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).
Inspection report detailing the positive aspects and criticisms of an electrical machine.
| Identifier | WestWitteringFiles\R\2October1927-November-1927\ 76 | |
| Date | 2nd November 1921 guessed | |
| -4- Contd. (a) Good all round electrical performance. (b) Very good light - 2 lbs. lighter than others. (c) Low price - £1. cheaper than the latest Watford. There would appear to be no reason to doubt the reliability of this machine. Further remarks, embodying the criticisms of this made by Mr. North, who personally inspected it at our Works, are as follows :- (1) Lack of means for lubricating the end bearing. We agreed that this was necessary but pointed out that a lubricator could be fitted at only a very small extra cost. (2) One piece casting. This he said prevented access to the armature and safety gap when testing. We suggested that this would be unnecessary if the armature and accessories were made thoroughly reliable; even then, a small inspection plate could be fitted. (3) We all agreed that the long H.T collector brush might lead to trouble owing to the fact that a slight mal-adjustment of the securing plate would make a big difference at the brush end and might cause the brush holder to foul the slip ring flanges. (4) The use of a single pin location for the H.T. rotor on the bakelite distributor wheel. Mr. North suggested might lead to the rotor being damaged by wrong location. (5) Jump spark distributors Mr. North criticised from the point of view of sparking over inside, but our service experience with this type of distributor on the MR. battery ignition rather negatives this. The well known advantages of a jump spark distributor as compared with a carbon brush wipe pattern are :- (a) Absence of tracking due to carbon dust, etc. (b) Greater ability to spark over fouled or leaky plug points. Contd. | ||