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).
Performance and weaknesses of spring shackles, comparing C.H.N.S. bushes to bronze and highlighting wear issues.
| Identifier | WestWitteringFiles\J\December1922\ Scan66 | |
| Date | 6th December 1922 | |
| Da.{Bernard Day - Chassis Design} from Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} ORIGINAL. Hs{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}6/LG6.12.22. RE. SPRING SHACKLES. X2628 X4261 Da{Bernard Day - Chassis Design}2/M4.12.22. We have had running for some time C.H.N.S. Bushes for springs instead of bronze. So far these are working very well. A possible trouble we can foresee if the lubrication is neglected, is that they might rust up. The chief weakness in the shackles when we have hardened surfaces is the difficulty of keeping the bolt itself from rotating. The half head arrangement which we use is alright so long as it is very carefully made but as soon as there is the least amount of slack in it, the surfaces to which the bolt is fixed are so small that they rapidly wear slack. This means frequently, that the dumb iron or the fitting on the frame has got to be removed. The only suggestion we have is that the pieces shall be made as robust and the surfaces as large as possible. The shackle at the rear end of Goshawk-ll springs gives us very little trouble. The shackle on the rear end of the front springs is the worst offender for wear. Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} | ||