February 2021 Rack protection enhanced and mast control revisited


New innovations from Linde Material Handling, fleet managers will benefit from cost-savings and productivity gains, while forklift operators can devote their full attention to load handling


A


sensor that prevents collision damage to racking and a mul- tifunction lever that combines efficient


control of driving, reach travel and lifting functions into a single joystick control: These two new options are now available for reach trucks from Linde Material Handling. Fleet man- agers will benefit from cost savings and productivity gains, while forklift operators can devote their full at- tention to load handling.


Collision damage to racking sys- tems can be a significant cost for warehouse managers because it entails considerable expenditure


of time and money. Damaged end frames and beams primarily result from reach truck operators ma- noeuvering in front of the racking with their attention focused up- ward as the load is stored and re- trieved. “What’s happening on the ground can be easily overlooked,” says


Alexander Schmidt, Senior


Product Manager Reach Trucks at Linde Material Handling, adding that market studies have shown that damage is caused primarily by the reach legs while the load, forks or chassis are less frequently involved. “Even minor carelessness can lead to major disruption of warehouse operations,”


Schmidt says. “If a rack end-frame suffers


a six millimeter dent over a length of one meter, up to one-third of it’s load-carrying capacity can be lost. This results in a number of rack locations that can no longer be used reducing the capacity of the warehouse. Repairing the damage and replacing the rack- ing components is time-consuming because all areas to either side of the damaged rack frame must be emptied and the goods tempo- rarily stored elsewhere. This takes up working time and additional storage space, disrupts operations and thus reduces productivity in the warehouse,” the Senior Product Manager says, outlining the nega- tive consequences.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14