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).
Technical critique of a Westinghouse motor, noting issues with its construction and components.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 23\2\ Scan059 | |
| Date | 29th September 1920 | |
| R.H. 238a (100 T) S.G. 643, 19-2-20; G 2618 To R.{Sir Henry Royce} from EFC. c. to CJ. c. to E.{Mr Elliott - Chief Engineer} c. to Bn.{W.O. Bentley / Mr Barrington} c. to Da.{Bernard Day - Chassis Design} c. to By.{R.W. Bailey - Chief Engineer} c. to PN.{Mr Northey} c. to EWE. for R.R. Inc. X1086 EFC4/T29.9.20. X.1086. RE WESTINGHOUSE MOTOR. ----------- ------------------- Generally speaking, this motor is a poor job, The pole pieces are solid and secured only by one large screw, to the carcase. The field coils are not well finished, especially where the connections emerge. The connections of the field coils on the one hand to the brush gear, and on the other hand to an insulated terminal on thecarcase are not at all well carried out, especially the latter where electrically a poor connection might occur. There is only one nut for securing the conductor to the insulated terminal on the carcase which results in the fact that they heavy current contact will depend upon the insulation of this terminal. This was not the case on the Bijur. The brush gear is only moderately good. There is only one pig-tail connection per brush upon which no attempt is made at insulation. This, however, would not be necessary on two of them as one pair of opposite brushes are earthed to the frame. Each brush-way appears to be a die casting of reddish coloured metal, the material of which we are not sure. The brush springs are of the spiral type, the dead end of which is secured in slots in small projections on each brush holder casting. Each of these is secured by rivets to a ring of insulation which in its turn is again secured | ||