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 a report on the Smith Dynamo, suggesting further comparative tests and commenting on workmanship and materials.
| Identifier | WestWitteringFiles\C\August1919\ Scan8 | |
| Date | 22th August 1919 | |
| To EFC. from R.{Sir Henry Royce} Copy to CJ. [strikethrough]DN.[/strikethrough] [strikethrough]EH.[/strikethrough] [strikethrough]EFC.[/strikethrough] ORIGINAL. R2/G19/8/19. 22 AUG 1919 RE SMITH (T. & M.{Mr Moon / Mr Moore}) TYPE "A" DYNAMO. X.295 X 3936 I thank you very much for your report (EFC1/T13/8/19) on the Smith Dynamo. From the analysis given this appears to be the best one that has been offered. There is, however, one point which is not mentioned in your report, and that is, the comparisons of temperature running under, say, three normal conditions, at such a speed that each dynamo will give the same output. I suggest 7½ amperes, 10 amperes, and 12½ amperes. It would not be fair to run them at the same speed, because the amperes given are so different, and therefore would favour the machine that had the least work. It would be as well, however, to run them at one or two very high speeds, but I think this would be accomplished when doing the 12½ amperes. You do not report on the quality of the workmanship of the Smith machine compared with the Lucas, but as far as I remember, you have previously reported that the Lucas was far better made than the C.A.V. I am surprised that these dynamo makers do not use a steel carcase instead of cast iron. They could, by this means, reduce the weight without altering the other conditions. R.{Sir Henry Royce} [Signature] E'B' 532v (200 L) (E'D' 40s So-t-11) BW S172[illegible] | ||