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).
Proposed new switchbox and the universal adoption of vibrator control for the dynamo.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 179b\1\ img341 | |
| Date | 28th February 1933 | |
| FROM R.{Sir Henry Royce} HS{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}/WST. C. to Sir H.R. P.W. WST JNAL CAR WORK. ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT. x3374 x6044 PROPOSED ENTIRELY NEW SWITCHBOX. I should not make a new one until we have a more definite programme. In reading many memos. from E.{Mr Elliott - Chief Engineer} and HS{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}/WST. I could not gather what system of dynamo control we were talking about (say on Peregrine.) VIBRATOR CONTROL (CONSTANT VOLTAGE.) In my own mind this is the only one worthy of thought until it fails, because it is not reliable, but I have the impression that the Bosch (made in England by C.A.V.) is excellent, and was to be adopted at the first possible moment. DYNAMO. Why? (1) Because the charging and running characteristics were what we want, and require the minimum of thought and attention for an always full but not excessively overcharged battery, (2) the dynamo heat and sparking can be much less, no 3rd. narrow brush, and pole pieces as you wish. Yet as usual we are harping on with a scheme that I have dismissed from my mind, with the usual result that we are out-classed and out-of-date. Someone at Derby should have told me why we were not universally adopting vibrator control. R.{Sir Henry Royce} | ||