Rolls-Royce Archives
         « Prev  Box Series  Next »        

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).
Report discussing dynamo regulation, battery standards, and a proposal for a new starter motor arrangement for the Goshawk engine.

Identifier  ExFiles\Box 38\5\  Scan225
Date  1st June 1922
  
EFC3/TSS.6.22.
-2- Contd.

Such a compromise is being aimed at on the Goshawk.

In passing, it has always appeared to us that so long as an inherently regulated dynamo is used, the most satisfactory alround solution of the problem, involving the greatest ratio of achievement complication consists in the use of a resistance in the circuit which is automatically inserted in the field circuit of the dynamo when charge is put on without lights, but is automatically cut-out when charge is put on with lights on, and in some of the Lucas systems, though not immediately adaptable to that of the 40/50, this feature is incorporated; this reduces the dynamo output when the lights are not required.

Sometime ago it was agreed at one of our Staff conferences at Derby that it was considered in the case of batteries, really satisfactory tests of a type of what necessitate the use of a number of the type under running conditions, that it is desirable to have two simultaneous standards so that if one standard begins to give trouble it is quite easy to drop this and carry on with the other, if the other is satisfactory. Therefore, although there is a difference in the price, the P & R being somewhat cheaper, and also the Exide being rather heavier, it appears desirable that in the first instance,(if, and when the larger battery is universally agreed to in principle), batteries of both kinds should be fitted as standard.

X.4399. Two Series Two Parallel Arrgt. of R.R.Std. 40/50 Starter Motor, together with Starter Motor Cables with increased section of conductor core, i.e. 133/25's in place of 84/25's.

Standardisation sheets for this item have been signed "Agreed" by Wor.{Arthur Wormald - General Works Manager}, Rg.{Mr Rowledge}, Ry., and EP.{G. Eric Platford - Chief Quality Engineer} FN. remarks "Agreed if it is thought wise to discharge battery always at a heavier rate than at present" - This remark will not apply as it is intended that this should not be standardised unless the larger battery is also standardised.
Da.{Bernard Day - Chassis Design} remarks "On account of increase of current this arrgt. of winding seems to call for a larger battery and therefore is not agreed".
CJ. remarks "What is E's opinion of Da{Bernard Day - Chassis Design}'s objection?"
BJ. "Has Da{Bernard Day - Chassis Design}'s objection been considered by R?"
Independently Mr. Royce remarks:-
"Agreed. It is understood that less watts are taken "out of the battery, because engine XXXX starts more "quickly at the slightly increased speed - this has been "done for America some time."

Ittherefore appears that the standardisation of this item can be considered to fall automatically provided
  
  


Copyright Sustain 2025, All Rights Reserved.    whatever is rightly done, however humble, is noble
An unhandled error has occurred. Reload 🗙