From the Rolls-Royce experimental archive: a quarter of a million communications from Rolls-Royce, 1906 to 1960's. Documents from the Sir Henry Royce Memorial Foundation (SHRMF).
Report comparing a B.W.P. lubrication suction device against a standard Chevrolet system, focusing on oil temperature and winter performance.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 135\3\ scan0093 | |
| Date | 18th August 1929 guessed | |
| 19 It will be noted from the above that the difference in oil temper- ature at the bottom as compared with the top in the case of the Standard Chevrolet suction device was 8 degrees, whereas with the B.W.P. device the difference was 16 degrees. The temperature at the top in the oil of the standard Chevrolet system being 192 degrees as against 198 degrees for the B.W.P. installation showing that there was an increase of but 6 degrees in temperature of the top oil, with the use of the B.W.P. device and three degrees midway in the depth of the oil. It is believed that this slight difference in oil temperatures is practically within the accepted range of experimental error. It is further believed that the 3 degrees maximum oil temperature difference between the B.W.P. device and standard Chevrolet material is insignificant. GENERAL SUMMARY. The above tests cover the five major phases originally outlined on the first page of this report. Our tests as well as those by other manufacturers prove the accuracy of our contention that the B.W.P. device produces certain very definite, desirable and necessary improvements in the operation of the lubrication system of an engine during each of these five individual conditions. In addition to the various statements and proofs which we have offered for consideration, we wish to point out the fact that the difficulty frequently encountered by the conventional suction devices of various manufacture in freezing up in the water accumulated in the sump in winter weather is very definitely and distinctly eliminated. The draw off point of the B.W.P. device being well above the ice cake forming at the bottom of the sump, it is impossible for the B.W.P. suction intake to become ice-locked in the manner experienced by other designs of suction intakes. | ||