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).
Letter to John Marston & Co. Ltd. discussing defective Mk.VI matrices and specifications for a Bentley dummy shutter set.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 150\3\ scan0148 | |
| Date | 19th April 1937 | |
| 1280. Rm {William Robotham - Chief Engineer} /Std.8/AP. 19th April 1937 Messrs John Marston & Co.Ltd., WOLVERHAMPTON For the attention of Mr.Dunn Dear Sirs, This is to confirm that as discussed with you on Thursday last, you will let us have your findings on the two defective customers' Mk.VI. matrices which we have left with you, with the minimum of delay. We have decided that the minimum shutter opening angle which we can use for the Bentley dummy shutter set which you are making up for us, is an included angle of 54° between the plane of the shutter and the front face of the matrix. We should like you to make up a set of shutters using this angle and copying our shutter shape as soon as possible. We will send you a radiator within the next day or two to which we wish you to fit this dummy shutter assembly. We would like the spacing of the shutters to be exactly as our standard set. With regard to the question of the lightened construction type of matrix i.e. thinner strip and no tinning of the centre strip - we were surprised to hear from your Mr.Smith and Mr.Coltman that in their opinion this construction would result in a loss of cooling of the order of 5 - 10%. When the question of adopting this construction was discussed with Mr.Dunn and Mr.Coltman, it was definitely stated that the effect on cooling would be so small as to be negligible - had this not been so we should have carried out tests on the new construction to determine this effect. In any case, we think that you should have test figures giving definite information on this point, especially as the suggestion for omitting tinning of the centre strip came originally from yourselves. We should like you to supply us with information on this point, both for 84mm. and 58 mm. blocks, as soon as possible. continued | ||