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).
Test report comparing the performance of various batteries, with tabulated results and analysis.
| Identifier | WestWitteringFiles\C\June1919\ Scan4 | |
| Date | 11th June 1919 | |
| Contd. -2- Battery. Average 'on' period (Secs) Average 'off' period (Secs) Initial amperes. Number of contacts to 9.0 Volts. Average drop in density of electrolyte. C.A.V.C(1) 9.5 11.35 101.5 90 45 9.5 10.25 105.0 85 35 Lucas.C(2). 8.9 11.2 108.5 62 35 9.5 11.7 110.0 68 45 P.& R.{Sir Henry Royce} 60. C. 9.1 11.4 106.0 93 -- 9.5 11.3 110.1 93 -- Chloride-60.-E.{Mr Elliott - Chief Engineer} 8.7 11.0 106.0 38 -- P. & R.{Sir Henry Royce} 45. E.{Mr Elliott - Chief Engineer} 9.6 11.8 110.0 48 -- Chloride 60.E. 9.8 12.7 105.0 162 90 9.5 12.7 109.0 156 100 Chloride 50.E(1). 9.5 12.0 104.0 142 / 136 90 9.5 11.9 104.0 138 100 The superiority of the Chloride batteries is again evident in this type of test. It appears that the only doubtful point about the excellence of Chloride batteries is now in regard to their life, which remains to be seen in actual service. Attached to Mr. Royce's copy of this report are photostats of curves of battery terminal voltage, motor terminal voltage, amperes, and motor speed, for several of the batteries. The variation in the amperes as the test proceeds, also from one test to another, is mostly due to the arrangement of torque-brake on account of which the retarding torque on the motor is not absolutely constant for different speeds, etc. [handwritten insert: Irregular variation of motor speed is due to variation of brush contact resistance.] We have now set up a recording voltmeter, and shall be putting the same batteries through low rate discharge capacity Contd. [Upside down text at bottom] R.R. 235A (500 T) (S.D. 408: 26-4-11: Bm) Bm. 2/156/13. | ||