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).
Secret memo discussing failures and potential improvements for steering gear, front springs, and frame brackets.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 73\2\ scan0175 | |
| Date | 1st January 1924 | |
| X9940 To Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} from Da.{Bernard Day - Chassis Design} c. c. to BY.{R.W. Bailey - Chief Engineer} c. c. to S E C R E T. E.{Mr Elliott - Chief Engineer} A.{Mr Adams} C. DA{Bernard Day - Chassis Design}4/M4.1.24. X.9770 X.9940. Referring to your HS{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}2/LG2.1.24. and the reported failures of the steering gear with radius rods, you will no doubt have considered that the essential difference between the two schemes is in the side steering tube. In the system you are testing now there is a bent side steering tube containing balanced buffer springs, but in the radius rod scheme the side steering tube was straight and had powerful set up springs. This is not of immediate interest as we have abandoned the straight side steering tube for the moment, but it will arise again when we come to EAC. 2 and 4. Referring to the failures of front springs as you know we have reduced the stress in these springs by reducing the bump 25% and increasing the length so that the failures should be materially less. If there is an increase in the tendency to fall between the springs of the same length using the new front axle than with the standard 40/50 axle it is most probably due to the increased length of the spring pad on the axle casing, what is in fact a greater curvature on the leaves at the maximum bump. This difficulty will also be removed by the increased length of the spring. Referring to the bracket at the rear end of the front springs in the proposed standard arrangement we note that you broke the frame. We do not expect that we can do better than be as strong as the frame, and consequently any improvement we expect to shew will be in taking hold of the frame in a better way. We do not know exactly how your bracket was arranged but it is quite possible that our bracket takes hold of the frame at least as effectively, and perhaps more so, while the fact that it is less rigid itself may reduce the strain on the bolts and the frame. We note for instance that it was not your bracket which broke. We are of the opinion however that it would be wise to make our bracket of .156 material. DA.{Bernard Day - Chassis Design} | ||