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 from Gordon Armstrong Patent Suspension Company discussing shock absorbers, dampers and testing.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 152\1\ scan0369 | |
| Date | 28th June 1937 | |
| 1293 TELEPHONE: BEVERLEY 321 The GRAMS: ARMSTRONG'S SUSPENSION Gordon Armstrong Patent Suspension COMPANY LIMITED WALTHAM WORKS, OPPOSITE ST.{Capt. P. R. Strong} MARY'S CHURCH, BEVERLEY E.{Mr Elliott - Chief Engineer} YORKS. GORDON ARMSTRONG, A.M.I.A.E., F.Inst. PAT, N. O.{Mr Oldham} TILL. OUR REF GA.WC.1. YOUR REF Rm{William Robotham - Chief Engineer}/Les.5/R.{Sir Henry Royce} Messrs. Rolls-Royce Ltd., DERBY. 28th June, 1937. For Mr. Leslie's attention Dear Mr. Leslie, I thank you for your letter of the 26th instant. We are making up and sending you off four more strengthened piston links; also one new damper casing. It would appear from your bumper tests that these shock absorbers are behaving very satisfactorily, and as you say it is lucky that the link failure was discovered before the car went to France. We are also sending you a drawing of the original die casting damper, and a complete damper specification. Regarding the dampers that have done 15,000 miles in France, this seems to be satisfactory except that, as you say, the poundage has dropped, which would rather discount their performance unless the 60/70 lbs was sufficient. This brings up the point again regarding the size of shaft. There is no difficulty with the new size of shaft except the expense. Do you think it would be safe to reduce this size at all, or would you prefer to keep on as it is ? We have had the auto-locking arrangement running for some time on a testing machine here, and it seems to be satisfactory, but there are one or two snags which we can overcome by increasing the size of the balancing portion of the top pin. This increase of size here would have the effect of lightening even more the energy required to operate the control, and as long as it is not overdone it should be beneficial. Cont'd... | ||