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).
Design considerations for aero engines, including piston rings, liners, and cylinder block construction.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 178\3\ img201 | |
| Date | 6th June 1932 | |
| RG.{Mr Rowledge} HS.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} ) FROM R.{Sir Henry Royce} UD. ) C. to SC. WOR.{Arthur Wormald - General Works Manager} B. C. to RV. F.{Mr Friese} re. VISIT OF RG.{Mr Rowledge} & UD. TO WW. - 2.6.32. AERO ENGINES. PINNING OF PISTON RINGS. I was very pleased to hear that RG.{Mr Rowledge} did not now wish to delete the pinning of the piston rings, the advantage he hoped to gain no longer existing. LENGTH OF PISTON. Regarding pistons generally, personally I much favour a rather longer piston as being worth the extra cost, in the hope that it will keep rather cooler, have a better surface, and be better guided. Regarding contact between piston and liner surfaces I think this should be kept as complete and close as possible, with the object of keeping the piston cooler, reducing the consumption of lubricating oil, and many other advantages that one could imagine. LINERS. Every effort should be made to reduce the distortion of the liners, especially in existing engines when they come in for reconditioning, by changing the liners or in some way reducing the tendency for the liners to distort. I understand that it has not been possible to take advantage of the experiments known as the 'Coverley' experiments, and really I cannot quite add up the situation as regards increasing the vigour of the longitudinal studs without in some way reducing the tendency for the liner to distort by the extra pressure. As far as I understand the position it would be better for us to move on to the two piece job rather than introduce in our smaller Kestrel engine the 6 bolt system which we use on the Buzzard. I should like to see more progress made in this cylinder block construction as I think it is important. We do not appear to have done anything to render the scheme less treacherous. Naturally one would like to reduce the floor deflections upon which the cylinder liner sits, and I suggested to RG.{Mr Rowledge} that experiments might be made to slightly relieve this part from some of the load so that the tilting is more even all the way round. I do not think we can seriously alter the shape of the crankchamber considering that we are anticipating the use of the 2 piece block. INCREASED PERFORMANCE. I understand that RG.{Mr Rowledge} looks forward to still further increasing the speed of the engine, especially the Kestrel maximum permissible speed. I agree to this providing that some balance (1) | ||