Maximize efficiency with fork-mounted cameras

Maximize efficiency with fork-mounted cameras

Maximize efficiency with fork-mounted cameras

Fork-mounted cameras on forklifts: 

Limited direct visibility is a key driver of errors, damage, and time loss in pallet handling. A fork-mounted camera gives the operator the right view at the right moment — tine insertion, pickup, and placement — reducing corrections and helping operators work faster with more confidence.

Evidence note (efficiency gain):

There’s no widely accepted peer-reviewed study that isolates a specific “pallets per labour hour” uplift from fork-mounted cameras alone. Field experience in many operations still points to faster placements, fewer corrections, and lower damage. The most reliable number is the one you measure locally with a short before–after pilot.

Measure your own efficiency gain (quick guide)

  • Pick one metric: Pallets per labour hour (PPH) for a defined task (e.g., high-bay put-away) or median cycle time (lift → placement) for ≥30 cycles.

  • Baseline (no camera): Track the chosen metric for 5 working days (same shift where possible).

  • With camera: Track for 5 comparable days; ignore day 1 to reduce learning effects.

  • Calculate: Efficiency gain % = (PPHwith − PPHwithout) ÷ PPHwithout × 100. If using cycle time, swap PPH for time and reverse the subtraction.

  • Reality check: Keep order mix, operators, and layout as similar as possible. Note exceptions on the sheet.

  • Decide: If gain ≥ 5–10% and damages do not increase, scale up and standardise use.

Where to place the camera

Fork-tip placement (on the forks)

  • Pros: Maximum precision for tine alignment and pocket entry, especially at height; true “what the forks see” view.

  • Trade-offs: More exposed to bumps/debris; may need periodic realignment if fork width changes.

Carriage/mast placement (between the forks)

  • Pros: More protected mounting; stable wide view of pallet face/rack; less frequent adjustment.

  • Trade-offs: Slightly less “fork-tip exact” view; at extreme heights or deep racks, the load can occlude parts of the image.

Tip: Many systems can be complemented with a rear-facing camera for reversing; several setups support automatic switching to the rear view when the truck is put into reverse or via a trigger input.

Choosing a camera system: wired vs wireless

Both wired and wireless systems can deliver excellent image quality and low-latency views when properly specified. The right choice depends on your installation constraints, uptime goals, maintenance routines, and how stable your use-case is.

  • Wired: Continuous power and no batteries to manage; suitable where radio policies are strict. Cables on the mast are wear points and usually mean longer, more invasive installation.

  • Wireless: No mast cabling and reversible magnetic mount on the mast (no drilling) keep installation quick and low-disruption. Modern links offer low latency in most sites; plan a simple battery swap/charge routine and keep magnetic contacts clean.

For retrofits, wireless is often convenient because it avoids mast cabling and speeds up pilots and fleet roll-outs. Wired remains a solid choice where continuous hard-wired power and a fixed configuration are the priority.

See example solutions

Further reading

Shop the story