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).
Review and comparison of various battery types, including Lucas, C.A.V., and P.A.R.
| Identifier | WestWitteringFiles\C\May1919\ Scan41 | |
| Date | 2nd May 1919 | |
| R.R. 235A (500 T) (S.D. 408. 26-4-17.) Bm. 2/156/13. -6- EFC1/T2.5.19. Contd. You will notice that we have specified that the internal resistance should not exceed .025 ohm when carrying 100 amperes. This would admit all the batteries except that of the Tudor make. As previously stated, however, we have written to the Tudor Company to ask them if they can remedy this defect. Regarding the various batteries we would like to add one or two remarks as follows:- Lucas 60 ampere hour celluloid. Electrically, this would appear to be a very good battery as the discharge results and resistance results are very good. The arrangement of cells in the battery is, however, not what we require, but had the cells been arranged in this manner the battery would appear to have a very good claim for consideration. The construction of the celluloid cases is very sound although, of course, the cells are not built up as separate cells. It would be interesting to know if the Lucas Company themselves make this battery. C.A.V. 60 ampere hour celluloid. Electrically, this battery is very nearly as good as the Lucas, but of course, it is a mono-bloc battery and the arrangement of the cells is not what we require. P.A R.{Sir Henry Royce} 60 ampere hour celluloid and 45 amp. hour ebonite. These batteries are quite fair as regards internal resistance, but they have not shown up well in discharge capacity. The construction of the batteries appears quite good and the arrangement of cells is such as we require. Contd. | ||