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).
Letter from the US office to the UK office discussing fuel feed system heating and misfiring issues.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 77\4\ scan0034 | |
| Date | 22th September 1927 | |
| ROLLS-ROYCE OF AMERICA, INC. SPRINGFIELD, MASS. OY4-R-92227 September 22nd, 1927. Mr. E.{Mr Elliott - Chief Engineer} W. Hives, Rolls Royce Ltd., Derby, England. Dear Mr. Hives: RE FUEL FEED - Section 7140 Referring to yours Hs{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}/AJL.1/L.G.14-6-27 - The following notes on the fuel feed may be interesting to you:- (1) We have so far detected no effect of increased misfiring when "dumping" due to heating of the vacuum tank, such as occurs in England. Your report gives 66°C.(151°F.{Mr Friese}) Max. recorded temperature. Mr. Caswell reports 63°C.(145°F.{Mr Friese}) Max. With asbestos lagging over vacuum tank, this was reduced to 57°C. (135°F). With asbestos lagging over entire rear exhaust pipe, highest recorded temperature was 54-1/2°C (130°F) This agrees fairly well with your figure of 58°C (136°F) for the vacuum tank with asbestos covering. During each run the car was run 30 miles with water at 180°F.{Mr Friese} Air temperature was "cool", 65 - 70°F.{Mr Friese} Undoubtedly under extreme conditions we should record temperatures of 66°C or more, but we have no complaint, and cannot detect any effect, of the trouble to which you refer, and which was so noticeable on cars 8 E.X. and 12 E.X. run by me in England. (a) Possibly this can be explained at once by the very different distillation-curve of American fuels. (b) Possibly by the very much quicker and more positive "trip-action" of the Stewart-Warner tank. (2) We do not at present fit the automatic spring-loaded suction-valve which you use. We have made several for trial, but can detect no positive benefit from their use, so far. | ||