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).
Continued report on the performance and construction of different battery cells.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 54\1\ Scan053 | |
| Date | 27th November 1925 guessed | |
| -6- Contd. contact both with the ebonite separator and with the negative plate. The 20 HP. Exide is similar. The 20 HP. P & R is also similar, but the 40/50 P & R is ribbed only on one side, namely the side in contact with the ebonite separator, so that a flat surface of wood is presented to the negative plate. There is therefore a difference in the two 40/50 batteries, which may account for the difference, or some of the difference, in the charging resistance. All ribs are vertical as apparently they should be for the best results. We feel this is a point which has not been thoroughly considered previously, and we hope your people will make experiments with a view to reducing the terminal P. D.{John DeLooze - Company Secretary} on charge at a given current, to the minimum possible. We have one or two observations of P. D's on Exide and P & R cells in the same batteries (two) which are as follows :- Battery designated SX, containing two Exide cells and two P & R's. The P.D's on the two Exide cells fully charged and charging at 9 amperes were each 2.6, and on the two P & R cells in the same condition were each 2.9. Battery designated SZ, containing one Exide and one P & R cell only; precisely similar figures were observed. The other cells of non-standard make showed P. D.{John DeLooze - Company Secretary}'s in every case lying between these two limits, so that the Exide and P & R may be taken respectively as the best and the worst in this respect. Yours sincerely, MADE AT CROXLEY | ||