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 comparing the performance results of Chloride, Tudor, and Fuller batteries against specifications.
| Identifier | WestWitteringFiles\C\May1919\ Scan42 | |
| Date | 2nd May 1919 | |
| Contd. -7- EFC1/T2.5.19. Chloride 60 ampere hour ebonite. Capacity results of this battery have been very good. The internal resistance is quite reasonable and would easily comply with our specification. The arrangement of cells in the battery is right and the terminals and connections comply with our specification. This battery exceed in weight our specification figure, as also do the C.A.V., and the Lucas; we are, however, expecting from the Chloride people a battery of 5/6 of the capacity of this, and with their improved type of vent, and we can reasonably expect good results from this battery. The O.C. are making enquiries from the Chloride people regarding deliveries of either of these two types of battery as at the moment it is undoubtedly the type of battery which most nearly meets our requirements. TUDOR BATTERIES The discharge capacity results, although quite fair, have not exceeded in our experiments the rated ampere hour capacities with the cells, as was the case in each of the Lucas, C.A.V. and Chloride. It would be necessary for the makers to lower the internal resistance of these batteries as this is unduly high and, as previously stated, we have written to the Tudor Co., to ask what they can do in this direction. FULLER This battery has shown up badly in almost every respect. EFC. W H S&S S32v (200 L) (S'D '08 S8-11) B'W S128U? | ||