ROUNDTABLE | DATA CAPTURE SYSTEMS
DB: The evolution of digital tools in the overhead crane industry allows real-time access to the crane from the factory floor, offices or remote locations. Information that was once only accessible by boarding the crane can now be viewed and analysed from office computers and mobile devices such as tablets and phones. The pathway of capturing and recording data is evolving at a rapid pace. Using pen and paper has transitioned to mobile devices and electronic storage. Another cutting-edge approach leans on automatic data collection systems that archive data to a local server or the cloud.
How do paperless systems compare with traditional paper-based methods? Are there any situations where manual processes still offer advantages? GN: Traditional paper-based methods remain useful in low-complexity environments, particularly where lifting operations are infrequent and risks are well-controlled. Their simplicity and low cost can still make sense in certain contexts. That said, paper systems struggle to keep pace with dynamic lifting scenarios, where conditions change minute-by-minute. Paperless systems offer clear advantages in these settings by capturing operational data continuously and objectively. On projects with high lift frequency or
multiple overlapping work fronts, such as high-rise developments in Hong Kong, digital systems have proven more effective at preventing incidents rather than simply recording them after the fact.
JG: The main case where paper is still necessary is in facilities where mobile devices aren’t allowed for security or safety reasons. After doing work in a facility where a mobile device isn’t allowed, teams spend additional time to go back and document information, which isn’t ideal. Outside of those situations, paper doesn’t offer any real advantage. It slows things down, creates delays and forces teams to do extra work after the job is already finished.
How has the introduction of technologies such as mobile platforms, sensors, automation, or AI-based monitoring changed data requirements and workflows? GN: These technologies have fundamentally changed expectations around data. Instead of periodic snapshots, organisations now seek continuous, time-stamped and contextual information that reflects how work is actually performed. AI-based monitoring, in particular, has
reduced reliance on manual observation. In hoisting operations, this means safety data is
generated automatically during lifts, with minimal disruption to crews. At viAct, this shift has allowed safety teams to move away from form-based workflows towards trend analysis and proactive risk management, an approach that has been especially valuable on large, fast-moving projects such as NEOM.
JG: Mobile devices have completely changed what’s possible. The advance in technology is really critical. Most modern field workflows wouldn’t work without smartphones and tablets. They allow companies to automate and streamline processes that used to be extremely manual. When it comes to leveraging AI in this space, the biggest factor is context. AI only works well if it has access to structured, meaningful data about how your business actually operates.
If companies don’t have an AI-backed system
they can feed clean, connected data into, they won’t be able to fully leverage what AI can offer. Over the next few years, that will become a major risk for companies that don’t modernise with the AI revolution continuing to catch fire.
DB: Mobile platforms, sensors and automation technologies enable enhanced monitoring and data acquisition on overhead cranes. The data collected from these systems supports informed decision-making to improve both safety and productivity of overhead cranes. By comparing real-time data with historical trends, changes in performance can be identified over time. Incorporating AI adds an additional layer of analysis, allowing these insights to be generated quickly and with greater precision.
Is there growing demand for updated standards, guidance or regulation to reflect the use of digital and paperless systems? GN: There is increasing recognition that many existing standards were written with paper documentation and manual inspections in mind. As digital systems become more common, questions are emerging around how automated data, video evidence and AI-generated alerts should be formally recognised within compliance frameworks. In practice, digital records often provide
stronger and more objective evidence than manual logs. The challenge now is aligning standards and guidance with these capabilities, ensuring consistency across jurisdictions. As adoption grows in regions such as Southeast Asia and the Middle East, this conversation is becoming more urgent.
Dan Beilfuss, general manager for Columbus McKinnon’s automation division. 52 Spring 2026 |
ochmagazine.com
JG: Yes, there’s growing demand. As more companies move away from paper, standards and regulators are recognising digital records as the norm more and more. Most teams are already working digitally, but guidance often lags
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 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87
