MOWER CLAIM CONTINUES

Press, Volume XCVIII, Issue 28895, 15 May 1959, Page 13

MOWER CLAIM CONTINUES

Machine “Impressive” Cutting Rushes Cutting done in swamp rushes by the Pyramid hydraulic mower during field tests at Te Aroha in June, 1956, was “quite impressive,” said William Stuart Turnbull, design engineer for W. H. Price and Son. Ltd., continuing his evidence in the Pyramid mower claim in the Supreme Court yesterday. The hearing of the dispute over the mower between • Pyramid Machines, Ltd., and Price and Son, Ltd., was being continued before Mr Justice Adams. “The weight of material cut in the rushes would probably provide a better test of the ability of the motor to keep going under heavy load than the nassella tussock cut at Waipara, because often the cutterbar cut through the very thick growth at the base of the clumps of rushes,” said Turnbull. “In some cases, this growth was so thick that the cut rushes stood up after they had been cut.” This was also the first time he had seen a mower used to cut a hedge—‘‘it seemed to cut well enough,” Turnbull said. After the teats at Te Aroha, it appeared to him that the mower was satisfactory, as the only faults shown up there seemed to be minor ones whi-ch could be rectified, Turnbull said. He got the impression that everyone at the Te Aroha tests seemed pleased with the performance put up in the rushes. Modified Mowers Produced

After the Te Aroha tests. Price's started on the modification of a batch of 100 mowers. Turnbull said. He gave technical details of these modifications. Turnbull said he tested the motors himself on the test rig, and checked and finally passed all the test sheets of the motors. The same applied to the pumps. For the modifications manufacture, and assembly of the hydraulic equipment, all the persons involved were tradesmen. The equipment was tested on a test rig before being sent away for assembly on the mower, and painting and packing. Components which did not meet with the test requirements were held back and rectified where necessary.

Regarding work on the actual mower frame, the welder employed on the job, was, in his limited experience, one of the best men he had seen do that work, said Turnbull. He admitted, however, that he did not know the man’s qualifications.

“The standard of workmanship of these modified mowers was, as far as I could see, always good,” said Turnbull. “Im the motor and pumps particularly, care was taken because it was realised that these units were being expected to give more power, and work at higher pressure, then before.” The final check on workmanship and assembly of the motors and pumps was the test on the test bench, but thie manufacture of the parts was under the supervision of the machine-shop foreman, Turnbull said*

He did not carry out day-to-day checks as part of his routine—that was done by the machineshop foreman, said Turnbull. Turnbull said he also saw the final assembly and packing. “If there was something unsatisfactory, I saw the people concerned, and impressed on them the need for it not to happen again.” He first knew of a breakdown in these 1956 modified mowers when Mr Price asked him if he could think of a solution to the excessive speed problem, Turnbull said. Checks on speed in the field have not been done. Turnbull will be cross-examined by Mr R. W. Edgley, counsel for Pyramid Machines, Ltd., when] the hearing resumes this morn-i ing.