Lift Report

While in the 1950s growing numbers of elevators and escalators were being installed in the course of economic recovery and upturn following WW II, those units were usually fitted by local companies, some of which started out with licenses from American companies and then developed further from that beginning. Ongoing technical advances, particularly in Europe, provided new impetus for the industry. There was a departure from the American paradigm and this was to set the tone almost all around the world in subsequent years. This marked the beginning of the decline of old, national firms and their absorption into larger units, resulting in the concentration of companies prevailing today. Some of the names from that earlier period – such as Falconi, Stiegler, Freissler, So witsch, Edoux-Samain, Roux Combaluzier, Haughton, Wadsworth, Waygood, Flohr, R. Stahl, Zaiser – are mentioned here simply by way of example. The list makes no claim to completeness. In the 1960s it became apparent that it was not necessary for every national or regional elevator manufacturer to fabricate all the parts specific to the elevators. Indeed the components, made up in relatively small quantities, can be manufactured more economically if piece counts are increased. Thus individual components were sold to, or bought from, competitors and that has resulted in the specific spectrum of exhibitors seen at the interlift trade fair. If at the beginning the so-called “core components” of an elevator were thought to embody a competitive advantage, this idea has been largely discarded by now. Starting in central Europe, various companies specialized, as of the late 1960s, in purchasing and trading elevator parts and components all across the European Community, and they often also represented foreign manufacturers, and door makers in particular.

Growing demand from the Middle East resulted in specialization in proprietary component manufacturing and development. Some suppliers even went so far as to build completely assembled elevators made up from bought-in components, delivering them with some technical modification; their customers handled only installation and local customer service. In many cases the strong expansion of these companies was followed by increasing capital requirements, triggering changes in ownership. Today some of these firms have reached a size that makes them interesting even for outside investors. The result is that additional manufacturing sites have been acquired the world over; other sites, however, have disappeared. The profusion of distribution channels, including the granting of licenses , has resulted in further penetration of the world market, something that was visible among certain exhibitors at this year’s interlift.

At present about 40 % of the elevators newly installed around the world are found in the Asia-Pacific region and this is reflected in the large number of Chinese exhibitors. The boom in recent years in China is similar to the growth phase found in Europe and Japan in the 1950s and ’60s. The large European and American makers have established extensive manufacturing capacities for lifts and escalators or are manufacturing there by way of subsidiaries, holding companies and partner firms. This trend toward globalization is being boosted by the growing market there and the low manufacturing costs.

The production capacities for elevators and escalators in Europe generally exceed what the market actually requires. Manufacturing capacities were relocated to eastern Europe and Asia because of the lower production costs there. Also of interest were the economies of scale that could be achieved with new and larger manufacturing facilities. The production capacities of the smaller firms that had been taken over by the majors are thus made uninteresting. The firms could, in this context, at best survive in niche production or through local distribution of specially engineered units.

It has been ascertained, however, that some of the former employees of the companies thus acquired have gone into business for themselves. In some cases they have even set up a small production unit and have drawn attention at the fair. In spite of the concentration in the industry, the total number of companies involved in elevator construction in Europe has not declined in recent years. Companies with a high export ratio are showing good capacity utilization. Nonetheless, the market for new lifts – especially in Germany – continues to be weak. Particular market impetus usually originates in modernization initiatives. The Operating Safety Ordinance and the EN 81-80 standard have stimulated demand to a certain extent. This is because operators are obliged to evaluate, by the end of 2007, the safety of the units they operate, using a safety assessment or risk analysis. Just like at the most recent fair, special retrofitting packages were on exhibit, tailored to meet these needs. Overall, however, the modernization sector is not focused only on such adaptations. Improvements associated with how the lifts are used often dictate more extensive replacements. This can then affect all the component groups, such as those which are also used for new units.

The traction lift without a separate machine room has become ever more common. In the past, the hydraulic lift was found considerably more frequently in Germany than in neighboring countries. Whereas ten years ago about 60 % of all lifts in Germany were fitted with a hydraulic drive, that figure is only about 20% today. This is also reflected in the range on offer at the fair. This development was not prompted solely by the advance of the “roomless” lifts but, at least in Germany, by the Water Resources Management Act, too. One of its consequences was that hydraulic lifts with a central cylinder, previously widely used, have virtually disappeared. Considerations of the electrical connection values also had an effect. As was seen at the fair, various hydraulic manufacturers took these negative influencing factors as an occasion to rework their products and in some cases even to reengineer them entirely. Thus solutions were shown in which the entire drive unit, including the control circuitry, is located inside the hoistway. Some, in a type-inspected version, can be installed to great benefit of the owner, making use of the provisions of EN 81-21 with the reduced pit depth and/or overhead space. The increasing use of electronics has improved both the electrical connection values and ride comfort. Since many elevator installing companies find fitting a hydraulic lift to be simpler and less troublesome, some manufacturers are even thinking about expanding their manufacturing capacities.

While in Germany more than 60 % of all lifts newly installed in the year 2000 featured a separate machine room, today this is true for less than 30 %. Currently more than 70 % of all new lifts – of both traction and hydraulic designs – have no separate machine room. Thus it is hardly surprising that the range of drive solutions and components or assemblies for traction lifts without a separate machine room has increased. In the year 2000 earsplitting moans and groans were heard from many smaller and medium-sized elevator companies. They complained that the “patent blockades” set up by the major companies for the machine-roomless lift left hardly any freedom for their own proprietary solutions. The situation has changed in the meantime.

Thoughts about launching collective challenges to patents to create some latitude for innovation have long since been forgotten . New patents, including those taken out by independent motor manufacturers, have paved the way for installation concepts that, in spite of the existing patent restraints, enable economical realization of a drive contained entirely within the hoistway. Also on exhibit this year – and once again independent of the patents held by the major companies – was an option for reducing drive sheave diameters. The thinner suspension ropes recently introduced by rope makers permit new installation options for the drive. On view at this year’s fair were drives already adapted to suit these rope diameters, with drive sheaves exhibiting the appropriate number of grooves and groove shapes. Here it was evident that even those companies that do not have their own extensive development and research capacities can profit from further refinements, once advances have been introduced. Almost in passing, and in conjunction with this miniaturization of the drive inside the hoistway, the discussion about the type of gearing and gearing efficiency has taken off in an entirely different direction. The 3-phase gearless, synchronous motor with the associated frequency inverter has achieved primacy. Where smaller output levels are required there is also an option for connection to a singlephase supply, tapping a normal 230 V socket. Here the frequency inverter converts the single-phase input current into 3-phase current. Miniaturizing of gearless drives was to be seen at various booths. The number of autonomous engineering concepts was, however, smaller. Mutual manufacturing and sales arrangements make for a sufficient number of supply sources, however, so that elevators with gearless synchronous motors, not subject to any restraints in regard to competition, can be taken to be the state of the art.

Although gearless drives are making major inroads, the classical geared drives are still being manufactured. Whenever a specialist manufacturer indicates that he delivers 23,000 gearboxes annually, around the world, then that is an indication of the extent of the demand, much of which is due to modernization projects. It is to be noted, however, that some specialist gearing manufacturers were not present as exhibitors at the fair this year, but most certainly as visitors.

There has been discussion among gearing manufacturers for some time now as regards the most advantageous brake configuration for gearing. The focus of that discussion has shifted with the development of new brake designs. The amount of installation effort required to avoid the so-called “upward fall” has been reduced since brake designs and safeties that have come onto the market in the meantime offer sufficient security in conjunction even with gearless drives. A variety of concepts has been put forth for monitoring brake quality at a standstill after the brake linings have worn down. They are actually an indispensable feature of a safe elevator, regardless of the nature of the drive. This is because, following the shift in brake function from a running brake to one active only at standstill in normal operations, brake wear is no longer easily recognized. The 3-phase synchronous design provides a convenient feature: the electronics can decelerate the motor in the case of a malfunction resulting in an uncontrolled ascent. Thus, in conjunction with the “roomless” solutions, a modified drive technology has gradually come into being. It was seenright across all the exhibit halls, insofar as the affected installation company had made the appropriate selection when combining components with the supplementary safety equipment that might be required. In isolated cases component manufacturers had augmented their linewith coordinated, bought-in components in order to relieve the assembly companies of a part of this task.

This trend toward becoming system supplier , delivering to companies that do assembly work exclusively, is on the rise.

As regards the control circuitry, thinking in terms of packaged solutions has advanced further so that carefully harmonized drive equipment and its controls can be obtained as a unit. Controls based on bus technology have in the meantime become almost a matter of course. But the targeted standardization with the CANopen system has not made the desired breakthrough. It was intended to give service technicians some independence so they could use controls available on the open market, liberating them from the need to use only the proprietary components made by the majors. This breakthrough was thwarted because the controls manufactured by the majors, from the service viewpoint, require a certain degree of rearward compatibility with the prior generations and development has not come to a standstill there. Destination control was presented at the fair by one manufacturer; he claimed that these were the first controls to be independent of any major company. The extent to which this might be associated with patents expiring is difficult to determine.

This type of control has been used to a great extent, for more than 10 years now, by one large manufacturer; it has also been used by other majors for more than 5 years. Otherwise such controls have not been available on the commercial market. The performance of such controls will be highly dependent on the algorithm used. The names chosen for controls do not tell us everything about the scope of the system’s complex capabilities and possibilities. The majors, too, have had to do some remedial work in the past five years and in many cases have further refined their software. Large banks of elevators serving many landings and special applications for specific types of use also require some experience in the application. Whereas destination control has been used in the past primarily for larger buildings, it will in the future make its breakthrough as the state of the art for a broader range of applications. This will be linked with transponder-initiated calls for certain groups of people and will be used in conjunction with access control systems. A destination entry point and display system modified to suit the situation augments this type of control, which eliminates the floor buttons inside the car.

Elevator doors, both at the landing and in the cab, were shown in many embodiments at the fair. The manufacturing costs for doors are highly dependent on the production line and the volume manufactured. Thus it was quite early on that the majors achieved both specialization and standardization. Doors for deviating requirements were bought on the commercial market. In particular for independent door manufacturers, highly automated sheet metal processing machines are of great assistance. They make it possible to modify production simply by entering new parameters at the software, so as to manufacture doors deviating from the standard. One manufacturing alliance manufactures 400,000 sets annually and that means – on average – an almost 20 % share of the world market. Important here is not only the share of production, expressed as the number of units manufactured, but also the question of the modifications to meet requirements for use in large buildings.

In new construction it is not always the price alone that is decisive, but also the running characteristics and the door opening and closing times. It is a wellknown fact that an elevator’s conveyance capacity will depend in large part on the properties of the doors. Door drives with special modifications and simplified adjustment concepts rounded out the range of offerings here. A door has to provide sufficient safety against falls and will have to be resistant to vandalism – to a specified extent and scope. Installation dimensions, fi re prevention requirements and decorative surface finishes complete the specifications. Examples were on exhibit for all these applications. To be mentioned as one innovation is that glass doors, too, will now withstand flame exposure testing as prescribed by EN 81- 58 or local building codes. Complete smoke-tightness cannot be achieved by any elevator door design, however, since the unavoidable gap required for operation prohibits complete sealing. Even at the last interlift glass doors were shown in which information could be incorporated into the interlayer of the laminated safety glass. Thus it is possible, with the appropriate electrical controls, to provide information on the direction of travel or confirmation that a destination call has been registered. A novel and exemplary solution for “edge protection” is to illuminate the leading edge, warning passengers that the door is about to close or is closing.

There is a largely separate market for doors manufactured for modernization purposes; they do not follow the standardized specifications for new equipment. There is a large number of hinged hoistway doors in place all across Europe in the existing inventory of elevators. It was only at the beginning of the 1970s that automatic, i.e. sliding, doors came into general use. These originally had a clear width of only 800 mm or in some instances as little as 700 mm. In many cases, however, the wall opening in which the doors are to be installed is so large that a door 900 mm wide will have to be fitted during modernization. With increasing attention to comfort and today’s widespread understanding of the need for wheelchair accessibility, these doors for retrofit may have to exhibit installed dimensions that deviate from those for a new system. Door designs for such installation situations were shown at various booths. Four-leaf sliding doors have been further perfected, precluding any danger of jerkiness and canting. Particularly in the Mediterranean countries hinged doors with a clear width of 700 mm or even 600 mm were by no means an exception in the past. Consequently only motor-driven folding doors might be considered during subsequent modernization. In order to keep on-site modification work during assembly to a minimum, special conversion sets, harmonized with the door drive, are being offered for these modernization projects.

Guide rails and attachment parts are components that every installer needs. Assembly aids that use appropriately modified laser systems to position the guide rails were on display, as were attachment systems using screw anchors for a variety of wall types. Attention was drawn here to the approvals for use, issued by the building authorities, facilitating assembly during modernization work where existing walls are involved. Companies specialized in assembly aids showed their lines, too. Packages of components – such as those for hoistway fittings and hoistway illumination – are intended to help reduce assembly times. Plug-type electrical equipment installation systems with so-called multi-plugs eliminate screw terminals and make for correct and unequivocal connection of two or more cables during service work. Safety equipment such as door latches, safeties and speed governors was to be seen both in the OEM versions and in the knock-off products. Slide and roller guides and buffers rounded out the range on offer.

Various exhibitors turned their attention to elevator energy consumption. Included in their considerations were the hoistway ventilation and air extraction systems, which are also used for smoke removal in case of a fire. Energy consumption and costs can be reduced in elevators that are used only infrequently by way of control modules that put the lift into the “sleep” mode, extinguishing the car lighting almost completely. The particulars of the application will determine the acceptable waiting time for “wake-up”. This will bring about savings if there is a small number of trips per day. Gearless drives using a frequency inverter do indeed in many cases continue to use the so-called braking resistors for braking purposes. In larger drives, however, they can be replaced, using the electronics, with energy recuperation. This only makes sense in larger buildings, however, where the power can be fed to other using units; it is a wellknown fact that electric meters are equipped with an interlock to keep them from running backwards.

A considerable amount of space was devoted to elevators for the handicapped and simple passenger lifts built as per the Machinery Directive. Given the fact that in the meantime American cruise ships have to provide safe access for handicapped passengers, larger manufacturers have become interested in this market. In the past this had been something of a niche for smaller and local manufacturers in regard to engineering and manufacturing. Also to be seen at the fair were numerous solutions for so-called stair lifts in which a seat moves along a flight of stairs in a two-story home, for instance, covering the distance between the floors. Simple lifts providing vertical conveyance at speeds of up to 0.3 m/s, using deadman controls, can be engineered in simplified versions as per the Machinery Directive. There were several examples of this shown, including an inclined lift for buildings located on a hill- side. In many cases these lifts are equipped with hydraulic drives and can handle an ascent height on an order of magnitude of four landings; such lifts were also seen with chain, rope or spindles for power transmission. One solution showed at earlier fairs, and in the meantime standardized, involves a traction lift with the drive located in the counterweight. This is, as always, an elegant solution that complies with the requirements of the Lifts Directive and requires only a short overhead and shallow pit.

The German mechanical engineering industry has determined that about twothirds of all companies have suffered economic damage by product piracy. The Chinese regulations for CCC – China Compulsory Certification – approval were intended to provide relief in that specified products could be imported into China only with the CCC certificate. The logo with the interlocking “triple C” was on display at various exhibitors’ booths. In regard to elevators, however, product piracy means not only economic damage due to the simple existence of knock-offs; it is also a safety issue. This can be a problem not only when installing replacement components but also in the certification of components for which no manufacturing monitoring takes place and where certification is effected without the original manufacturer’s knowledge. Not only is the original manufacturer affected – in regard to product liability – by such counterfeit products. Maintenance companies that do not obtain sufficient information on the origin and quality of the components can also be impacted.

Engineering offices and surveillance agencies, responding to the fact that the near-monopoly on elevator inspections in Germany has been eliminated, showed solutions that make it possible to conduct required testing without having to use weights. It is a known fact that beginning on January 1, 2008, approved monitoring offices will be authorized to inspect existing elevators, too, for compliance with the requirements set down in the Operating Safety Ordinance. A well-known rope tension measurement unit has been further perfected to permit exact adjustment of rope tension. This makes it possible to adjust all the parallel suspension ropes to identical tension levels.

Additional electronic monitoring devices make it possible to simulate testing for traction values, safeties and overload sensors without a load; the results are documented. Various testing laboratories used examples of certifications that had been awarded to draw attention to their capacities.

Shown among the devices used for command input were glass panels with capacitance-type sensors located behind the glass surface. These are indeed not new, but they are becoming more widely used. Elevator information systems in the form of light-emitting elements or screens similar to those found in laptops are used for various passenger information applications or for passenger guidance. Some of the systems are so advanced that they also contain touch-sensitive command units in the form of touchscreens. Such devices can be used not only in applications incorporating destination control but also in building information systems.

The obligation for operators to install sufficiently safe and secure emergency call systems, an outgrowth of the Operating Safety Ordinance, has resulted in a widely varied spectrum. Numerous manufacturers have devoted attention to the transmission security of the emergency calls and have also offered appropriate solutions. In the meantime there are also various system solutions for remote monitoring – for simpler systems, too – something that has been common for some time in larger arrays run by largescale operators. Monitoring systems tailored to the needs of operators with a larger number of lifts were also on display. One engineering office showed an example of web-based transmission technology for operating and monitoring far-flung technical equipment – such as the escalators and technical equipment in an underground light rail network.

But one searched in vain for those firms that in Europe, and around the world, too, command more than 60 percent of new elevator turnover. These companies have grown to their current size by way of license agreements and acquisitions and have production sites and joint ventures spread out across the entire world. The parent companies will be found in Germany, Finland, Japan, Switzerland, and the USA. The developments and outputs of the engineering departments in these companies become public only when the products are ready for market and thus not really the subject for an industry fair. When Kone installed the first elevators without a separate machine room in 1995, the competitors initially did not take notice of it and then by no means recognized the full consequences of this innovation; they could not envision today’s scope of use as being possible at all. Once the Lifts Directive had gone into effect this type of lift made a strong breakthrough on the market. A number of companies, unaware of the patent situation, attempted to install copies that were simply modified. Patent infringement suits taught them a bitter lesson in what patent protection really means. Other exemplary innovations, such as the destination control system introduced by Schindler in 1996 and the development of novel suspension means like the aramid rope or the steel-cord reinforced PU belt used in the Otis machine-roomless lifts are milestones along the path to improving carrying capacities and reducing drive sheave diameter. When in 2004 ThyssenKrupp Elevator introduced the Twin Lift, in which two cars with their own drives travel one above another in a common shaft, this was a major step in the direction of greater utilization of the space in the building and improving the carrying capacity in a smaller overall footprint. Such system-dependent solutions can be realized and can make their mark on the market only after great development effort and only if they can be used in contracts already on hand. Entirely new product lines being targeted for introduction have again and again disappeared from the market because of problems encountered in practical operation.

LiftEquip, a subsidiary of ThyssenKrupp Elevator, offers in the main components proprietary to the company and it was one exception among the major companies. The parent company – as was true of all the other large companies – has never been present at the interlift. But they all certainly did dispatch emissaries or even top-level decision makers as visitors to the fair. On the one hand the fair serves these companies, too, as a mirror of certain market trends in the components sector. On the other hand, however, there is always an eye peeled to spot any “copy-cat inventions” that might be on display. Many of the components and assemblies shown at the interlift are used by the majors in their own lifts.

Seen against this background, the term “leading fair” as used in the press releases is certainly justified. Even though the interlift did not show any breakthrough innovations by the larger companies, as is the case at any automotive exposition, it is the world’s most important public meeting of the trade. None of the other exhibitions can boast such a broad cross section of the industry. Other fairs tend to be much smaller and more regional in character. For many exhibitors with a large booth and a small number of products on display it is more a matter of being seen and cultivating business relationships. Given the positive responses heard all around, expecting that the past growth of the interlift will continue in the future is quite reasonable.