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).
Responding to a query about the performance and issues with spherical versus cone type pipe unions.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 141\2\ scan0125 | |
| Date | 23th September 1935 | |
| E.{Mr Elliott - Chief Engineer} Wor.{Arthur Wormald - General Works Manager} Sft{Mr Swift}/AEM. Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} Ws. By.{R.W. Bailey - Chief Engineer} Hd.{Mr Hayward/Mr Huddy} RHC.{R. H. Coverley - Production Engineer} Mxr. X1184 Sft{Mr Swift}1/BH.23.9.35. PIPE UNIONS. In reply to your E.6/HP.13.9.35:- Para.1. We agree that the steel spherical type Union has been standard for a considerable time, and we do not understand why this was preferred to the cone type, which according to our experience gave satisfaction. It is agreed by the works that complaints of leaking joints commenced with the introduction of the spherical type fitted to the Phantom main Oil Pipe, and it is this joint that has given trouble. Para.2 & 3. Yes we agree that the works took this matter up with E/Jnr{Charles L. Jenner}, and 25 sets of the cone type were instructed and fitted to cars, and up to date they are satisfactory. This recommendation was helped because the 20/25 HP. which is the cone type had given complete satisfaction. Para.4. If loosening has been found to be a bad feature of the cone type, we have had no experience of this. Para.5. The spherical joints (small size and in soft metal) have been satisfactory. The serious complaint has been as stated above in connection with the large steel spherical type of union used on the Phantom Main Oil Pipe. They are also expensive from a machining and fitting point of view. Para.6. We do not agree that the spherical type does not demand alignment, in our opinion perfect alignment is essential with both types. Para.7. We agree that on all the points where the olive joints are used, we have no complaints. Sft.{Mr Swift} | ||