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).
Comparative analysis of various batteries based on their voltage performance under different loads.
| Identifier | WestWitteringFiles\C\May1919\ Scan37 | |
| Date | 2nd May 1919 | |
| Contd. -2- EFC1/T2.5.19. Battery. Open circuit Minimum instant- Steady reading of Voltage. aneous reading of voltmeter when current voltmeter on switch- had fallen to 90 amps. ing on current. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Lucas 60 amp. 12.5 10.5 11.0 hr.celluloid. 12.3 10.4 10.8 C.A.V. 60 amp. 12.5 10.5 11.0 hr.celluloid. 12.45 10.4 11.0 P.& R.{Sir Henry Royce} 60 amp. 12.55 10.0 10.7 hr.celluloid. 12.30 9.9 10.7 Chloride 60 amp. 12.5 9.8 10.6 hr.ebonite. 12.25 9.5 10.5 P.& R.{Sir Henry Royce} 45 amp. 12.6 9.7 10.55 hr. ebonite. 12.3 9.7 10.55 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tudor 60 amp. 12.5 7.5 8.8 hr. ebonite. 12.3 7.0 8.6 Tudor 60 amp. 12.5 7.0 8.5 hr. celluloid. 12.2 6.5 8.3 Tudor 45 amp. 12.4 6.5 7.4 hr. celluloid. 12.3 6.3 7.2 ebonite. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The batteries are arranged in this table roughly in order of merit in this respect. We would point out, however, that we cannot obtain the actual internal resistance accurately from these figures, owing to the change in the E.M.F. of the battery, caused by the current taken, and owing to the fact that the instru-ment does not immediately settle down to a new reading when the current is switched on. In order to actually determine the resistances in the most accurate way, aft-er trying a number of methods, we decided that the best way was as follows:- E F 532v (200 L) (G'D' 408 S8-4-11') R H Street/12 Contd. | ||