DCs have a head-spinning array of choices when it comes to printing and labeling systems. Here are some tips for picking the right device for your operation.
Peter Bradley is an award-winning career journalist with more than three decades of experience in both newspapers and national business magazines. His credentials include seven years as the transportation and supply chain editor at Purchasing Magazine and six years as the chief editor of Logistics Management.
Printing and labeling systems in the distribution center can sometimes cause indigestion for managers. They can be a bottleneck in the process of getting goods out the door. Labeling errors can cause shipping errors that result in unhappy customers and possible chargebacks. Downtime can bring a whole line to a halt. But nothing can go out the door without a label.
Whether an operation uses inline print-and-apply systems or portable printing tools, the devices' speed, accuracy, and uptime are crucial to DC productivity. What's important is to determine what solution would work best for your operation. Here a few things to consider in selecting a printing and labeling system:
Think about people first. Larry Boroff, director of automation systems engineering for Forte, emphasizes that the technical capabilities of staff to maintain and program the devices should be an important consideration in which one you select. Some systems, particularly automated print-and-apply systems, require a fair amount of in-house expertise.
A veteran of Amazon, where he was an operations engineer, Boroff has a fine appreciation for the need for fast and reliable printing. He recalls that at Amazon, "we looked at both manual and automated [printing] systems. One of the drivers for that was what the workrce looked like." That applies as well for the clients he now works with at Forte, a supply chain consulting organization. "If a customer does not have a semi-skilled workforce that can correct any issues or troubleshoot problems, it gets tough to design a print-and-apply system for that customer," he says. "There will be times when you have to interface with the system, reset the orders, or manually rectify issues that come up. I want to make sure they are able to support it." If the DC's operations or maintenance staff doesn't have the skills to maintain an automated system, then a manual system may make more sense.
Get smart. While the skill of the workforce is important, printing system providers are building more intelligence into the printers themselves. Karl Perry, senior product manager for printer software at Intermec, says that although printers have been able to host applications for some time, manufacturers are now making the process simpler. For example, in August, Intermec launched a major upgrade in its printer software from the reliable but dated GW-BASIC to the more modern and robust C# (pronounced C sharp) language. The result, says Perry, has been to make application development easier for the average developer skilled in C#.
To illustrate the utility of built-in applications, Perry cites the case of a Midwestern high-tech distributor. The shipping department was having problems with shipments that were misdirected or contained incorrect items. Systems integrator ToolWorx Information Products wrote an application for Intermec printers and linked a scale and scanner to the printer. Now, orders are pulled into the printer via Wi-Fi from the firm's order system. The clerk responsible for picking and shipping the order scans and weighs each item, prompting the printer to check the actual weight against the expected weight to ensure a match. It signals the clerk in the event of a mismatch. Using the program eliminated inaccurate shipments for the customer.
Consider the budget and the required throughput. Automated systems are substantially more costly than manual systems but have a much higher throughput. If the goal is to limit touches or to label items at high speed, that argues for automation. But it's important to note that opting for a print-and-apply system also has implications for the design of the overall material handling system, Boroff warns. "My customer has to expect to have enough accumulation to support a print-and-apply system," he says. "You can't just have four or five or 20 feet of accumulation for products because you're going to starve your system or overload it."
Does portability have value? In the past, manual systems—with the printer in a closet or office for access to power and connections to the facility's IT network—often required printing large numbers of labels at once, then bringing them to the floor to match up with shipments. No more. Portable, battery-operated systems with Wi-Fi connectivity allow for a great deal more flexibility, says Perry.
"Rather than have the printer at a fixed point in the warehouse, you can take the printer anywhere you want. If you have a battery cart, you don't need a power cord. It is driving productivity in the shipping room." And, he adds, some portable printers have their own batteries built in, eliminating the need for the cart.
What are you labeling? Cartons? Totes? Polybags? Do products vary markedly in size? Do you have a full-case picking operation or are you picking mixed cases? Those are all factors in the print-and-apply technology decision. Full-case operations lend themselves to automation. In mixed-case picking, where multiple products are picked into a single shipping container, manual systems are perfectly adequate as the picking and packing process is likely to be slower than the printing and labeling operation.
Can you accelerate throughput? Boroff says a typical print-and-apply system can label 15 to 25 cartons a minute. Including a packing slip with the label would cut that almost in half.
For print-and-apply systems, especially those handling cartons of varying heights, he suggests installing two print engines on the same line with advanced control systems. That would come close to doubling the throughput speed, depending on product size, by having each head printing and applying to every other carton.
The biggest constraint in the whole print-and-apply system, he says, is the product mix. Most often, labels are applied to the top of a product for shipping. The print head has to move down to the carton to apply the label, then move back up out of the way before the next carton comes through. The time it takes for the print head to lower and raise again, he explains, is the limiting factor in how quickly cartons can move along the conveyance system. If the height of the cartons varies markedly—say, from six inches tall to 20 inches tall—the print head needs time to lower and raise as much as 14 or 15 inches in each direction.
One way to improve throughput in a system with a broad range of carton heights, he says, is to assign each print head to a small range of carton heights. For example, one print head could handle cartons from six to 12 inches high, a second those from 12 to 18 inches; That limits the stroke each machine must take to lower, apply, and retreat. But it requires some advanced skills to set up and manage that sort of system. "This is where the technology skill of your workforce is important," Boroff says.
Uptime and maintenance matter. Not too long ago, a malfunction in a printer could bring shipping to a standstill. But the development of smart printers, with technology that alerts managers to an impending failure so they take preventive action, can sharply diminish downtime, especially when combined with more modular printer designs that make maintenance easier. Says Perry about smart printers, "It's not just the capability to print labels, but to do preventive maintenance based on predictive algorithms that are coming from the device management system."
Perry says that current printers' warning systems offer screens that provide specific information on printer issues, as opposed to a simple warning light. And maintenance is simpler. "You're able to replace the print head without using a screwdriver, which you can never find when you need one," he says. "What was once a 20-minute job now takes 15 seconds."
GETTING THE CIO ON BOARD
Going forward, logistics managers may find themselves having to check with the company IT department before deploying printers in the warehouse or DC. That's because today's printers are no longer simply tools for expediting shipping. As manufacturers build more intelligence into them, these devices are becoming important nodes in companies' overall IT networks.
"CIOs are becoming more powerful in device management," says Alexander Babic, product manager industrial printers for Intermec. That doesn't mean the CIO will be looking over a DC manager's shoulder and trying to tell him or her what printer to select. What the technology people are interested in is ensuring that smart devices fit in the overall IT infrastructure, he says. Their concern, says Babic, is network security and ensuring that smart printers comply with the rules and regulations that govern the company's IT infrastructure.
A move by federal regulators to reinforce requirements for broker transparency in freight transactions is stirring debate among transportation groups, after the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) published a “notice of proposed rulemaking” this week.
According to FMCSA, its draft rule would strive to make broker transparency more common, requiring greater sharing of the material information necessary for transportation industry parties to make informed business decisions and to support the efficient resolution of disputes.
The proposed rule titled “Transparency in Property Broker Transactions” would address what FMCSA calls the lack of access to information among shippers and motor carriers that can impact the fairness and efficiency of the transportation system, and would reframe broker transparency as a regulatory duty imposed on brokers, with the goal of deterring non-compliance. Specifically, the move would require brokers to keep electronic records, and require brokers to provide transaction records to motor carriers and shippers upon request and within 48 hours of that request.
Under federal regulatory processes, public comments on the move are due by January 21, 2025. However, transportation groups are not waiting on the sidelines to voice their opinions.
According to the Transportation Intermediaries Association (TIA), an industry group representing the third-party logistics (3PL) industry, the potential rule is “misguided overreach” that fails to address the more pressing issue of freight fraud. In TIA’s view, broker transparency regulation is “obsolete and un-American,” and has no place in today’s “highly transparent” marketplace. “This proposal represents a misguided focus on outdated and unnecessary regulations rather than tackling issues that genuinely threaten the safety and efficiency of our nation’s supply chains,” TIA said.
But trucker trade group the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) welcomed the proposed rule, which it said would ensure that brokers finally play by the rules. “We appreciate that FMCSA incorporated input from our petition, including a requirement to make records available electronically and emphasizing that brokers have a duty to comply with regulations. As FMCSA noted, broker transparency is necessary for a fair, efficient transportation system, and is especially important to help carriers defend themselves against alleged claims on a shipment,” OOIDA President Todd Spencer said in a statement.
Additional pushback came from the Small Business in Transportation Coalition (SBTC), a network of transportation professionals in small business, which said the potential rule didn’t go far enough. “This is too little too late and is disappointing. It preserves the status quo, which caters to Big Broker & TIA. There is no question now that FMCSA has been captured by Big Broker. Truckers and carriers must now come out in droves and file comments in full force against this starting tomorrow,” SBTC executive director James Lamb said in a LinkedIn post.
The “series B” funding round was financed by an unnamed “strategic customer” as well as Teradyne Robotics Ventures, Toyota Ventures, Ranpak, Third Kind Venture Capital, One Madison Group, Hyperplane, Catapult Ventures, and others.
The fresh backing comes as Massachusetts-based Pickle reported a spate of third quarter orders, saying that six customers placed orders for over 30 production robots to deploy in the first half of 2025. The new orders include pilot conversions, existing customer expansions, and new customer adoption.
“Pickle is hitting its strides delivering innovation, development, commercial traction, and customer satisfaction. The company is building groundbreaking technology while executing on essential recurring parts of a successful business like field service and manufacturing management,” Omar Asali, Pickle board member and CEO of investor Ranpak, said in a release.
According to Pickle, its truck-unloading robot applies “Physical AI” technology to one of the most labor-intensive, physically demanding, and highest turnover work areas in logistics operations. The platform combines a powerful vision system with generative AI foundation models trained on millions of data points from real logistics and warehouse operations that enable Pickle’s robotic hardware platform to perform physical work at human-scale or better, the company says.
Bloomington, Indiana-based FTR said its Trucking Conditions Index declined in September to -2.47 from -1.39 in August as weakness in the principal freight dynamics – freight rates, utilization, and volume – offset lower fuel costs and slightly less unfavorable financing costs.
Those negative numbers are nothing new—the TCI has been positive only twice – in May and June of this year – since April 2022, but the group’s current forecast still envisions consistently positive readings through at least a two-year forecast horizon.
“Aside from a near-term boost mostly related to falling diesel prices, we have not changed our Trucking Conditions Index forecast significantly in the wake of the election,” Avery Vise, FTR’s vice president of trucking, said in a release. “The outlook continues to be more favorable for carriers than what they have experienced for well over two years. Our analysis indicates gradual but steadily rising capacity utilization leading to stronger freight rates in 2025.”
But FTR said its forecast remains unchanged. “Just like everyone else, we’ll be watching closely to see exactly what trade and other economic policies are implemented and over what time frame. Some freight disruptions are likely due to tariffs and other factors, but it is not yet clear that those actions will do more than shift the timing of activity,” Vise said.
The TCI tracks the changes representing five major conditions in the U.S. truck market: freight volumes, freight rates, fleet capacity, fuel prices, and financing costs. Combined into a single index indicating the industry’s overall health, a positive score represents good, optimistic conditions while a negative score shows the inverse.
Specifically, the new global average robot density has reached a record 162 units per 10,000 employees in 2023, which is more than double the mark of 74 units measured seven years ago.
Broken into geographical regions, the European Union has a robot density of 219 units per 10,000 employees, an increase of 5.2%, with Germany, Sweden, Denmark and Slovenia in the global top ten. Next, North America’s robot density is 197 units per 10,000 employees – up 4.2%. And Asia has a robot density of 182 units per 10,000 persons employed in manufacturing - an increase of 7.6%. The economies of Korea, Singapore, mainland China and Japan are among the top ten most automated countries.
Broken into individual countries, the U.S. ranked in 10th place in 2023, with a robot density of 295 units. Higher up on the list, the top five are:
The Republic of Korea, with 1,012 robot units, showing a 5% increase on average each year since 2018 thanks to its strong electronics and automotive industries.
Singapore had 770 robot units, in part because it is a small country with a very low number of employees in the manufacturing industry, so it can reach a high robot density with a relatively small operational stock.
China took third place in 2023, surpassing Germany and Japan with a mark of 470 robot units as the nation has managed to double its robot density within four years.
Germany ranks fourth with 429 robot units for a 5% CAGR since 2018.
Japan is in fifth place with 419 robot units, showing growth of 7% on average each year from 2018 to 2023.
Progress in generative AI (GenAI) is poised to impact business procurement processes through advancements in three areas—agentic reasoning, multimodality, and AI agents—according to Gartner Inc.
Those functions will redefine how procurement operates and significantly impact the agendas of chief procurement officers (CPOs). And 72% of procurement leaders are already prioritizing the integration of GenAI into their strategies, thus highlighting the recognition of its potential to drive significant improvements in efficiency and effectiveness, Gartner found in a survey conducted in July, 2024, with 258 global respondents.
Gartner defined the new functions as follows:
Agentic reasoning in GenAI allows for advanced decision-making processes that mimic human-like cognition. This capability will enable procurement functions to leverage GenAI to analyze complex scenarios and make informed decisions with greater accuracy and speed.
Multimodality refers to the ability of GenAI to process and integrate multiple forms of data, such as text, images, and audio. This will make GenAI more intuitively consumable to users and enhance procurement's ability to gather and analyze diverse information sources, leading to more comprehensive insights and better-informed strategies.
AI agents are autonomous systems that can perform tasks and make decisions on behalf of human operators. In procurement, these agents will automate procurement tasks and activities, freeing up human resources to focus on strategic initiatives, complex problem-solving and edge cases.
As CPOs look to maximize the value of GenAI in procurement, the study recommended three starting points: double down on data governance, develop and incorporate privacy standards into contracts, and increase procurement thresholds.
“These advancements will usher procurement into an era where the distance between ideas, insights, and actions will shorten rapidly,” Ryan Polk, senior director analyst in Gartner’s Supply Chain practice, said in a release. "Procurement leaders who build their foundation now through a focus on data quality, privacy and risk management have the potential to reap new levels of productivity and strategic value from the technology."