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).
Starter motor engagement, pinion design, and spring mechanisms.
| Identifier | WestWitteringFiles\T\January1929-February1929\ Scan175 | |
| Date | 22th February 1929 guessed | |
| (2) Engaging. disengaging. and the points rounded thus- .250 This seems the most substantial & practical & should be nearly what Mr. Elliott suggested. Regarding the longitudinal spring this should have the low-est rating possible -i.e. the same force as possible all the stroke. The amount of this force should be sufficient to always return the armature to a clear position. The only real inconvenient trouble with this sequence starter is when the motor goes forward and sticks there even when the press button has been released. This has occurred once with our cars here, though we have had 3 specimens during the last two seasons. The necessity for a second press of the button has never caused any inconvenience, though naturally we should like this to occur as rarely, but not at the loss of some other good point. The jump back spring should be as weak as possible but I do not know what rating is desired, but again I should prefer it was a low rating. 18-EX as sent from Derby was badly sprung but as altered to more recent practice it is working quite satisfactorily. The great point is that the pinion and flywheel shall be good silent gears. In future we want more energy in the engagement and I agree that we ought to run at it through a greater distance as well as with coarser wound teazer. Add therefore the extra stroke suggested of about .050 so as to have .250 clearance. I am not sure that the longitudinal damper is needed or desirable. It should be made as simple as possible. My scheme of oiling will avoid some of the complication, and not require the oiling pipe disconnecting to examine the brushes. | ||