Plunger Elevator Co. v. Standard Plunger Elevator Co.

153 F. 747, 1907 U.S. App. LEXIS 5125
CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts
DecidedMay 13, 1907
DocketNo. 126
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 153 F. 747 (Plunger Elevator Co. v. Standard Plunger Elevator Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Plunger Elevator Co. v. Standard Plunger Elevator Co., 153 F. 747, 1907 U.S. App. LEXIS 5125 (circtdma 1907).

Opinion

COLT, Circuit Judge.

This bill charges the defendant with infringement of patent No. 700,740, issued May 27, 1902, to the complainant as assignee of William F. Cole.

[748]*748. The Cole patent relates to hydraulic valve mechanism for regulating the starting and stopping of elevators, particularly hydraulic elevators of the plunger type. The invention is for an improved form of valve, which permits a quick start for the elevator, and at the same time insures a sl'ow stop.

In defining the invention, the specification says:

“My invention relates to regulating mechanism for elevators, whereby the elevator car may be started and reach full speed as quickly as desired; but, however' suddenly the operative may attempt to stop the car, the suddenness of stopping is regulated within a predetermined limit, thus permitting a quick start and insuring a slow stop.”
“My invention consists, essentially, of means adapted to regulate at independent rates the suddenness of starting and stopping an elevator car.”
“More particularly my invention consists of means attached to the valve mechanism, which limits the rate of speed of closing the main valve in either direction without affecting its rate of speed of opening.”
“In modern high-speed elevators it is desirable, to have the car reach its maximum rate of speed as soon as possible after starting; but any sudden stopping of the ear is undesirable. Among other objections sudden stopping is the cause of an extremely unpleasant sensation which the passengers are made to feel, and in the case of the ‘plunger’ type of hydraulic elevator if the supply of water to the cylinder be shut off too suddenly the momentum of the rapidly-moving parts which comprise a considerable mass is so great that the plunger will be apt to jump off the water, causing an extremely disagreeable shock to be felt by the passengers.”

With respect to the prior art, the specification says:

“Obviously it-is not desirable to leave the possibility of sudden stopping in. the hands of the operative. This has already been recognized, and a gradual stoppage has been accomplished in several ways by means entirely independent of the controlling device in the car. One method has been to make the ports of the secondary or pilot valve quite small or to throttle them down by means of a screw-plug, which is left permanently adjusted in the required position, allowing only a comparatively small volume of water to'flow to or from the motor-cylinder in a given time. A similar result is sometimes accomplished by constructing the ports of the'main valve of such shape that as'the valve closes the water is gradually shut off. These permanent adjustments which accomplish a gradual stop, both going up and coming down, also of necessity accomplish a gradual start in either direction.”

The specification then proceeds:

”“To gradually overcome the energy of such a large mass of rapidly-moving matter as is required in an elevator without the undesirable effects above referred to, it is necessary to begin to slow down several feet before the floor at which it is desired to stop is reached. To accomplish this, the movement of the main valve in closing must be very gradual. When the elevator is started!) however, it is not necessary nor desirable that full speed should be as gradually reached from full stop as was full stop when the elevator was running at full speed. In fact, full speed can be safely acquired in several feet less travel than within which it would be desirable to stop a car from full speed. Therefore it is not necessary that the main valve should move as gradually in opening or that the same means, if any, should be employed for a gradual start as must of necessity exist in the means for gradual stoppage, which I have referred to above.”

The specification further says: •

“My invention of throttling device is not limited to the form of throttling-valve shown, as other throttling devices or governors might be applied to accomplish the object, and many changes might be made in the detail of construction and mode of attachment to the reciprocating parts of the valve.”

[749]*749The patent contains 29 claims. Most of these claims are of a broad character. It is sufficient for illustration and for the purposes of this suit to give the first five:

“1. In an elevator, the combination with the car, of motor means for running said car, controlling means adapted to be operated from the car, and an automatic quick-starting, slow-stopping device adapted to permit of a quick start and to regulate the suddenness of stopping whereby the car will be brought to rest gradually.
“2. The combination with the main three-way valve, of means for opening and closing said valve in either direction, and automatic means for regulating the opening and closing movements at different rates of speed.
“3. The combination with the main valve for controlling the passage of fluid under pressure, of means for opening and closing said valve, and automatically-operated quick-opening, slow-closing means connected with said main valve, whereby the speed of opening and the speed of closing the main valve are regulated within independent limits, substantially as described.
“4. In a hydraulic elevator, the combination with a main valve, of a valve-motor, pilot-valve mechanism, and an opening and closing regulating moans operated by movement of the main valve, whereby a quick opening and slow closing of the main valve are effected.
“5. The combination with the main valve for controlling the passage of fluid under pressure, of motor means for opening and closing said main valve, secondary valve mechanism for controlling the motor means,. and hydraulic-opening and closing regulating means for automatically regulating the velocity at which the main valve may be opened and the velocity at which the main valve may be closed at independent rates, substantially as described.”

In reading these claims in connection with the specification, it is apparent that the patentee seeks to cover all means for accomplishing an automatic slow stop of the elevator by limiting the rate of speed of closing the main valve and at the same time permitting a quick start; and this is the position taken in the brief of complainant’s counsel, as appears from the following extract:

“It appears, therefore, plainly from the specification of the Cole patent that his purpose was to claim broadly any mechanism which limited the rate of speed of closing the main valve automatically without affecting its rate of speed of opening, so that the elevator car might be permitted to reach full speed as quickly as desired, but limited to a gradual or slow speed in stopping, •however suddenly the operative might attempt to stop such car.
“This theory thus advanced in the specification is emphasized in the claims of the Cole patent, a careful reading of which will demonstrate the plain intention of the inventor to cover broadly this principle of operation which he had found absolutely necessary in the practical utilization of a plunger elevator. A large majority of the 29 claims are broadly phrased to cover in different forms this idea.

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

Related

Cardox Corp. v. Armstrong Coalbreak Co.
194 F.2d 376 (Seventh Circuit, 1952)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
153 F. 747, 1907 U.S. App. LEXIS 5125, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/plunger-elevator-co-v-standard-plunger-elevator-co-circtdma-1907.