Issue link: https://read.dmtmag.com/i/279349
I DA U N I V E R S A L M a rc h -A p r i l 2 0 1 4 52 LEGAL LINE Continued from page 11 is apparently involved, the picture gets even muddier, and that is before any lawsuits fl y. How does this work in real life? Here's how, from an example that critically injured an operator and almost killed a dozen bystanders: "Rollerway" brought out a brand new, full hydrostatic drive double drum roller. Instead of a direct transmis- sion and regular brakes, it had a full hydrostatic system and a fairly powerful emer- gency and parking brake. e machine was stopped in travel by reversing the hydrostatic drive, which was great for the back and forth motions in rolling new pavement. When the machine was stationary or holding, the drive was auto- matically put in neutral, and the parking brake lever could be pulled up and locked to park and walk away. e problem started at the factory, which was located in one of the fl attest parts of the county, and the company had never made a hydrostatic machine before. e engineers relied on the hydrostatic drive vendor and the brake vendor to set the design for the drive and brakes. Neither had any prior experience in this kind of machine or installation. However, the world is not fl at everywhere, and the eff ect of hills and grades in other places where roads were paved was not taken into account. About a year a er the machine was released to the market, a paving company in Ohio bought one, and it worked great. It was faster, and the quick reversing and auto- matic neutral were universally liked by the operators, and the maintenance on brakes and clutches that was required on older models was gone for good. All was well until one day the paving job was on a pretty steep hill in one of the local towns. When the operator started down the hill to roll the fresh mat, the machine started to speed up. e opera- tor pulled the shi er back to reverse to slow and stop the machine, just like he had done hundreds of times before, but the machine ran away. Pulling on the emergency brake did nothing at all at this speed. e machine raced down the hill, nearly hitting a dozen people coming out of a factory, threw the operator off and ran over him. What went wrong? In a nutshell, when the reverse/ brake hydrostatic function was engaged, the speed was so great that the hydraulic pressure generated by the drive in reverse simply blew open the pressure relief valve in the system, and it freewheeled. e brake only generated 10 percent of what was needed to stop the machine and quickly burned up from the over-speed. In this case, the machine manufacturer was sued, the machine manufacturer sued the hydro vendor and the brake maker, and the accusa- tions fl ew for months. e truth is that nobody checked the work, and they were all responsible for the injury. is is a situation where the prod- uct was truly at fault, and the blame and payment were fairly assessed. I trust at this point the light is starting to get a little brighter. Our members make and sell hydrostatics, brakes, and brake parts for example. ey also make metal and rubber tracks, engine parts, pumps, hoses, valves, cylin- ders, GET, and so on. In this context, there are two channels of risk. First, while most a ermarket com- panies (or their sub-vendors) do at least some engineering to make replacement parts, it may not be the type of "day one" engineering that the OEM does to design the part or component in the fi rst instance. Here, the a ermar- ket is relying on the OEM's engineering decisions, but if the parts start to fail in service, unfortunately the buck stops at the a ermarket company. Backing up, literally, if the hydrostatic drive in the roller discussed above was a rebuilt one from one of our members or even their a ermarket direct replacement new unit, "you" are still relying on the engineering decisions and competence of the OEM to make a replacement or rebuild. Even if you use the same high quality materials or better, the same or better manufacturing processes, and even fully test a er completion, if the defect or problem was "engineered in" from the OEM, you are stuck with the problem. In the example, if the drive was an a ermarket, I'll give you one guess as to who would be sued. On top of this tangle, there are the endless "intended use" controversies. Simply put, was the product being used in a way that the maker or assem- bler could reasonably expect? Obviously, a road roller must be safe to use when paving a hill where a car would travel. Less obvious is the chronic overloading of machines and equipment. Did the bucket li cylinder hose break because it was not strong enough from day one for the use, or was it defectively made with a fl aw in the braid, lining or instal- lation of the fi ttings? In this context, are repeated overloads expected, and should some safety factor be incorporated to protect the innocent? Further from reality, should there be some warning against overloading and fatigue? If you bought a ladder or lawnmower recently in the U.S., you just might see the machine under the "lawyer labels." Are they eff ective? One idiot on YouTube actually held his lawnmower chest high to trim a hedge. No fair guessing what happened… How does this play into your business, especially if you are a foreign company sell- ing in the U.S? In most cases, domestic and foreign compa- nies making high quality a er- market parts will review the engineering of the OEM part for no other reason than to duplicate or exceed OEM spec- ifi cations and manufacturing methods. In many cases, the a ermarket can improve on the OEM part in some manner or have a replacement that is functionally better. e prob- lem comes when the OEM has made a fundamental mistake in the underlying design of the entire machine or system, and