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).
P.&R. battery for the 40/50 model, focusing on capacity versus weight and charging solutions.
| Identifier | WestWitteringFiles\J\November1922\ Scan1 | |
| Date | 11th November 1922 | |
| R.R. 235 A (100 T) (S.F. 846 6-8-19) G.{Mr Griffiths - Chief Accountant / Mr Gnapp} 2460. ORIGINAL TO EFC. FROM DA.{Bernard Day - Chassis Design} DA{Bernard Day - Chassis Design}1/M1. 11. 22. RECEIVED NOV 1922 X.3398 - P.&.R.BATTERY FOR 40/50. In reply to your EFCL/T301022., Mr. Royce has definitely stated that he will not agree to any increase of capacity, and I think it would be unwise to push the matter any further. Mr. Royce was interested in the idea of P.&.R. making a battery which was of less weight, and it would appear that there is a definite saving of weight since we say we are satisfied with the present capacity, and do not want any increase. With reference to London, our point is that if you have one battery under the alleged London conditions it will discharge itself sooner or later. By putting in the larger battery you simply delay that condition for a few hours. In some cases they use two batteries, one of which is charging, and the other is in use, and this appears to be a sensible idea having regard to the difficulties of the situation generally, but it appears to us that the proper point to tackle is the dynamo. To tackle the battery by increasing it's capacity is simply to add weight without any real gain. Mr. Royce is strongly in favour of a trickling current being run through the batteries all the time they are not in use, and for this reason we are anxious to find a simple sort of rectifier so that owners who only have alternating current laid on can (1) | ||