Follow up to new Nanni diesel engine problems

[benlui]

See link for previous post at bottom

Spoke to the fitter/dealer who installed and supplied the engine today and he informed me that the oil results are back and that they can confirm they found salt water in the oil. However they found no air, therefore, they reckon the gasket is ok and that all might be easily repaired. They suggest that the salt water came in the exhaust and that the water trap didn’t work in time to stop it, causing water to enter the engine.
This part was not replaced when the engine was installed however, surely it should have been up to the fitter/supplier to examine it and be 100% sure given the fact that the 35year old original engine was removed to make way for the new Nanni? I asked if this was covered under warranty, and was told (i would be looked after) in a kind of a (your my friend manor)
I would have thought that this should be their responsibility to make sure that there is nothing that can damage the engine; after all i did contract them to complete the job as I know too little about it myself. They are visiting the boat next week to carry out works so fingers crossed I wont need a replacement.
I wonder what damage has been causes to the engine, and when repaired, will it be as good as the new engine I paid my hard earned money for.


http://www.ybw.com/forums/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/2348161/page/0/fpart/all/vc/1

 

[Heckler]

If sea water has got in to the oil I would be looking for a new engine! The prob is that if it came back thru the exhaust, it will have entered some of the cylinders, it will then have had to get past the rings to get in to the oil. Corrosion (microscopicaly) is inevitable. There is a possibility, if enough water got in to a cylinder, that it hydraulicked, bending a con rod ( I have seen a Daihatsu, that had had water in a cylinder, it ran but misfired slightly on tickover, the con rod was bent, causing less compression and hence the misfire) If the engine has been run with salt in the oil, then the bearings will have been contaminated as well, I would bet that if you stripped the engine, faint signs of corrosion will be be seen on the bearing metals. It will run OK, on the face of it, after a good clean out, BUT its life will have been comprimised.
If the job was a turn key operation then the fitter/engineers should have checked the heights of the water trap/ exhaust etc etc to ensure that it was suitable.
Its down to them, I can see a lovely row brewing. They will be aware of what happened I suspect, I can see lots of complicated tech terms coming out to baffle you.
Ask them in writing what they intend to do, telling them you expect them to fix it under a warranty claim. Bearing in mind what I have said above, it might be worth paying a PROPER independent engineer (when I say proper, I mean one that does court cases as part of his remit) to take a look.
Stu

 

[Bilgediver]

I endorse what Stu has said and also would be concerned of the internal condition. How long was the engine sitting with sea water in its bearings after the run. Dont forget that the oil was sitting on the water in the sump so little or no oil going to the bearings.

Beta do a high rise exhaust bend option to help get around this problem however it certainly seems that the size of the exhaust water trap should be reviewed.

If the supply and the installation were by the dealer then you need to ensure you are happy with their handling of the matter as you could now have bent connecting rods,damaged head gaskets and damaged bearings.

As an absolute minimum the head should come off to check the condition of the bores and piston heights.

The engine may well run however the bearings could fail sooner rather than later somewhere down the line.

 

[MrCramp]

I think that is sound advice from skipper_stu. I think that you need to have your expert inspect the installation BEFORE your supplier interferes with the evidence. You should certainly have good photos of the water trap as this is one of the main suspects. Does it have an inspection hole with a screw opening (like the top of an oil container)? If the integraty of the trap is compromised then it would not work properly and that could be put down to equipment failure. Then all the costs would be down to you.

You are almost in a no win situation unless you take steps to protect your position. If it is proved that the installation was not fit for purpose then the supplier/fitter would presumably claim on their insurance.

I think it would be worth talking to your insurers. I assume you would be able to claim off them if it is not the suppliers fault. Your insurer will be looking to mitigate a claim so they might well appoint an expert engineer to inspect the job. I used to get involved in similar situations as a supplier of industrial equipment.

Actually the more I think about this the more certain I am that you should be consulting you insurance company. Good Luck.

 

[Tranona]

Agree with others. Amazed the installers did not put in a new water trap with a new engine.

Don't think you will get a warranty claim against Nanni. Your claim will be against the installer, which is why it is so important to have your own expert - whose costs you can recover in damges from the installer.

Your approach to seeking damages will also depend on the nature of your contract and what it said about the service they were going to provide. You need to be able to show clearly that you were relying on their specialist knowledge for a complete engine installation and they have failed to do that.

You may also want to brief a consumer law solicitor and your equivalent of Trading Standards.

Your objective is to get an engine installation with the balance of your 3 year warranty from Nanni. They will not give that until they are happy that the engine is sound.

 

[Pye_End]

[ QUOTE ]
They suggest that the salt water came in the exhaust and that the water trap didn’t work in time to stop it, causing water to enter the engine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not sure exactly what is meant by this. Are they saying that the water trap is faulty in some way (eg design)?

Somebody on the last thread made the point about if the engine has been hard to start then this may then lead to exactly this kind of problem. But then again, it may have been hard to start due to water ingress!

Are you sure that you have reached the root cause of the issue?

 

[Malish]

fully agree with everyone else. The fitter is at fault and it is very likely that the engine will suffer from a shorter than expected lifecycle as a result. The fitter / dealer is bound to try and 'fix' it - a new engine will cost him money and at best he will have to recover the cost from his insurance. What sort of insurance cover do you have on your boat - your insurers migh be able to assist in sorting out this mess. I would certainly pay for a professional survey or marine engineer to write a short report <u>before</u> the dealer undertakes any remedial work and I would send the dealer a letter explaining the findings to date and your concerns. If the dealer is an approved Nanni dealer then I would also write a letter to Nanni, explaining the problem (not blaming them) and ask them if they can assist in finding a resolution

 

[misterg]

Oh gawd!

[ QUOTE ]
Spoke to the fitter/dealer who installed and supplied the engine today and he informed me that the oil results are back and that they can confirm they found salt water in the oil. However they found no air...

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand the second part of that. Does this still relate to the oil results? Is that exactly what he said?

[ QUOTE ]
...therefore, they reckon the gasket is ok and that all might be easily repaired.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm highly dubious about the gasket being OK, given that the engine was blowing coolant out of the top when you did start it, and that it's pretty certain to have been 'hydraulically locked' when you first tried to start it.

[ QUOTE ]
They suggest that the salt water came in the exhaust and that the water trap didn’t work in time to stop it, causing water to enter the engine.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, need to dig a bit deeper into that one: Are they suggesting that the water came up the exhaust (from wave action, etc.) while the boat was not in use? That the normal flow of cooling water wasn't being cleared sufficiently, Or that you've filled the water trap when cranking the engine?

[ QUOTE ]
This part was not replaced when the engine was installed however, surely it should have been up to the fitter/supplier to examine it and be 100% sure given the fact that the 35year old original engine was removed to make way for the new Nanni?
{snip}
I would have thought that this should be their responsibility to make sure that there is nothing that can damage the engine; after all i did contract them to complete the job as I know too little about it myself.

[/ QUOTE ]

This depends entirely on what you asked them to do, and also your response to any points they've raised - did they ever say that anything should be looked at, or replaced, or "wasn't normal"?

[ QUOTE ]
They are visiting the boat next week to carry out works so fingers crossed I wont need a replacement. I wonder what damage has been causes to the engine, and when repaired, will it be as good as the new engine I paid my hard earned money for.

[/ QUOTE ]

You need to find out what they're intending to do. I would hope that the oil has already been drained out!

Unless the agreement between you and the fitter is documented remarkably clearly, I don't think you'll get a new engine (IMHO) - with the little that we know, the scope for real or contrived 'grey areas' is huge. If you want to stick to your guns, fine - I would agree that you need someone independent acting for you and it might indeed be worth talking to your insurers for their advice - especially if you have legal expenses cover. I wouldn't expect to be able to recover any costs for this from the installer if he fixes the engine - IMHO, the only way you might do that is if installer doesn't fix; goes to court; your man proves that installer is in the wrong, and court decides costs.

Perhaps I'm giving up on the warranty idea too easily, but being pragmatic, I would expect them to take the head off, check piston crowns for damage & check the 'squish' clearance (the gap between each piston and the head) for some reassurance that there isn't a bent con-rod. (I expect this will entail removing the injectors unless there is a way of checking it with the head off.)

If there is no other damage, then renew all disturbed gaskets, coolant & oil and test-run engine. If test run is OK - change oil again, and you'll / they'll have to fit a 'suitable' waterlock before using the boat in earnest.

If the damage is more extensive, then try harder to get a new engine /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif

Yes, it would undoubtedly be better if the engine hadn't got water in, but if it's dealt with properly and promptly, I don't think the long term effects will be too dire.

Try to ensure that you have written confirmation of the extent of the installers and Nanni's warranty, taking into account the work that the installer is planning to undertake.

Not a happy situation /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif

Andy

 

[pappaecho]

I had the exact same problem with a new Beta 35 fitted professionally replacing a Perkins 4108. Twice the engine failed due to the "springs" in the injector pump ( Kubota part) failing due to water ingress via the exhaust valves and ending up in the lubrication oil.
The route cause of the problem was that when the old engine was removed the pipes were cut with a hacksaw, which then created plastic swarf which floats, and which ended up in the antisiphon valve, and stopped it working.

There is a very simple test which will check if the valve works. With the engine off, detach the salt water pipe to the exhaust elbow, and let it hang down. Switch on the raw water seacock. If water dribbles out of the pipe, even after half an hour, then the antisiphon valve must be suspect.

It follows therefore that if the raw water cock is left on, when the engine is not running, and the antisiphon valve is not working, over a period of time the exhaust elbow will fill up, and if the engine is near or below the water line, inevitably water will enter the engine via the exhaust manifold sooner or later

I have a new valve, but also only switch on the raw water after the engine has started, and switch off again immediately after shutdown

 

[Tranona]

The most important issue for Benlui is to get the balnce of his 3 year warranty confirmed from Nanni. They will only do that if they are satisfied that the engine is not damaged, or the damage is repaired to a level consistent with a one year old engine.

Based on what I have seen so far they may well choose to replace the engine under goodwill rather than carry the risk. Also fire the agent. Any installer who replaces a 30 year old 10hp engine (which I seem to recall is what he had) with a new 21 hp and does not change the water trap should be banned for life!

 

[1955patric]

One thing that hasn't been mentioned yet. It is possible, if you have a scoop type cooling water skin fitting, with scoop facing forward, that water can be forced up the sea water inlet pipe, through the pump and thence into the cooling system whilst sailing. This could be another source of leakage into the engine and the siphon break would not be effective in preventing it. I would suggest that the source of the water ingress is investigated and remedial action taken before a new or repaired engine is re-commisioned or the same thing will inevitably happen again. As to the engine I would make sure that the engineer at least lifts the cylinder head and checks bores and piston crowns, valves and guides, injector nozzle tips and any other critical components which could have come into contact with water. It is likely, as previously mentioned that the water in the oil has been circulated through the entire lub oil system, and if it were my engine I would want to look at crankshaft and bearings, camshaft and followers and gear drive components to the sea water pump and camshaft - in other words a total strip down. If this is not possible, then charge with flushing oil after the engine is repaired, and run for 20 or so minutes, drain and change the oil filter before running on load. I would then change the oil again after 50 or so hours and have a sample analysed by a company such as Finnings. If the results show abnormal levels of insolubles, iron, copper or aluminium, then you can be sure you have a problem related to the original problem and would have some concrete evidence to support a claim against the supplier or manufacturer. In any event I wish you all the best - this is a horrible thing to happen at any time, but particularly at this time of year.

 

[Clyde_Wanderer]

A very sad situation here and basically caused be some serious shortfalls by the person who fitted the new engine.
The way I see it now is, you are left with an engine which you will have paid quite a lot of money for not too long ago and is now probably no better than a well used second hand unit, or at least it wont be in a very short time after been subject to that salt water treatment, possibly bent con rod, pitted white metal shell big and main bearings, damaged small end gudgen pin bushes, pitted or corroded bores and probably damaged rings, plus any degradation of other running surfaces caused by the oil been washed off by salt water, possibly a damaged oil pump, which could be reason for alarms sounding.
I would on the basis of the original purchase/fitting contract argue the case for a new replacement engine and no less, plus a new water trap.
Dont settle for second best, argue for what you paid for.
Good luck.
C_W

 

[Hinata Sailing]

Hi,
Twelve year later, I am on the same spot where you were at Benlui. I wish you have finished this thread with the outcome of what you have ended up doing and what was cause and solution.
[B]pappaecho[/B] is right on the point and that is what caused my engine to be seized. After removing the head, rusty components are all over the place. Service people are recommending new engine.
Wish me luck...
Emre.

 

[Graham376]

I agree with most of what's been said above except for the insurance bit. Highly unlikely mechanical failure will be covered under boat policy but, if the (sometimes optional) legal assistance policy has been included, that would be my first step for legal advice.