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).
Radiator designs and overheating complaints, comparing large and small hexagonal tubes.
| Identifier | ExFiles\Box 131\1\ scan0012 | |
| Date | 27th May 1931 | |
| To Hs.{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair} From Hs{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}/Rm.{William Robotham - Chief Engineer} c. to Nor. GWH.{George W. Hancock - Head Chateauroux} c. to By.{R.W. Bailey - Chief Engineer} 8766. Hs{Lord Ernest Hives - Chair}/Rm.{William Robotham - Chief Engineer}9/KT.27.5.31. QUARTERLY COMPLAINTS. RADIATORS. X.7250. X.7250. X.766. You will note in R4/M22.5.31. that R.{Sir Henry Royce} has selected the large hexagonal copper tube as being the one we ought to use for production in conjunction with bonnet shutters as universal standard. In view of the fact that we have never been free from overheating complaints in the history of the Company, we are rather concerned at this decision, because it means that a customer who is likely to complain would be 7oC. better off at low speeds and 10oC. better off at high speeds if the small hexagon tube was adopted (with the louvred bonnet for those customers who live in hot climates). Furthermore with the large hexagonal tube and the proposed bonnet ventilation, the customer will be 3oC. worse off at high speeds than he would be if he had a louvred bonnet and the present existing standard tubes. We are therefore anxious that both the small and large hexagon tube radiators should go to France with 25-EX. so that we may be sure that we can obtain adequate cooling without adopting the best radiator tube we know of, i.e. the small hexagon. With regard to reducing costs, though this really does not concern us, we wonder if saving 1800 radiator tubes is of more value than deleting six bonnet shutters per car on all those chassis which are not at present fitted with louvred bonnets. With regard to saving in weight the small hexagon tube radiator is 2¾ lbs. lighter than the standard radiator under running conditions. If we find in France that we can eliminate any possibility of further complaints of overheating with the big tube, we shall be the last people to suggest increasing the cost and complication of the radiator by fitting the small hexagon tube. Naturally it is not reasonable to question R's decision until we have proved the point and obtained the relative cost of the items affected. We think Byc/G27.5.31. the right line to take. ns{Norman Scott}/Rm.{William Robotham - Chief Engineer} | ||