Natchitoches Oil Mill, Inc. v. Ruston Foundry & MacHine Shops, Ltd.

152 So. 340
CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedFebruary 5, 1934
DocketNo. 4705.
StatusPublished

This text of 152 So. 340 (Natchitoches Oil Mill, Inc. v. Ruston Foundry & MacHine Shops, Ltd.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Natchitoches Oil Mill, Inc. v. Ruston Foundry & MacHine Shops, Ltd., 152 So. 340 (La. Ct. App. 1934).

Opinion

DREW, Judge.

This is an action instituted by the Natchi-toches Oil Mill, Incorporated, against the Ruston Foundry & Machine Shops, Limited, to recover the sum of $959:50, with legal interest from judicial demand. The claim is represented by the following items:

(1) The cost of three pistons made by defendant for plaintiff for a Fairbanks-Morse engine, and reboring the cylinders of said engine, $384.50,; (2) the cost of trimming said pistons down after installation, $23; (3) the cost of installing said pistons, $35; (4) trucking the pistons to and from Alexandria, La., $20; (5) the cost of new cylinder to replace cracked cylinder, $200; and (6) loss of two days’ operation of its mill, at $150 per day, $300.

The plaintiff, Natchitoches Oil Mill, Incorporated, owns and operates a cotton oil mill in Natchitoches, La. The defendant is the owner and operator of an iron foundry and machine shop in Alexandria, La. Plaintiff set out that in the summer of 1930 the parties entered into an oral agreement whereby defendant agreed to manufacture for plaintiff three new pistons for use in a 4rcylinder Fairbanks-Morse engine, the price being $384.50; that, in accordance with said agreement, the pistons were manufactured, the cylinders rebored, and the articles delivered and paid for.

Plaintiff alleges that the pistons were improperly constructed and made of faulty material, a fact which it ascertained when it attempted to use the engine in which they were installed; that, after continually sticking in the cylinders, the three pistons finally, one by one, cracked and broke down, and became totally worthless and were returned to defendant.

This suit was then filed for the return of the cost price and for other items, as above alleged, including the value of a cylinder which was wrecked by one of the pistons, delays in operation caused thereby, installation costs, and expenses, etc., making the total amount claimed herein.

The defense stated that the pistons were properly made of good material, and that the cylinders were rebored in a workmanlike manner, and that the trouble which plaintiff had with the pistons was due to. the manner in which the engine was used and operated.

The lower court rendered judgment in favor of defendant, and plaintiff has appealed.

In the summer of 1930 plaintiff ordered from defendant three new pistons for its 4-cylinder Fairbanks-Morse engine. Only three were ordered for the reason that it had on hand one unused piston made by the Fairbanks-Morse Company. The three pistons were delivered in July, and were installed in the engine by plaintiff’s engineer. Soon thereafter the engine, carrying no load, was started up, and it was found that the three pistons made by defendant were slightly too large. To rectify this, the pistons were dressed down, or made slightly smaller, by cutting off in a lathe ⅛ of an inch from each side, starting at the top of the third ring and tapering to the top or head of the piston. The bill for this work, amounting to $23, was sent to defendant on August 22d, soon after the work was done, and plaintiff was credited with that amount. The defendant, therefore, ratified what was done by plaintiff.

After this was done, no attempt was made to use the engine until the latter part of August or the first part of September, when the mill started up for the crushing season. It seems that, after two or three days’ usage, the pistons swelled again to such an extent that the engine stopped and could only be started again by allowing the pistons to cool off and contract; that continually during the next two months the pistons gave trouble, sticking first in one place and then another, despite plaintiff’s efforts to trim them off with an emery wheel and in a lathe; and that finally they cracked and became useless and were returned to defendant.

The plaintiff’s theory of the trouble, viz.; what caused the pistons to stick 'from time to time, is best shown by the testimony of O. L. Hayne, an officer of the plaintiff corporation, a graduate of the Engineering School of Louisiana State University, and a practical engineer and mechanic of many years’ experience. His testimony on this point is as follows:

“Q. What caused those pistons to stick, Mr. Hayne? A. I think Mr. Dawkins hit the nail on the head when he said green pistons; they sent material up there, in my opinion, which was unseasoned; it was entirely different material from the cylinder wall. They had no unequal expansion and contraction. The pistons expanded more than the cylinder walls did and the green castings continued to grow and as fast as we got them down, they would continue to grow and they finally cracked up.
“Q. Did Mr. McMichael know these pistons were to he used in that particular engine? A. He did. I called on Mr. McMi-chael, Mr. Day and myself, and told him that *342 the Fairbanks-Morse man, representative, predicted the very thing that did happen and he laughed at that suggestion. The Fairbanks-Morse man stated that these pistons were going to give trouble, that they couldn’t make pistons for Fairbanks-Morse engines, and Mr. McMichael laughed at that suggestion in his office and said, ‘we can make pistons for anybody,’ and they did and just exactly as the man said they would.
“Q. From your knowledge as a practical engineering mechanic, do you think you are in a position to state why those pistons expanded and caused the trouble? A. Oast iron is similar to lumber in that in a lumber mill you find dry kilns and lumber stacked out in the woods for the purpose of seasoning the lumber, and in big foundries you find castings thrown out in the yard to season, to be seasoned by the atmosphere. Some plants have eleetric ovens similar to a dry kiln in a lumber mill. These cast iron materials are not good until they are properly seasoned for a period of probably six months or maybe a year, the longer the better. When it’s not a properly seasoned casting, it’s called a green casting, and they will continue to grow. The cylinder walls of this Fairbanks-Morse engine were seasoned material and we tried to match up unseasoned material with seasoned material. It’s similar to a blood transfusion; the analysis of that material might be perfect from an analysis standpoint, but it would not analyze with the walls of that cylinder; my blood might be perfect but it might not fit this man’s blood in a transfusion.” .

Professor Lacy H. Morrison, in his work entitled “Oil Engines,” a recognized authority, says: “It is apparent that piston seizing . when it is due to lack of clearance can be eliminated by taking a small taper cut off the piston immediately below the head. The taper may well- start between the top pair of rings. Certain east irons continue to grow even after the clearance has been increased by such a cut. It then becomes necessary to watch this piston and. repeat the tapering process as required.” (Pages 72 and 73 of the above-mentioned work.)

On page 72 of the same work Professor Morrison has the following to say: “Even with the the modern types of pistons now in use, many plants have experienced trouble with seized pistons. This difficulty is directly traceable to either of two conditions. One of these is insufficient clearance between the piston and liner. This applies especially to the clearance around the piston immediately below the head.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
152 So. 340, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/natchitoches-oil-mill-inc-v-ruston-foundry-machine-shops-ltd-lactapp-1934.