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).
Response to criticisms regarding the friction damper and Klaxon horn for Chassis 26-EX.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 19\1\ Scan084 | |
| Date | 19th December 1930 | |
| WOR.{Arthur Wormald - General Works Manager} c. PP. c. Rm.{William Robotham - Chief Engineer} c. Mx.{John H Maddocks - Chief Proving Officer} X71201 WBY/G/C/22.12.30. CHASSIS 26-EX. WOR{Arthur Wormald - General Works Manager}3/T/19.12.30. Referring to Mr. Schmidt's criticism of the friction damper in the fourth paragraph of the translation of his letter of the 11th inst., he is, of course, entirely wrong in his criticism, the friction damper will not impose greater loads on the body than a similar hydraulic damper. The reason we use one friction and one hydraulic damper is that the friction damper damps equally over all its range, whereas the hydraulic damper, particularly if there is air present or holes drilled in the valve, will not damp the spring over small movements of the latter. KLAXON HORN. Referring to Hk{Col. T. Harker - Sales}'s criticism of the Klaxon horn, it has been suggested that a horn of the Bosch type, samples of which we are testing out at the moment, can be heard more readily under the road conditions described than the Klaxon. I have heard it suggested that the Klaxon sound mingles with the other noises, and whilst it is very loud and raucous it does not apparently attract attention due to the fact of mingling itself with other rattling noises. BY.{R.W. Bailey - Chief Engineer} [handwritten signature] | ||