Vertical Reciprocating Conveyor Selection: VRC vs Continuous, RFP and FAT/SAT for Thai Plants

“We want to stop lifting parts up to the mezzanine with a forklift and carrying them up and down the stairs by hand. But we do not know what criteria to use for vertical reciprocating conveyor selection.” This is a question we often hear from production engineering and facilities managers at Japanese plants in Chonburi, Rayong, Ayutthaya and Samut Prakan, Thailand. When you compare catalogs, the first things that catch your eye are rated load and lift height. However, if you choose on these two figures alone, you can end up after installation with a machine that “cannot move as much as we expected.”

The reason is simple. What determines the capacity of a vertical conveyor is not the speed of travel, but the time spent on transfers at each level (loading, unloading, and opening and closing the gates), and that is where most of each cycle goes. In this article, we therefore propose taking the selection in the following three steps.

• First decide between a reciprocating type and a continuous type, based on the peak transport volume per hour and the transport unit (cases, or carts and pallets)
• Decide at the same time whether transfers will be done by people or automated with conveyors, and have the RFP (request for proposal) require a breakdown of the cycle time
• For safety, confirm a “structure that people do not ride” from three perspectives (a US industry standard, Japanese practice and Thai ministerial regulation) and turn it into test items for FAT/SAT (factory acceptance test before shipment and site acceptance test)

Note that all seconds, transport volumes, headcounts, amounts and years in this article relating to “Model Plant M” (described below) are original estimates and assumptions created for this article. They are neither industry averages nor survey results. Please read them as a “calculation template” to be replaced with your own figures.

What Is a Vertical Conveyor? Reciprocating vs Continuous, and How It Differs from an Elevator

Vertical conveyor basics

Hitachi’s glossary of logistics center terms describes a vertical conveyor as “equipment that transports goods vertically between upper and lower floors in logistics centers and similar facilities.” According to the glossary, it is often used in combination with roller conveyors, chain conveyors, belt conveyors and the like so that goods can be loaded and unloaded without direct human involvement, and it differs from a freight elevator in that people do not ride in it to operate it.

On the factory floor, vertical conveyors fall broadly into two types.

The reciprocating type is called a VRC (Vertical Reciprocating Conveyor) in English-speaking countries, and each up-or-down trip carries one “consolidated” unit, such as one cart or one pallet. The continuous type, on the other hand, is good at sending cases one after another in a steady stream, but it cannot carry large units such as carts or pallets. Even though both are grouped under the same term “vertical conveyor,” you are less likely to make a selection mistake if you think of them as different machines.

The difference from an elevator is a “structure that people do not ride”

How the difference between a vertical conveyor and a freight elevator is treated varies from country to country.

In the United States, guidelines compiled by the VRC subcommittee of the industry association MHI (February 2019 edition) distinguish between material lifts (covered by the elevator code ASME A17.1) and VRCs (covered by the conveyor safety standard ASME B20.1). According to these guidelines, VRCs normally operate at less than 100 ft/min (about 30 m/min), the operating controls must be located where they can never be operated from on the carriage, and the landing gates require a combination of a mechanical lock and an electrical gate-status switch. However, this is a position statement by an industry association, and the document itself notes as background that, even in the US, state and local inspection authorities may reach different conclusions.

In Japan, there are known “three requirements” for treating a vertical conveyor as equipment that is not an elevator under the Building Standards Act. We cover these in detail in the safety section below.

As for Thailand, a ministerial regulation on occupational safety defines a “goods lift.” At the time of writing, we have not been able to confirm an official interpretation of whether vertical conveyors fall under this definition. We also address this point in the section on “Thailand-specific issues.”

What all of these countries have in common is that the dividing line from an elevator is whether you can demonstrate, in both design and operation, a structure in which “people do not ride” and “people do not handle loads inside the carriage.”

Comparing Vertical Conveyor Types: Reciprocating (Hydraulic and Mechanical) and Continuous

Hydraulic and mechanical reciprocating types

Reciprocating types include hydraulic units, which are raised and lowered by a hydraulic cylinder, and mechanical units, which are raised and lowered by a motor, reducer and chain. The MHI guidelines describe how to choose between them as follows.

• Hydraulic units are typically intended for two-level operation and are not recommended for applications with intermediate stops. Because they are less expensive to manufacture, most VRCs are in this class
• Mechanical units (raised and lowered by a brake motor, reducer and heavy chain) are the option for high-lift two-level applications, three or more levels, intermediate stops, automated systems, and high-speed, high-cycle applications

This is only a recommendation from a US industry association. It does not state definitively that “hydraulic units can only be used for two floors,” but if you have three or more stop levels, or you want to automate transfers with conveyors and run at high cycle rates, the natural approach is to include mechanical units as candidates in your comparison.

Examples of manufacturer-stated specifications

Each company’s specifications are manufacturer-stated values and vary by model and configuration. The following are examples taken from publicly available pages and are not intended for ranking one product above another.

A few additional notes:

• According to PFlow, the 21 Series is said to comply with the ASME B20.1 safety standard and is equipped with features such as safety cams that prevent descent if a chain breaks, a velocity fuse that prevents uncontrolled descent if the hydraulic system ruptures, a check valve that holds the carriage during a power failure, and a manual lowering valve.
• Wildeck’s figures are each upper limits for the product family as a whole. They do not mean that a single unit can meet the maximum load, maximum lift and maximum platform size at the same time. According to the company, configurations include Straddle, Cantilever, Heavy Duty (4XLift), Box Lift and Delta, and loading and unloading patterns can be chosen from “C,” “Z” and “90 degree.” Listed safety features include overload and jam protection, free-fall prevention if a chain breaks, and self-diagnostics on multi-level units.
• For Central Conveyor (founded in 1961 and part of the IHI Group since 2008), the listing page does not state whether the RZ and RC types are reciprocating or continuous. Pricing is available on inquiry to the company.
• The Sanki Engineering continuous example is a model for applications that send lightweight small items in a continuous flow. According to Takatsu Dendo Seiki, which lists the company’s products, no control is needed before infeed, and a downward-conveying type is also available.

Capacity guidelines for reciprocating and continuous types

A blog post (February 2023) by the US distributor Cisco-Eagle gives examples of package lifts for small cases: up to 420 units/hour for the reciprocating type, and 400 units/hour as standard and up to 2,000 units/hour as a custom option for the continuous type. The floor space is 7.5 square feet for the reciprocating type and 16 square feet for the continuous type, and both are described as more economical than spiral conveyors and more expensive than incline conveyors.

These are figures a distributor gave to explain specific products, not industry statistics. Also note that they cannot be compared with the capacity of reciprocating units that carry carts or pallets. Still, they are useful for confirming the starting point for choosing a type: “continuous for high volumes of light small cases, reciprocating for consolidated units such as carts and pallets.”

The approach to choosing a type can be summarized as follows.

• Transport unit is carts, pallets or large loads → reciprocating. Compare hydraulic and mechanical based on the number of stop levels and the degree of automation
• Transport unit is small cases and the number per hour is very high → continuous is also a candidate. Check that case dimensions and weights fall within the model’s range
• Both are mixed → first consider whether the units can be standardized on one or the other (if not, splitting into two systems with different types is also an option)

For how vertical conveyors fit within material-handling equipment as a whole, see also Material-Handling Equipment Selection: RFP, FAT/SAT and TCO.

Vertical Conveyor Capacity Is Determined by the Cycle: Breaking Down One Cycle

Assumptions for Model Plant M

From here on, we calculate using a hypothetical Model Plant M. To repeat, all figures are assumptions made for this article.

• A Japanese electronic components manufacturer in Chonburi Province, Thailand. The ground floor houses molding and the parts warehouse; the mezzanine (lift height 5 m) houses assembly and inspection
• The transport unit is a cart loaded with 12 parts cases (1 cart = 12 cases). Parts go up, and finished goods or empty carts come down; each cycle carries one cart both up and down
• Demand is 600 cases/day going up. With two shifts and 16 hours of operation, the average is 37.5 cases/hour. The peak, such as just after a shift starts, is 3 times the average at 112.5 cases/hour
• Currently, lifting to the edge of the mezzanine by forklift and carrying by hand on the stairs requires 3 people/shift x 2 shifts = 6 people for up-and-down transport
• Annual labor cost per person is an assumed value including overtime, bonuses, social security, and recruitment and turnover costs: 20,000 baht per month, 240,000 baht per year

The key point here is that equipment capacity must be judged against the peak, not the average. At the average of 37.5 cases/hour, any type can handle the load with room to spare. The problem is the period just after a shift starts, when parts replenishment is concentrated; if capacity falls short here, the assembly line stops waiting for parts.

Option A: one round trip with one reciprocating unit and manual transfers

First, consider “Option A,” in which one reciprocating unit is installed and workers push carts in and pull them out at each level. The breakdown of one round trip (up and down) is as follows.

As proportions, the 180 seconds of transfers account for about 56% (56.25%), the 60 seconds of gate opening and closing and waiting for start for about 19% (18.75%), and the 80 seconds of travel for 25%. In other words, for three quarters of each round trip, the carriage is standing still.

From this, we calculate capacity.

• Round trips per hour = 3,600 seconds ÷ 320 seconds = 11.25 round trips
• Upward capacity = 11.25 round trips x 12 cases = 135 cases/hour
• Utilization against peak demand = 112.5 ÷ 135 = about 83% (83.3%)

A utilization of 83% means that the vertical conveyor runs without a break for most of the peak hour. The ratio of capacity to peak demand is only 1.2 times. When small disruptions pile up, such as a worker being called away to another task and a transfer running a little late, or a cart facing the wrong way and taking extra effort to push in, a queue forms immediately.

Applying the cycle-time formula to your own plant

The calculation for Model Plant M can be generalized into the following formulas.

• Round-trip time = (time per transfer x number of transfers) + (time per gate opening, closing and start wait x number of occurrences) + (time per travel x number of travels)
• Hourly capacity = 3,600 seconds ÷ round-trip time x units carried per trip

When you use this for your own plant, the key is to use values measured with a stopwatch for the actual motions of pushing carts in and pulling them out on your current shop floor, rather than “catalog values,” for the time per transfer. Travel time is determined by the lift height and the manufacturer’s speed, but transfer and gate times can vary widely depending on the shape of the cart, steps in the floor, worker movement paths and the type of gate.

Note also that the 40 seconds of travel in this calculation is a model assumption, not a manufacturer-stated value. Travel speed varies by manufacturer, model and lift height.

Automating Transfers Works Better Than a “Faster Lift”

Doubling the travel speed

When you are worried about the capacity of Option A, the first idea that comes to mind is “get a faster lift.” Suppose the travel speed is doubled, cutting each travel from 40 seconds to 20 seconds.

• Round trip = 320 seconds − 40 seconds (each of the two travels is 20 seconds shorter) = 280 seconds
• Round trips per hour = 3,600 ÷ 280 = about 12.86 round trips
• Upward capacity = about 154 cases/hour (154.3)

The capacity gain stays at about 14%. Because travel accounts for only 25% of a round trip, halving it does not shorten the whole cycle very much.

Automating transfers (Option B)

Next, consider “Option B,” in which roller conveyors and automatic gates are installed on both levels to automate the loading and unloading of carts. We assume the time per transfer falls from 45 seconds to 15 seconds. Gate opening and closing, waiting for start, and travel are the same as in Option A.

• Round trip = 4 times x 15 seconds + 60 seconds + 80 seconds = 200 seconds
• Round trips per hour = 3,600 ÷ 200 = 18 round trips
• Upward capacity = 18 x 12 = 216 cases/hour

Capacity rises from 135 cases/hour to 216 cases/hour, an increase of 60%. Utilization against the peak demand of 112.5 cases/hour falls to about 52% (52.1%), creating headroom to absorb small disruptions on the transfer side.

The difference shows when demand grows

This difference becomes clear when demand increases. For example, if production grows and demand rises by 30%, the peak becomes 112.5 x 1.3 = about 146 cases/hour (146.25).

• With Option A (135 cases/hour), capacity falls short and the line waits for parts during peak hours
• With Option B (216 cases/hour), the plant can handle it as is

A vertical conveyor is equipment that requires cutting an opening in the building floor, building a pit or foundation, and erecting an enclosure. Adding a second unit later is a major undertaking, including building work. At the time of introduction, it is likely in many cases to cost less in the end to assume “how far demand could grow over how many years” and to build in capacity headroom by automating transfers.

If the merging and accumulation of the transfer conveyors are designed poorly, capacity will hit a ceiling there. We cover the design approach on the conveyor side in detail in Conveyor Design in Thailand — Merge, Divert, Buffer and Real Payback.

Model Calculation of Vertical Conveyor Investment and Payback

No published prices could be found

We should state up front that, within the scope of our research for this article, we could not find any published prices or distributor-listed prices for vertical conveyors. Many domestic Japanese manufacturers list them as “price on inquiry.” Because the amount varies greatly with the transport unit, lift height, number of stop levels and scope of building work, it is not possible to give a market price as a single figure.

In what follows, therefore, we use amounts assumed for this article as a model calculation to show the cost-item structure and the approach to payback. They differ from actual quotations, so please split your own quotations into the same cost items and apply them.

Investment breakdown for Options A and B

The unit itself is only part of the total; even for Option A, we assume 1,500,000 baht for building work, electrical and controls, safety, and acceptance testing and training. If you look only at the unit price when comparing quotations, building work and safety items tend to be added later as extras, and the project ends up over budget.

Option A: 3 people saved, payback about 5.2 years

In Option A, people handle the transfers, so 1.5 people/shift x 2 shifts = 3 people remain on up-and-down transport after introduction.

• Labor cost savings = (6 people − 3 people) x 240,000 baht = 720,000 baht/year
• Annual maintenance and inspection cost = 80,000 baht/year (an assumption that includes outsourcing inspections and the annual load test on the premise that the Thai ministerial regulation applies)
• Net benefit = 720,000 − 80,000 = 640,000 baht/year
• Simple payback = 3,300,000 ÷ 640,000 = about 5.2 years (5.16)
• 5-year cumulative = 640,000 x 5 − 3,300,000 = −100,000 baht

By this calculation, the investment is not fully recovered even after 5 years.

Option B: 5 people saved, payback about 4.2 years

In Option B, transfers are automated, so the only remaining staff are 0.5 people/shift x 2 shifts = 1 person for replenishing carts and responding to faults.

• Labor cost savings = (6 people − 1 person) x 240,000 baht = 1,200,000 baht/year
• Annual maintenance and inspection cost = 120,000 baht/year (adding the conveyors and automatic gates)
• Net benefit = 1,200,000 − 120,000 = 1,080,000 baht/year
• Simple payback = 4,500,000 ÷ 1,080,000 = about 4.2 years (4.17)
• 5-year cumulative = 1,080,000 x 5 − 4,500,000 = 900,000 baht

Furthermore, looking only at the 1,200,000 baht added in Option B, the difference in net benefit is 1,080,000 − 640,000 = 440,000 baht/year, so the additional investment is recovered in 1,200,000 ÷ 440,000 = about 2.7 years (2.73).

Option B, with the higher initial investment, pays back faster. That is the conclusion of the model calculation. What creates the difference in payback is that people no longer need to be tied to transfers (the difference in the number of people saved). The “60% capacity increase” effect seen in the previous section works separately as a buffer against demand growth and is not included in these amounts.

Conditions under which the calculation’s assumptions break down

However, this conclusion rests on several conditions. If the following conditions cannot be met, the effect of Option B shrinks considerably.

• Carts and cases must have standardized dimensions so that they can be transferred by conveyor. If there are many kinds of carts, casters point in random directions, or cases are stacked so that they stick out, automated transfers will not be stable.
• There must be a place to receive carts on the upper and lower levels (a buffer on the process side). If there is nowhere to put the carts coming out of the vertical conveyor, they will jam on the conveyor, and in the end people will have to run over to collect them.
• The people saved must be redeployed to other processes, and hiring for those positions must be stopped. If headcount cannot be reduced, there will be no labor cost effect.

Cautions to avoid double counting

There are common mistakes when you rebuild this calculation for your own plant.

• The baseline for comparison is “the current 6 people.” Both Option A and Option B are calculated as reductions from this baseline. Do not add Option A’s 3-person reduction to Option B’s 5-person reduction.
• The savings from reducing forklift use (fuel and leasing), the lower risk of occupational accidents, and quality improvements (less damage from drops) are not included in this calculation. In that sense, it is a conservative calculation.
• BOI incentives are not included either. If they can be used, the positioning is that payback could become even shorter.
• Because the continuous type cannot carry carts, it is not included in this model’s comparison. In plants with even larger demand measured in cases, the continuous type also becomes an option.

For how to structure cost items for larger material-handling investments such as automated warehouses, see also Automated Warehouse Price 2026 | Thailand Cost and ROI Guide.

Vertical Conveyor Safety: Demonstrating a “Structure That People Do Not Ride”

The most important thing in vertical conveyor safety is to ensure through the structure itself that people do not ride the carriage, do not put their hands or bodies inside the carriage, and the carriage does not fall. Here we introduce a US industry standard and recommendations, and Japanese administrative practice, as yardsticks for design and acceptance. Please note that none of them are the laws of Japan or Thailand themselves.

US industry standard and recommendations: ASME B20.1 and the MHI guidelines

According to ASME’s official page, the latest edition of ASME B20.1, the safety standard for conveyors and related equipment, is the 2024 edition. Its scope covers the design, construction, installation, maintenance, inspection and operation (with respect to hazards) of conveyors and conveyor systems, and conveyors whose primary purpose is moving people are excluded.

According to the MHI guidelines, B20.1 before 2015 was a performance standard without details on “how to achieve” its requirements, but the 2015 revision added a mandatory appendix specifying the design, installation, commissioning and periodic inspection of VRCs. The guidelines present the industry position that ASME B20.1 is the only valid safety standard that can be used to regulate VRCs. They also state that, in the US, VRCs are typically regulated and inspected by OSHA (the Occupational Safety and Health Administration), whereas material lifts are regulated and inspected by state and local authorities.

The main safety principles listed in the MHI guidelines are as follows.

• Gate interlocks: A locking mechanism under which the VRC does not move unless all doors and gates are closed, and a door or gate does not open unless the carriage is at that level. The guidelines call for interlocks on all gates, whether they open vertically, slide horizontally or swing.
• No riding: Never allow people to ride on the lift carriage. Operating push buttons must be located where they cannot be operated from on the carriage with the gate closed, or at least 6 feet (about 1.8 m) from the carriage.
• Do not bypass safety devices: Do not operate before the safety devices and interlocks have been wired. Operating the unit by manually pressing contactors in the control panel is prohibited, because it bypasses all safety devices.
• Enclosure: Enclose with wire mesh, expanded metal, steel sheet or similar; wire mesh or other mesh must have openings that a 2-inch ball cannot pass through, and every enclosure must withstand a force of 200 pounds in any direction. A typical swing gate height is 84 inches.
• Fall prevention: Fall-prevention safety devices are required on all VRCs of the type in which the carriage is suspended (not required where a hydraulic ram or cylinder supports it directly). Mechanical units may be equipped with features such as a switch that detects chain slack and stops the unit.

The MHI guidelines also state that ASME B20.1 requires, for every VRC installation, complete guarding to prevent injury from inadvertent contact with the lift or load, and interlocks on the gates or doors at unloading levels, and that the installer is responsible for meeting these requirements regardless of who supplied the gates or enclosure. This is a statement in a US industry guideline, but it can be taken as a suggestion that, even for contracts in Thailand, the RFP should clearly state “who provides the enclosure and gates, and who is responsible for meeting the safety requirements.”

Japanese practice: the “three requirements” for vertical conveyors and the Hyogo Prefecture criteria

For readers who compare against the equipment standards of their Japanese head office, we also introduce Japanese practice. According to a paper presented by Hiroaki Yoshino of the Hyogo Prefectural Housing Supply Corporation at a research presentation meeting of the Kinki Regional Development Bureau (2016), the only criteria for vertical conveyors that could be found were the following three requirements in the “Commentary on Technical Standards for Elevators.”

1. The facility must be incorporated exclusively as part of the process, as production equipment or conveying (cargo-handling) equipment in a factory, workshop or similar
2. It must be used without people directly intervening in carrying goods out of or into the carrier
3. It must have a structure with no risk of being operated with a person on board

According to the same paper, Hyogo Prefecture created criteria that put these three requirements into concrete form, and they were adopted as the common treatment across the Kinki region. Please note that these are not legal criteria unified nationwide.

The main contents of the Hyogo Prefecture criteria are: the conveying system must use sequence control and be able to perform a series of conveying motions automatically (in principle with a single operation); the operating panel must be located outside the safety fence or similar, at a position where it cannot be reached from the carrier; safety fences must be at least 1.1 m high; the hoistway must, in principle, be covered with gap-free steel plate or similar up to 1.8 m above the floor (wire mesh with openings that hands cannot enter is acceptable); entrances must have intrusion-prevention doors interlocked with the operating circuit, and the conveying system must stop if a door is opened while the carrier is moving; and emergency stop buttons and similar devices must be provided at key points.

Behind the creation of these criteria are tragic accidents. According to the same paper, in Hyogo Prefecture in 2009, 2010 and 2012, fatal accidents involving illegally installed freight-carrying elevators occurred at separate factories in Himeji City. The causes are said to have been deficiencies in safety devices, such as a landing door opening when the carriage had not arrived at the floor (there was no door lock) and a carriage falling when the wire rope went slack (there was no switch to detect slack). Of the 398 factories in Hyogo Prefecture surveyed in the paper, 49% had installed freight elevators (this ratio applies only to the surveyed factories).

To sum up the idea behind Japan’s three requirements in a single phrase: “transfers are automatic, and people stay outside the carrier.” This also overlaps with the direction that this article’s Option B (automated transfers) aims for. Automation intended to increase capacity also helps to demonstrate safety, and this is worth keeping in mind during selection.

However, in Japan, calling something a “vertical conveyor” does not mean it falls outside the scope of the Building Standards Act or the Industrial Safety and Health Act. To be treated as equipment that is not an elevator under the Building Standards Act, it must at least have a structure that meets the three requirements. Some manufacturers describe their products as “vertical conveyors not subject to the Industrial Safety and Health Act or the Building Standards Act” (for example, Jaroc explains that its slide lifter with a maximum load of 2000 kg is designed so that no cargo handling takes place inside the hoistway, and that no building confirmation application or statutory inspection is required). Such explanations are manufacturer claims and concern laws within Japan. They do not apply as is to factories in Thailand.

How to decide the performance of safety controls

Regarding the level to which safety-related controls such as gate interlocks should be built, within the scope of our research for this article we could not confirm a primary source that specifies the performance level required for vertical conveyor interlocks (PLr under ISO 13849). We therefore do not assert that any specific value is mandatory. As a way forward, we recommend the general procedure of determining the required performance level through a risk assessment and having suppliers submit the required value and the verification method (such as calculation documents) in response to the RFP. We explain how to proceed with verifying safety controls in detail in Safety PLC Implementation: RFP, Validation and FAT/SAT Evidence.

Ultimately, please confirm compliance with safety standards individually with the competent authorities or safety experts.

12 Items to Write in a Vertical Conveyor RFP or Request for Quotation

We summarize the content so far as 12 items to write into the RFP. To compare quotations from multiple companies on the same terms, it is important to align these at the stage of the initial request.

1. Transport unit and peak transport volume: Dimensions, weight and center-of-gravity position (maximum and minimum) of cases, carts and pallets, and the peak transport volume per hour
2. Type and rationale: Reciprocating or continuous, hydraulic or mechanical. Also require submission of the reasons for that judgment
3. Cycle-time breakdown: Present transfer, gate opening and closing, and travel separately, as guaranteed values
4. Stop levels and lift height: Number of stop levels, lift height, and loading/unloading orientation (same side, opposite side, 90 degrees)
5. Transfer method: Manual, conveyor, or AGV or AMR. Scope of responsibility for I/O (input/output signals) and interlocks with surrounding conveyors
6. Safety: Gate interlocks (does not move unless all gates are closed, the gate does not open at a level where the carriage is not present), no-riding structure and signage, fall-prevention devices, enclosure mesh and strength, emergency stop
7. Standards and criteria to comply with: References such as ASME B20.1, the Japanese head office’s standards, and whether the supplier can handle the inspections and load tests in the Thai ministerial regulation
8. Scope of building work: Floor opening, pit or foundation, beam reinforcement, fire compartmentation, and the division of responsibilities between owner and contractor
9. Installation plan in an operating plant: Schedule, temporary storage space, and time during which production must stop
10. FAT and SAT test items and acceptance criteria
11. Maintenance: Inspection intervals, who performs the annual load test, spare parts, engineers in Thailand and response times
12. Commercial terms: Price validity, exchange rates, import taxes and customs clearance, payment terms, and whether the supplier can provide the machinery list and itemized quotation needed for a BOI application

Of these, having suppliers state the cycle-time breakdown in item 3 as guaranteed values is the most effective way to prevent a capacity shortfall. A quotation that says only “maximum capacity XX/hour” does not tell you what transfer time it assumes. If you obtain the breakdown, you can compare it with the transfer times measured on your own shop floor and re-estimate the actual capacity.

The scope of responsibility in item 5 is another item that is easily overlooked. When the vertical conveyor manufacturer, the transfer conveyor supplier and the building contractor are all different, it tends to become unclear who connects the interlock signals and where, and whose controls stop the system when a jam occurs.

What to Check in Vertical Conveyor FAT/SAT

In the FAT (factory acceptance test before shipment) and the SAT (site acceptance test), check the following items. The acceptance values are shown as examples for you to decide yourself.

For gate interlocks, the MHI guidelines list site test items such as up and down speeds, all limits, gate interlocks and gate-status switches. It is a good idea to use these as a reference when creating your own SAT checklist.

The acceptance testing approach itself has much in common with AGV Elevator Integration: RFP and FAT/SAT Acceptance, which also deals with equipment that spans upper and lower floors.

Thailand-Specific Issues: Ministerial Regulation, Installation, Labor Costs and BOI

The “goods lift” in Ministerial Regulation B.E.2564, and confirming whether it applies

In Thailand, there is a ministerial regulation (B.E.2564, published in the Royal Gazette on August 6, 2021) that sets out occupational safety management standards for machinery, cranes, boilers and similar equipment. This regulation defines a “goods lift” (ลิฟต์ขนส่งวัสดุ) as a machine used only for transporting goods up and down between the floors of a building or similar structure, and not used to carry people. A report by Enviliance, an English-language secondary source, also explains that the regulation covers machinery, cranes, boilers and similar equipment, and includes lifts in the machinery category.

According to the Royal Gazette version of the text, the main requirements for goods lifts are:

• Install securely and inspect daily
• Hazard-prevention measures and “do not use” signage during testing or repair
• An alarm when the load specified by the manufacturer is exceeded, and a device that cuts off operation
• Measures so that the lift does not move unless the door is closed
• Rated-load signage and “no riding” signage (inside the carriage and outside the doors on every level)
• Measures to prevent loads from shifting and to prevent the carriage from jamming
• Testing of parts and devices after installation and at least once a year during use. Load testing is to be performed at 100% or more of the maximum working load specified by the manufacturer, with the results posted and records kept
• Monthly inspection of safety devices and operating systems
• A safety factor of 5 or more for wire ropes and 4 or more for chains

What requires attention here is that at the time of writing, we have not been able to confirm an official interpretation of whether vertical conveyors in Thailand fall under this “goods lift” category. We have also not been able to confirm whether Thailand has an administrative treatment, as Japan does, that “handles vertical conveyors separately.” On the other hand, reading only the wording of the definition, it describes “a machine that carries only goods up and down between floors,” so we consider that vertical conveyors may fall under it.

We therefore recommend the following steps.

1. Before introduction, confirm with the competent Department of Labour Protection and Welfare, safety experts or inspection bodies whether your machine falls under the definition
2. Until you have the result, budget for the plan and costs of daily and monthly inspections and the annual load test on the premise that it does apply (the maintenance and inspection costs in the model calculation are also set on this premise)
3. In the RFP, confirm with the manufacturer and installer whether they can handle the inspections and load tests under the regulation, and who will perform them

If it turns out that the regulation does not apply, saving those costs is no problem; but if it does apply and you have not budgeted for it, you will have to rebuild your inspection system later. Erring on the side of safety is the prudent choice.

Installation in an operating plant

When a vertical conveyor for a mezzanine is added to an existing plant, installation almost always takes place while production continues. According to an article in the industry publication Material Handling 247 (September 22, 2026), PFlow has published a guide to installing VRCs in active facilities. The guide lists planning items such as the delivery route (actual door widths and aisle widths), temporary storage space (up to about 50 ft x 50 ft, roughly 15 m x 15 m, may be needed), rigging, welding permits and fire watch, safety zones, and start-up and training (capacity limits, gate functions, daily inspections), and states that in active facilities it is common for 1 to 2 weeks to be added to the normal schedule. These are guideline figures from PFlow’s guide, not track records from Thai plants, but they can be used as a list to check the plan for omissions.

PFlow is also reported to have showcased a modular VRC, the “RapidStack Lift,” at MODEX 2026 (Atlanta, US) in April 2026. It combines two prefabricated upper and lower sections with a made-to-order middle section, has a capacity of 2,500 pounds (about 1,130 kg), comes as a standard two-level mezzanine-edge configuration, and is said to require no on-site welding because it is bolted together. It can be seen as a product that responds to the need to reduce hot work in operating plants.

In Thailand, it is also wise to build the following points into the schedule.

• If building work on floor openings or exterior walls overlaps with the rainy season, the schedule becomes hard to predict
• Above and below processes where production cannot be stopped, work needs to be shifted to nights or holidays
• Fire management when welding or cutting is involved, and coordination with other work in the plant

Labor costs, and how hard it is to retain staff for up-and-down transport

According to materials from the law firm ILCT, as of the revision in July 2025, Thailand’s daily minimum wage ranges from 337 to 400 baht depending on the province. Chonburi, Rayong, Bangkok and others are at 400 baht, and Samut Prakan is at 372 baht. The labor cost for Model Plant M (240,000 baht per year) is not the minimum wage itself, but an assumed value that includes overtime, bonuses, social security, and recruitment and turnover costs.

More of a problem on the shop floor than the amount itself is that staff for up-and-down transport are hard to recruit and do not stay. Pushing carts back and forth between the stairs and the mezzanine edge is physically demanding, monotonous and hard on the back. When support staff are sent from other processes to fill the gap left by someone who quit, those processes can no longer keep up. Automating transfers is not only a way to cut labor costs; it is also a means of fundamentally reducing these recruitment and retention problems.

The BOI Smart and Sustainable Industry measure

According to the investment promotion guide (2023 edition) for the Thailand Board of Investment (BOI) “Smart and Sustainable Industry” measure, the following incentives are available for efficiency improvements through machinery upgrades and automation.

• Eligible projects are existing businesses (with or without BOI promotion; for BOI projects, the corporate income tax exemption must have expired or never been granted)
• Investment of at least 1 million baht, excluding land and working capital
• Exemption of import duties on machinery
• A 3-year corporate income tax exemption (capped at 50% of the investment)
• If automation systems or robots are used and linkage with and support for Thailand’s automation industry amounts to 30% or more of the value of the upgraded machinery, the cap is 100% of the investment

However, this article has not been able to confirm the application deadline or the status of the measure’s continuation or revision as of 2026. In addition, whether a vertical conveyor on its own qualifies as an “automation system” is a matter for individual judgment by the BOI. There may be room to consider it as part of an automated line investment, but always confirm the latest requirements individually with the BOI. BOI incentives are not included in this article’s model calculation. We explain the requirements in detail in BOI Automation Tax Exemption 2026 — What Decides 50% or 100%.

For reference, in Japan, the introduction of vertical conveyors was listed as eligible equipment in the 4th round of applications for the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism’s subsidy program to promote the use of standard-specification pallets (according to an LNEWS article dated August 26, 2026; subsidy rate 1/2, with a cap of 5 million yen for cargo-handling efficiency projects and 10 million yen for logistics efficiency projects; vertical conveyors were listed as eligible under cargo-handling efficiency). The application period closed on October 2, 2026, and was no longer accepting applications at the time this article was published. Because this is a program within Japan, sites in Thailand are not eligible. Still, the fact that vertical conveyors are a target of policy support in Japan as an investment in logistics efficiency may be useful background when explaining an investment to your head office.

Meeting both Japanese head office standards and Thai law

Japanese plants are often required to design in line with their Japanese head office’s equipment standards. If you adopt specifications that satisfy both the thinking behind Japan’s three requirements (transfers are automatic, people stay outside the carrier, a structure that cannot be ridden) and the requirements of the Thai ministerial regulation (door interlocks, signage, inspections and load tests), you are less likely to be asked to make corrections later, whether in a head office audit or a check by the Thai authorities. We recommend stating both clearly under item 7 of the RFP, “Standards and criteria to comply with.”

A 90-Day Plan for Introducing a Vertical Conveyor

We now break down the content so far into a 90-day plan.

Days 0 to 30: Measure transport volumes and standardize transport units

• Measure transport volumes between the upper and lower levels by time of day. In particular, identify peaks such as just after a shift starts
• Measure the current transfer times (pushing carts in and pulling them out) with a stopwatch
• Take inventory of the types of carts and cases, and consider whether their dimensions and stacking methods can be standardized
• Confirm whether a place to receive carts (a buffer) can be secured on the upper and lower levels

Days 31 to 60: Decide the type and transfer method, issue the RFP and compare quotations, and confirm with the authorities

• Decide between reciprocating and continuous based on the transport unit and peak volume
• Decide whether transfers will be manual or automated by comparing them using the same template as the model calculation
• Issue an RFP containing the 12 items to multiple companies and compare quotations that include a cycle-time breakdown
• Confirm with the competent authorities or experts whether the equipment falls under the goods lift definition in the ministerial regulation

Days 61 to 90: Building work and installation planning, FAT and SAT, and training

• Plan the work on the floor opening, pit or foundation, and enclosure, taking into account the rainy season and the impact on production
• Decide the installation procedure for an operating plant (delivery route, temporary storage, fire management, safety zones)
• Confirm cycle time and interlocks at FAT, and reproduce the peak transport volume at SAT after installation
• Prepare Thai-language operating procedures and daily inspection procedures, and train operators and maintenance staff

In an actual introduction, building work and equipment manufacturing lead times may mean that it does not fit within 90 days. Even so, simply measuring the “peak volume” and the “transfer time” in the first 30 days greatly improves the accuracy of the subsequent type selection and quotation comparison.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) About Vertical Conveyor Selection

Q1. What is the difference between a vertical conveyor and an elevator?

The biggest difference is whether it has a structure that people do not ride. In the US, the guidelines of the industry association MHI distinguish between VRCs (covered by the conveyor safety standard ASME B20.1) and material lifts (covered by the elevator code). In Japan, three requirements serve as an operational guide: the equipment is incorporated into the production or conveying process, people are not directly involved in loading and unloading, and there is no risk of it being operated with a person on board (according to a paper introducing the treatment in the Kinki region). However, the treatment differs from country to country. For how it is treated in Thailand, please confirm with the competent authorities or experts.

Q2. Should I choose a reciprocating or a continuous vertical conveyor?

Decide based on the transport unit and the peak transport volume. For consolidated units such as carts and pallets, choose a reciprocating type. The continuous type is suited to sending small, light cases in an uninterrupted flow, but it cannot carry carts or pallets. Among reciprocating types, according to the MHI guidelines, hydraulic units are typically for two-level applications and are not recommended for applications with intermediate stops, while mechanical units are the option for three or more levels, automated systems and high-cycle applications.

Q3. How much does it cost to introduce a vertical conveyor?

Within the scope of our research for this article, we could not find any published prices. Costs vary greatly with the transport unit, lift height, number of stop levels and scope of building work. In this article’s model calculation, we split the costs into the following items: the unit itself, building work, electrical and controls, safety, FAT/SAT and training, and transfer automation. We recommend asking suppliers to break down their quotations by these cost items.

Q4. How do I calculate the capacity of a vertical conveyor?

Calculate the round-trip time as “transfer time x number of transfers + gate opening, closing and start-wait time x number of occurrences + travel time x number of travels,” divide 3,600 seconds by that value to get the number of round trips per hour, and multiply by the number of units carried per trip. For Option A at Model Plant M, the round trip was 320 seconds, there were 11.25 round trips per hour, and upward capacity was 135 cases/hour. For transfer times, please use values measured on your own shop floor rather than catalog values.

Q5. What laws and inspections apply when using a vertical conveyor in Thailand?

Thailand’s ministerial regulation (B.E.2564) defines a goods lift and requires, among other things, daily inspections, measures so that the lift does not move unless the door is closed, no-riding and rated-load signage, load testing at 100% or more of the maximum working load at least once a year, and monthly inspections. We have not been able to confirm an official interpretation of whether vertical conveyors fall under this, but since they may fall under it based on the wording of the definition, the safe-side approach is to confirm individually with the competent Department of Labour Protection and Welfare or safety experts before introduction, and to budget for inspection and testing costs on the premise that it applies.

Q6. Can AGVs or AMRs be connected to a vertical conveyor?

In principle, yes. A column by IDEC Factory Solutions introduces a case in which input/output signals were added to an elevator’s control panel in cooperation with the manufacturer, a linkage control panel was placed between it and the AMR, and the interlocks, timeout handling and operating sequence were designed. The column also points out that radio signals tend to weaken because of the metal structure inside the elevator, and that sharing with people raises safety concerns. This is an elevator case, but the approach to designing I/O linkage, interlocks and timeouts can be applied to vertical conveyors by analogy. Please include in the design the mechanism by which AMRs or conveyors receive carts on the upper and lower levels. For how to define transfer specifications, see also Conveyor-Top AMR Integration: Interface and 90-Day PoC.

Summary

• If you choose a vertical conveyor on rated load and lift height alone, it tends to end up short of capacity. In Option A at Model Plant M, of a 320-second round trip, transfers accounted for about 56% and gate opening and closing and waiting for start for about 19%, while travel was only 25%.
• Decide the type first, based on the transport unit and the peak transport volume. Choose reciprocating for carts and pallets; for high volumes of small, light cases, continuous is also a candidate. Each company’s specifications are manufacturer-stated, so be careful not to make judgments by combining upper limits with one another.
• In the model, doubling the travel speed raised capacity by only about 14%, but automating transfers raised it by 60%, and peak utilization fell from about 83% to about 52%. The plant can cope even if demand rises by 30%.
• Option B requires 1,200,000 baht more in investment, but because its net benefit is larger, it pays back in about 4.2 years, faster than Option A’s about 5.2 years. However, this assumes that cart dimensions are standardized, that there is a place to receive carts, and that the people saved can be redeployed.
• Safety is about demonstrating a “structure that people do not ride.” Use the US ASME B20.1 and MHI guidelines and Japan’s three requirements as yardsticks for design and acceptance; confirm with the competent authorities or experts whether the equipment falls under the goods lift definition in the Thai ministerial regulation, and budget for inspections and load tests on the premise that it does.

At TOMAS TECH, we are happy to help with how to measure transport volumes and peaks between floors, even at the stage before you have decided whether to choose a reciprocating or continuous type. We also welcome requests such as re-reading the quotations you already have by splitting them into a cycle-time breakdown and cost items, or organizing the overall picture including transfer automation. If you are facing challenges with up-and-down transport in a mezzanine or two-story plant, please feel free to contact us through our contact form.

References

• MHI (Application Guidelines for Vertical Reciprocating Conveyors, February 2019 edition): https://og.mhi.org/downloads/industrygroups/conv/Application%20Guidelines%20for%20Vertical%20Reciprocating%20Conveyors.pdf
• ASME (B20.1 Safety Standard for Conveyors and Related Equipment): https://www.asme.org/codes-standards/find-codes-standards/b20-1-safety-standard-conveyors-related-equipment
• PFlow Industries (21 Series hydraulic VRC): https://www.pflow.com/vertical-conveyors/hydraulic/21-series
• Wildeck (Mechanical VRCs): https://www.wildeck.com/vertical-reciprocating-conveyors/mechanical-vrcs
• Central Conveyor (vertical conveyors, listed on IPROS): https://pr.mono.ipros.com/centralcv/product/detail/2000286754/
• Takatsu Dendo Seiki (Sanki Engineering S-Con Mini Power Up Flow, listed on IPROS): https://pr.mono.ipros.com/takatsu/product/detail/2000692436/
• Cisco-Eagle (Incline Conveyors vs Reciprocating Lifts vs Spiral Conveyors): https://www.cisco-eagle.com/blog/2023/02/02/vertical-package-transport-incline-conveyors-vs-reciprocating-lifts-vs-spiral-conveyors/
• Hitachi (logistics center glossary: vertical conveyors): https://www.hitachi.co.jp/products/infrastructure/product_site/logistics_center/term/vertical-conveyors.html
• Jaroc (slide lifter, listed on IPROS): https://pr.mono.ipros.com/jaroc149882/news/detail/95406/
• Hiroaki Yoshino (paper, Kinki Regional Development Bureau research presentation meeting, FY2016): https://www.kkr.mlit.go.jp/plan/happyou/thesises/2016/pdf06/05.pdf
• Thai Ministerial Regulation on safety management standards for machinery, cranes and boilers, B.E.2564 (copy of the Royal Gazette version, hosted by Chulalongkorn University): https://www.shecu.chula.ac.th/data/boards/728/กฎกระทรวง%20มาตรฐานบริหารจัดการ%20เครื่องจักร%20ปั้นจั่น%202564.PDF
• Enviliance (overview of the Thai ministerial regulation): https://enviliance.com/regions/southeast-asia/th/report_4310
• Material Handling 247 (How do you install a VRC in an active facility): https://www.materialhandling247.com/article/how_do_you_install_a_vrc_in_an_active_facility
• Today’s Machining World (PFlow RapidStack Lift, MODEX 2026): https://todaysmachiningworld.com/industry_news/pflow-industries-to-showcase-new-rapidstack-lift-modular-vrc-and-powertow-cart-return-system-at-modex-2026
• LNEWS (4th round of applications, standard-specification pallet use promotion support program): https://www.lnews.jp/2026/08/s0826102.html
• Thailand Board of Investment (BOI), Smart and Sustainable Industry measure guide: https://www.boi.go.th/upload/content/Smart_and_Sustainable_Industry.pdf
• ILCT law firm (Thailand minimum wage, July 2025 revision): https://www.ilct.co.th/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Thailand-minimum-daily-wage-revised-221025-1.pdf
• IDEC Factory Solutions (AMR and elevator integration): https://en.idec-fs.com/mir/column/column-6/