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).
Standardization of battery terminals, comparing C.A.V. types with others.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 51\5\ Scan142 | |
| Date | 6th May 1921 | |
| R.R. 293A (100 T) (S H. {Arthur M. Hanbury - Head Complaints} 768. 10-12-20) G. {Mr Griffiths - Chief Accountant / Mr Gnapp} 2947 3 Contd. EFC {E. Fowler Clarke - Electrical Engineer} 3/T6.5.21. We are sending a sample vent plug for Mr. Royce's examination, The question of the terminals was also raised, and C A.V. were asked if they could supply batteries with another type of terminal similar to those used on the Exide, of which we showed them a sample. They did not appear to have any other kind of terminal and I gathered that they would be very reluctant to make any change as it would interfere seriously with the service system which they have introduced, and of which they are proud. We have your note G25.4.21 and note that your preference for the flat terminal coincides with our own. We are sending you a sample of the C.A.V. cable terminal, but in view of their remarks we cannot at the moment decide what we had better do in the matter. In the C.A.V. battery dept. there were a number of C.A.V. batteries, with similar terminals, removed from vehicles and temporarily connected up for charging by bits of wire wound round the terminal lugs. I pointed out to them the very bad practice of making charging connections in this manner owing to the corrosion and consequent wire breakages which take place. They agreed to my objection, but made some excuse or other for this particular lot of batteries having been connected up in that way. It will be remembered that at present we have two pairs of cables, the motor cables and the charging and lighting cables, both of which are connected independently to the battery terminals. Thus there would be a difficulty with the standard C.A.V. terminal in any case. A compromise, by making use of the C.A.V. terminals for the heavy current leads, and having extra smaller terminals fitted on the lugs for the light leads, might be considered. You may remember that we have on 1 Ex a termin-al board on the chassis side member to which the heavy and light current leads were brought, and from which only two leads were taken to the battery, but this was not considered satisfactory owing to its inaccessibility. An arrangement like this would partly overcome our objection to the C.A.V. type of terminal. If you would kindly confirm that, supposing we wished to standardise these C.A.V. Willard batteries, we would not, in any case, use the C.A.V. type of terminal, this would enable us to definitely inform them of our wishes in this direction. Contd. | ||