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).
Engine secondary imbalance and the use of vibration dampers, with examples from Studebaker, Bentley, and Rolls-Royce.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 153\4\ scan0142 | |
| Date | 10th December 1942 guessed | |
| we all pointed out. That surely in such an engine - the unbalanced 2^ndaries were ignored (actually in engines of equal c.c. they would be 1.414 times the magnitude of the unbalanced 2^ndaries in a vertical 4?) Said the American: "To hell with your 2^ndaries. It's the primaries that stay put just once - on the drawing" Studebaker tried a short-stroke 6 without a torque damper in '36. In '38 - to compete with our big 3 (Ford. Chev. Plymouth) Studebaker has to seat 3 front & rear - which meant 2" onto the 4'8" track & 2 cwt onto the 23 cwt. more power was needed so the stroke was increased from 3 7/16" to 4". What happened? Boy did that c/s whip! So Stude. fitted a damper - refitted another damper in '39, & fitted one about twice the size for '41. maybe they've gotten it right now - maybe! any 6 unless the dampers just right, gets dizzy with dither. Didn't Bentley's make a particular point of their own patented vibration damper in the "Auto Engineer" - May 1942 description of the IFS Bentley and don't RR fit a damper on their 12 cyl car + on the god-be-praised Merlin itself. | ||