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).
Comparing different car dynamo systems and outlining requirements for a new system.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 61\2\ scan0090 | |
| Date | 11th November 1918 | |
| R.R. 235A (500 T) (S.D. 408. 26-4-17.) Bm. 2/156/13. Handwritten: X3374. RL2/G11.11.18. X.3231. X.3014. X.3374. To EFC. from R.{Sir Henry Royce} c. to EH. c. to By.{R.W. Bailey - Chief Engineer} c. to BJ. Handwritten: X294 RE CAR DYNAMO. (1). I do not think the System adopted by Rotax, Leitner, Lucas, and others, gives the lightest form of generator because to get a system of regulation by windings, appears to require either an inefficient dynamo or certain parts within the dynamo which are not contributing towards effective output. (2). In the Bijur and similar systems where there is plain shunt windings and separate voltage regulator, the [handwritten insertion: and efftient] machine can be built on the most economical/lines as regards weight and can give maximum current at the slowest speed it will cut in, whereas [handwritten insertion: with] the Lucas and C.A.V. systems, only a small current is obtained at first, increasing with increased speed. (3). We must have enough current to maintain necessary lighting (and dynamo cut in) at 15 m.p.h., i.e. 750 r.p.m. of dynamo (does Sales agree this is correct?) Handwritten in margin: X1369 (4) Find out from London what is the usual c.p. of the lighting of ordinary cars of R.R. 40/50 size, i.e. the watt required for efficient driving. (5) Cannot agree to fitting regularly a dynamo and regulator weighing more than 40 lbs. unless it is absolutely necessary. (6) Re system described in "Electrical Review" (X.3405), let us make an estimate of advantages of this new system before attempting to construct one. [Handwritten: If it makes a heavy machine as suggested in (2) then I am not in favour.] (Contd) | ||