Requirements and priorities for various component test rigs.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 159\6\ scan0067 | |
| Date | 13th April 1930 | |
| γ 1371 To G.Bastow from Rm. {William Robotham - Chief Engineer} Rm. {William Robotham - Chief Engineer} 5/MH. {M. Huckerby} 13.4.30. With reference to your note re test rigs ( a copy of which I attach) the expensive thing about any rig is the bed plate on which it is located, and the motor to drive it. The remainder of the pieces can usually be made without incurring a great deal of expense. I am, therefore, interested to know what additional bed plates and motors are required over and above those which are already allocated to chassis work, in order to produce all the rigs which you enumerate. My comments on the rigs you mention are as follows:- I think the axle shaft rig is of No.1 importance. The rig for tests of engine components, No.2. The shock absorber endurance testing rig, No.3. I suggest that a road spring test could be combined with the shock absorber test. In our endeavours to get the price of a spring down and at the same time reduce its weight and evolve a satisfactory interleaving, we are bound to do a great deal of running, and the bump test is a somewhat cumbersome and expensive way of carrying this out. I would like to have your comments on the fan belt test rig which I understand is partially completed. With regard to the treble balancing machine, we would not sacrifice floor space to accommodate this if it meant losing any of the other rigs. It is almost certain that it will be replaced by some more up to date equipment before long. I notice that you have not included a wheel test. This seems to me to be rather important as we are trying to get the weight of rims and wheels down. | ||
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).