Contributing Editor Toby Gooley is a writer and editor specializing in supply chain, logistics, and material handling, and a lecturer at MIT's Center for Transportation & Logistics. She previously was Senior Editor at DC VELOCITY and Editor of DCV's sister publication, CSCMP's Supply Chain Quarterly. Prior to joining AGiLE Business Media in 2007, she spent 20 years at Logistics Management magazine as Managing Editor and Senior Editor covering international trade and transportation. Prior to that she was an export traffic manager for 10 years. She holds a B.A. in Asian Studies from Cornell University.
If you think about it, choosing the right type of lift truck is not very different from seeking the perfect mate. In both cases, reliability and trustworthiness are prized characteristics. And—fairy tales about peasants marrying royalty aside—the ability to "fit in" and operate effectively in a particular environment is a major consideration.
With so many classes and categories of lift trucks on the market, though, matching the right equipment to an application can be a challenge. So, will you need Yenta, the matchmaker in "Fiddler on the Roof," to help you find "the one"? Probably not. But before you can begin to screen candidates, you'll have to do plenty of research. Here are some guidelines for gathering that information, analyzing it, and making a decision.
FIRST, GET THE FACTS
The most basic information required includes a profile of what you're moving: what kinds of products, packages, and containers; their weights, heights, lengths, and widths; whether they're palletized; whether they require special handling; and how many of each type of item is handled per shift. You'll also need basic vehicle data like actual run times, usage in hours, maintenance records, and energy consumption (battery amps or volume of gas), says Keith Allmandinger, senior marketing manager at Komatsu Forklift U.S.A.
Next, document the warehouse environment, says Bill Pfleger, president of Yale Distribution, a subsidiary of NACCO Materials Handling Group. Floor conditions, inclines or ramps, doorways, temperature, moisture, and so forth all affect the lift choice, he notes. He also advises conducting a power study to determine whether internal combustion or electric power is most suitable for the environment.
Assess the density and type of storage—rack type, configuration, and height; the type and velocity of products stored in them; and aisle widths, intersections, travel paths, and other features that affect vehicle travel. Then comes product velocity, or throughput: how many units must be moved per hour or shift.
Track exactly what your lift trucks do, and where and how they do it. "Think in terms of the product lifecycle and movement for a particular customer," recommends Greg Mason, warehouse product consultant, Mitsubishi Caterpillar Forklift America Inc. (MCFA). That might include how and where a particular product will be received, put away, and then picked and shipped, he says.
As for where to find all this diverse data, managers can tap a variety of sources. A warehouse management system (WMS) can provide insight into throughput, including pallets per hour and the velocity of individual stock-keeping units (SKUs). Hour meters can determine how much traveling and lifting trucks are doing, data loggers attached to batteries can measure energy usage, and fleet management software can generate detailed performance reports for individual vehicles and operators as well as for different classes of trucks.
But it would be a mistake to rely entirely on technology. You simply can't make an informed decision without site surveys or assessments by technically knowledgeable observers, including the forklift dealer's representative and someone from your own team—"the site survey guy who knows the lift truck and the guy with the need," as Clark Simpson, product marketing engineer for Clark Material Handling Co., puts it.
Indeed, local dealers—and for large projects, a material handling consulting engineer—should be involved in site surveys. They're trained to conduct and interpret the results of those assessments, and they can apply what they've learned from previous projects to your situation. You'll also need input from your warehouse operations team, and speaking with lift truck operators is critical. "They're the ones who live and breathe this, and they typically have very good insight into productivity levels," Mason says.
Site assessments, including demographic and time-study application surveys, are essential because they provide an accurate picture of what's actually happening on the warehouse floor—not just what the numbers **ital{say} is happening. For instance, a software-generated report might indicate that a lift truck has a high utilization rate, says Bill Pedriana, director of sales for Big Joe Forklifts. But what it might not show is that the operator is using the vehicle for personal transportation. That kind of qualitative information, obtainable only through direct observation, can reveal opportunities to make big gains in efficiency.
How much information should you gather? The most important thing is to cover not just normal periods but also your least busy and your peak times, says Susan Comfort, product manager, narrow-aisle products marketing for The Raymond Corp. But don't limit yourself to thinking about the past, she cautions. "You should also anticipate future needs. For example, if your business changes, then its peak demand might also change."
Pedriana agrees that it's valuable to look at historical data but adds a caveat: Business practices are changing so quickly, he says, that if you go too far back, you may not capture what's actually happening today. He further suggests regular communication with upper management about strategic plans—information that could affect DC operations but often isn't shared until late in the game. "Too often, higher-ups will start some strategic initiative, and they assume the engineers and the warehouse managers will come up with a solution to make it work," he says. "If they had known about it in advance, they could have planned for it." (For more about choosing lift trucks for a planned facility, see sidebar.)
WHAT DO THE DATA TELL YOU?
Once the data are in hand, it's time to evaluate the information. Who should be involved? "A misapplied piece of equipment can be costly in many ways, and the key to making the right decision is having the team members involved in the process who have a vested interest in the equipment's productivity," Pfleger says.
That could include the plant or warehouse manager, shift supervisors, the maintenance manager, service technicians, the safety manager, and the lift truck operators who will be performing the activities in question. In addition, says Komatsu's Allmandinger, the company controller and "green" project managers increasingly are involved. Finally, the consulting engineer and prospective lift truck suppliers can provide insight into what the data mean and how they translate into a truck choice.
Why so many players? Because each one will have a different focus, explains Andy Smith, senior marketing product manager at Crown Equipment Corp. Shift supervisors will focus on inefficiencies, while warehouse managers might think about business cycles; they may also be aware of a contract that's about to expire or a new one that could influence the type of truck required. Technicians, fleet managers, and forklift operators will know what detracts from the current fleet's performance. The local forklift provider can help to consolidate and prioritize their concerns, and then put together a proposal based on that input, he explains.
The team will consider what tasks (for instance, picking, putaway, and loading/unloading trailers) and activities (such as lifting and horizontal travel) the lift trucks are currently doing, what they **ital{should} be doing, and what will be expected of them in the future. They will also examine the physical demands and constraints on trucks and operators, plus their efficiency and cost performance. The aim is to uncover inefficiencies, safety issues, and excessive costs—all signs of a possible mismatch between a truck and a particular application, or that the truck you plan to buy won't be a good fit. Just a few examples of what the analysis might turn up:
Trucks that move into a rack should be lifting 25 percent of the time, says Comfort. If they're being used more for horizontal transport, then it could be more cost-effective and efficient to position those trucks near the racks and use a different type of vehicle to shuttle loads to and from the racks.
Lift trucks that may be at home elsewhere in the warehouse may be totally inappropriate for loading and unloading trailers. A standard two-rail mast that's designed to provide maximum visibility will puncture the roof of the trailer before the load reaches the necessary height for travel and must not be used for loading and unloading, Simpson explains. Designs that allow for simultaneous movement of load and rails have a similar problem, he says.
It sounds simple: For low lifts and horizontal transport, a sit-down counterbalanced truck is the obvious choice; if you have to go higher, then some type of reach truck usually is best. But even when the former is the case, if the aisle length and width and the turning space at intersections are too tight for the bigger forklift to maneuver efficiently, it will slow throughput and create a safety hazard. "You have to understand all of the tradeoffs, such as aisle size versus productivity," Smith says.
If workers have to wait for a forklift driver to pick up assembled pallets and deliver them to another location nearby, you're wasting time and money while creating a safety hazard, says Pedriana of Big Joe. It might be better to substitute a walkie stacker: Workers can use the smaller vehicle as a lift table and then deliver the finished pallet themselves to the next location, rather than have an operator drive heavy equipment where people are working.
ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL
All of the experts consulted for this article have seen warehouses try to skimp on costs by using one type of truck for as many applications as they can. That might work for a small facility that performs just a few activities for a limited set of items, Comfort says. But in most cases, it doesn't pay to go that route.
For one thing, if a particular type of lift truck doesn't have the correct rated capacity and/or the correct attachments for every type of load it will carry, the lift truck may become unstable and tip over, resulting in injury or even death to the driver and bystanders, says Simpson. Furthermore, treating a lift truck as a jack-of-all-trades could place stresses on the lift truck that it wasn't designed to handle, thereby shortening its life, he says.
The more variety, volume, and speed required, the more important specialized lift trucks become in order to avoid compromising cost, space utilization, and efficiency, Mason says. A high-throughput facility, for example, could benefit from using one type of lift truck for loading and unloading trucks, another for high-level order picking, and another for high-level full-pallet putaway. It could even use different trucks in the same area. For example, low-level picking could be done with inexpensive end-rider pallet trucks, while the more expensive counterbalanced forklifts handle second- or third-level picking.
Ultimately, the objective is to select the best truck for the application in terms of safety, efficiency, and total cost of ownership. Making the right choice depends on understanding not only what your lift trucks are doing now, but also what you **ital{want} them to do. "You have to know your warehouse operations, your operational metrics, and what spells success for you," says Smith.
That's why it helps to think of a lift truck as part of an overall business process, such as fulfillment, Pedriana says. The more efficient that process is, the more profitable it will be. If you scrutinize each of the tasks required to carry out that process and then apply differentiated equipment to optimize them, he says, the lift trucks you choose will be potential profit generators, not just an expense.
Made for each other
Usually lift truck buyers are evaluating equipment for an existing warehouse or DC. But what about when they're spec'ing for a facility that hasn't been built yet? That can be a golden opportunity to ensure that the facility and the trucks are truly made for each other, says Kenro Okamoto, a product support specialist at Toyota Material Handling, U.S.A., Inc.
You might think warehouse layout designers would always consider equipment capabilities and limitations in their plans, but that's not the case, Okamoto says. For example, many companies try to squeeze as much racking with as much height as possible into a new building, yet that may make it impossible for forklift operators to efficiently handle the volume and type of products required, he says.
"I've seen warehouse designs that did not allow for safe maneuvering," Okamoto recounts. "You need enough space between aisles that trucks can turn in either direction, and you have to consider that operators will need to back up, move forward, pick up or put away product, and even make reverse turns in certain areas." For that reason, the layout designer may have to reduce the number of aisles.
A process called "application engineering" can prevent such problems by matching the measurements for the planned facility and material handling equipment with the right type of lift trucks to achieve maximum efficiency. This type of analysis also prevents costly conflicts. Okamoto cites the example of a proposed design with a low door height and high racking—a combination that could lead to problems if it turned out there were no lift trucks that could collapse low enough for the planned doorways and still reach high enough in the racks. An engineering analysis, however, would likely uncover the conflict early enough in the process to allow the building designer to tweak the plans.
Congestion on U.S. highways is costing the trucking industry big, according to research from the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI), released today.
The group found that traffic congestion on U.S. highways added $108.8 billion in costs to the trucking industry in 2022, a record high. The information comes from ATRI’s Cost of Congestion study, which is part of the organization’s ongoing highway performance measurement research.
Total hours of congestion fell slightly compared to 2021 due to softening freight market conditions, but the cost of operating a truck increased at a much higher rate, according to the research. As a result, the overall cost of congestion increased by 15% year-over-year—a level equivalent to more than 430,000 commercial truck drivers sitting idle for one work year and an average cost of $7,588 for every registered combination truck.
The analysis also identified metropolitan delays and related impacts, showing that the top 10 most-congested states each experienced added costs of more than $8 billion. That list was led by Texas, at $9.17 billion in added costs; California, at $8.77 billion; and Florida, $8.44 billion. Rounding out the top 10 list were New York, Georgia, New Jersey, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, and Tennessee. Combined, the top 10 states account for more than half of the trucking industry’s congestion costs nationwide—52%, according to the research.
The metro areas with the highest congestion costs include New York City, $6.68 billion; Miami, $3.2 billion; and Chicago, $3.14 billion.
ATRI’s analysis also found that the trucking industry wasted more than 6.4 billion gallons of diesel fuel in 2022 due to congestion, resulting in additional fuel costs of $32.1 billion.
ATRI used a combination of data sources, including its truck GPS database and Operational Costs study benchmarks, to calculate the impacts of trucking delays on major U.S. roadways.
There’s a photo from 1971 that John Kent, professor of supply chain management at the University of Arkansas, likes to show. It’s of a shaggy-haired 18-year-old named Glenn Cowan grinning at three-time world table tennis champion Zhuang Zedong, while holding a silk tapestry Zhuang had just given him. Cowan was a member of the U.S. table tennis team who participated in the 1971 World Table Tennis Championships in Nagoya, Japan. Story has it that one morning, he overslept and missed his bus to the tournament and had to hitch a ride with the Chinese national team and met and connected with Zhuang.
Cowan and Zhuang’s interaction led to an invitation for the U.S. team to visit China. At the time, the two countries were just beginning to emerge from a 20-year period of decidedly frosty relations, strict travel bans, and trade restrictions. The highly publicized trip signaled a willingness on both sides to renew relations and launched the term “pingpong diplomacy.”
Kent, who is a senior fellow at the George H. W. Bush Foundation for U.S.-China Relations, believes the photograph is a good reminder that some 50-odd years ago, the economies of the United States and China were not as tightly interwoven as they are today. At the time, the Nixon administration was looking to form closer political and economic ties between the two countries in hopes of reducing chances of future conflict (and to weaken alliances among Communist countries).
The signals coming out of Washington and Beijing are now, of course, much different than they were in the early 1970s. Instead of advocating for better relations, political rhetoric focuses on the need for the U.S. to “decouple” from China. Both Republicans and Democrats have warned that the U.S. economy is too dependent on goods manufactured in China. They see this dependency as a threat to economic strength, American jobs, supply chain resiliency, and national security.
Supply chain professionals, however, know that extricating ourselves from our reliance on Chinese manufacturing is easier said than done. Many pundits push for a “China + 1” strategy, where companies diversify their manufacturing and sourcing options beyond China. But in reality, that “plus one” is often a Chinese company operating in a different country or a non-Chinese manufacturer that is still heavily dependent on material or subcomponents made in China.
This is the problem when supply chain decisions are made on a global scale without input from supply chain professionals. In an article in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Kent argues that, “The discussions on supply chains mainly take place between government officials who typically bring many other competing issues and agendas to the table. Corporate entities—the individuals and companies directly impacted by supply chains—tend to be under-represented in the conversation.”
Kent is a proponent of what he calls “supply chain diplomacy,” where experts from academia and industry from the U.S. and China work collaboratively to create better, more efficient global supply chains. Take, for example, the “Peace Beans” project that Kent is involved with. This project, jointly formed by Zhejiang University and the Bush China Foundation, proposes balancing supply chains by exporting soybeans from Arkansas to tofu producers in China’s Yunnan province, and, in return, importing coffee beans grown in Yunnan to coffee roasters in Arkansas. Kent believes the operation could even use the same transportation equipment.
The benefits of working collaboratively—instead of continuing to build friction in the supply chain through tariffs and adversarial relationships—are numerous, according to Kent and his colleagues. They believe it would be much better if the two major world economies worked together on issues like global inflation, climate change, and artificial intelligence.
And such relations could play a significant role in strengthening world peace, particularly in light of ongoing tensions over Taiwan. Because, as Kent writes, “The 19th-century idea that ‘When goods don’t cross borders, soldiers will’ is as true today as ever. Perhaps more so.”
Hyster-Yale Materials Handling today announced its plans to fulfill the domestic manufacturing requirements of the Build America, Buy America (BABA) Act for certain portions of its lineup of forklift trucks and container handling equipment.
That means the Greenville, North Carolina-based company now plans to expand its existing American manufacturing with a targeted set of high-capacity models, including electric options, that align with the needs of infrastructure projects subject to BABA requirements. The company’s plans include determining the optimal production location in the United States, strategically expanding sourcing agreements to meet local material requirements, and further developing electric power options for high-capacity equipment.
As a part of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the BABA Act aims to increase the use of American-made materials in federally funded infrastructure projects across the U.S., Hyster-Yale says. It was enacted as part of a broader effort to boost domestic manufacturing and economic growth, and mandates that federal dollars allocated to infrastructure – such as roads, bridges, ports and public transit systems – must prioritize materials produced in the USA, including critical items like steel, iron and various construction materials.
Hyster-Yale’s footprint in the U.S. is spread across 10 locations, including three manufacturing facilities.
“Our leadership is fully invested in meeting the needs of businesses that require BABA-compliant material handling solutions,” Tony Salgado, Hyster-Yale’s chief operating officer, said in a release. “We are working to partner with our key domestic suppliers, as well as identifying how best to leverage our own American manufacturing footprint to deliver a competitive solution for our customers and stakeholders. But beyond mere compliance, and in line with the many areas of our business where we are evolving to better support our customers, our commitment remains steadfast. We are dedicated to delivering industry-leading standards in design, durability and performance — qualities that have become synonymous with our brands worldwide and that our customers have come to rely on and expect.”
In a separate move, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also gave its approval for the state to advance its Heavy-Duty Omnibus Rule, which is crafted to significantly reduce smog-forming nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from new heavy-duty, diesel-powered trucks.
Both rules are intended to deliver health benefits to California citizens affected by vehicle pollution, according to the environmental group Earthjustice. If the state gets federal approval for the final steps to become law, the rules mean that cars on the road in California will largely be zero-emissions a generation from now in the 2050s, accounting for the average vehicle lifespan of vehicles with internal combustion engine (ICE) power sold before that 2035 date.
“This might read like checking a bureaucratic box, but EPA’s approval is a critical step forward in protecting our lungs from pollution and our wallets from the expenses of combustion fuels,” Paul Cort, director of Earthjustice’s Right To Zero campaign, said in a release. “The gradual shift in car sales to zero-emissions models will cut smog and household costs while growing California’s clean energy workforce. Cutting truck pollution will help clear our skies of smog. EPA should now approve the remaining authorization requests from California to allow the state to clean its air and protect its residents.”
However, the truck drivers' industry group Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) pushed back against the federal decision allowing the Omnibus Low-NOx rule to advance. "The Omnibus Low-NOx waiver for California calls into question the policymaking process under the Biden administration's EPA. Purposefully injecting uncertainty into a $588 billion American industry is bad for our economy and makes no meaningful progress towards purported environmental goals," (OOIDA) President Todd Spencer said in a release. "EPA's credibility outside of radical environmental circles would have been better served by working with regulated industries rather than ramming through last-minute special interest favors. We look forward to working with the Trump administration's EPA in good faith towards achievable environmental outcomes.”
Editor's note:This article was revised on December 18 to add reaction from OOIDA.
Global trade will see a moderate rebound in 2025, likely growing by 3.6% in volume terms, helped by companies restocking and households renewing purchases of durable goods while reducing spending on services, according to a forecast from trade credit insurer Allianz Trade.
The end of the year for 2024 will also likely be supported by companies rushing to ship goods in anticipation of the higher tariffs likely to be imposed by the coming Trump administration, and other potential disruptions in the coming quarters, the report said.
However, that tailwind for global trade will likely shift to a headwind once the effects of a renewed but contained trade war are felt from the second half of 2025 and in full in 2026. As a result, Allianz Trade has throttled back its predictions, saying that global trade in volume will grow by 2.8% in 2025 (reduced by 0.2 percentage points vs. its previous forecast) and 2.3% in 2026 (reduced by 0.5 percentage points).
The same logic applies to Allianz Trade’s forecast for export prices in U.S. dollars, which the firm has now revised downward to predict growth reaching 2.3% in 2025 (reduced by 1.7 percentage points) and 4.1% in 2026 (reduced by 0.8 percentage points).
In the meantime, the rush to frontload imports into the U.S. is giving freight carriers an early Christmas present. According to Allianz Trade, data released last week showed Chinese exports rising by a robust 6.7% y/y in November. And imports of some consumer goods that have been threatened with a likely 25% tariff under the new Trump administration have outperformed even more, growing by nearly 20% y/y on average between July and September.