GUARDING AGAINST MUD SPLASHES.
Page 10
Page 11
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The Latest Tests of Devices which Aim at Reducing a Nuisance.
THE Royal Automobile Club, on Wednesday last, conducted a series of tests with mud-splashguards fitted in situ to a number of commercial and private motors, the scene of the competition being a newly made concrete road at Cricklewood, London.
The .total number of entries was 36, and very little .novelty was apparent in the design of the devices exhibited. Roughly, they •might he divided into two classes, namely (1) hanging shields suspended either from, the centre of the hub or from some point above the wheel_ such as the wing, and (2) flanges attached to the wheels lying near the tyre. Of the hanging shield type, some were more or less rigid, whilst others were freeto swing. Some were merely metal shields, whilst others took the form of a brush hanging by the side of the wheel. In only one case was there any deviation from this construction, and that was in the case of No. 27, entered by T. Kershaw, of Oldham, which consists of a pairof small wheels, which carried a chain as in a chain-track tractor. The caterpillar arrangement lay in a horizontal position, and was geared to the hub in such a manner that the lower portion of the chain had no motion relative with the ground when travelling. Long brush-like hairs were attached to the outer part of the chain so that, a
continuous brush nearly touched the ground without. having any movement relative with the -ground. This device suffered badly when brought into contact with a kerb of by no means unusual height. Many of the more rigid forms of shields suffered considerable damage when undergoing the kerbstone tests, some being rendered useless. These contact tests preceded the mud splash tests. Many of the designers seemed to have entirely overlooked the fact that all vehicles must, in ordinary use, be brought right up to a kerb. The actual shields were made of various materials, such as leather, fibre, chainmail, and plain metal plate. The other type,. which consisted of flanges of metal, rubber and other materials, suffered in many cases equally badly when in contact with the kerb. That the designers should have overlooked such an important matter as this is inconceivable.
Crude Designs that Did Not Stand the Kerb Tests.
Most of the devices of the flange type were of the crudest design and, in one case, the kerb tests showed that it would be practically useless in any place where kerbs had to be reckoned with. The conditions of this test were by no means of a severe character, and had we been responsible for the tests, looking at the matter from a commercial vehicle point. of view, we should have insisted upon a much mare severe teat by having .a kerb of maximum height (at. least 9 ins.),. and posts representing those often found in the entrance to factory and .goods yards. Had such _posts been used, very few of the hanging shield type would have survived, and ),et the test could nothave been said to have been an unreasonable one.
After the kerb tests a run on the road was insisted onto showthe effect such tests may have on the guards-. The .next test consisted of running over a puddle made artificially in the new hard concrete roadway.: Thispuddle took the form of a basin with its edges rounded off. It was approximately some 30 ins. across, and was filled with liquid mud. The flat surface of the roadway was scraped clean so that the test was one of splash from a puddle only, and not one from mud on a flat surface. A black line was marked on the road surface along which the drivers had to follow with their right-hand wheels. Screens of wood, covered with white paper, were placed 3 ft. to one side of the wheel track to receive any splashings, and a motorcycle combination was driven in front of the vehicles to regulate their speed. The screens were changed'
after each vehicle had passed. No obstruction was provided representing a kerb, so that the whole of the mud thrown up came on to the screen. Although every effort was made to regulate the speed of the vehicles to the pace set down, several of the competitors visibly slowed down at the actual time when the puddle was met, while some seemed actually to increase their speed at this point. In one or two cases it was very doubtful whether the wheels did not skim the edge of the puddle in stead stead of passing right over its centre where it was deepest, and by so doing avoided the bulk of the mud.
The first trials over •the puddle were for the lighter vehicles fitted with pneumatic tyres, which were -driven at 20 miles per hour, and the second trial was for the heavier vehicles fitted with solid tyres driven at 12 miles per hour. Although the trials were arranged with great care, the results may be misleading in many casts. Several of the hanging-shield type were-swinging very much as they came along, and, no doubt, there was a great element of chance as to what, position the .shield had assumed at the actual time of contact with the puddle. In some cases, the front wheel seemed to divide the mud, which either had not time to return to its normal posi
Lion before the rear wheels came over the puddles, or the puddle was so nearly emptied that the effect of the rear wheels seemed to be less than that of the front ones as regards splashing.
Strange to say, there was no really appreciable difference between the amount of mud thrown by the lighter vehicles and that thrown by the heavier ones. This may be accounted for by the different speeds at which they had to-be driven.
. To carry out such tests is, no doubt, a very difficult matter, if any definite conclusion is to be arrived at. Many points struck us as not representing actual road conditions, as there -was no kerb, consequently much of the mud that would, under ordinary conditions, have been arrested by a kerb was thrown on the screen. No doubt, the judges will make some allowance for this in their conclusions. Such trials should, in our opinion, be made first without the guard, and afterwards with it on each vehicle, so that one may be able to judge exactly the effect of the guard. A trial over a fiat surface covered with a continuous layer of mud would also be useful. ,.
Some of the Best Results.
As to the results of the trials, we should not like to give any judgment.,
as we are of the opinion that there were too many elements of chance in the passing of a vehicle over one puddle only once, as the slightest mis-steering or irregulerity of speed, which may be quite unintentional, would entirely alter the results, and might condemn a. really useful device. Although some of the screens showed more freedom from splash than others, we should not like to give these results as final. The competitors which struck us as the most successful were in the pneumatic class No. 2, Eureka and No. 13, Gamed Curtain.
In the solid-tyre class, No. 15 Ellis, and No. 16 Eureka, both showed well. No. 31 Ideal made a good record, but it seemed to us that the speed was not up to the standard of the others. It is, of course, very difficult to form an opinion without a long and careful investigation of the records, as no doubt not only the amount of splash will have to be considered but the character of the splash, as a finespray, although annoying to a pedestrian, is not so likely to do damage as heavy splashes of solid mud. Every praise is due to the Club officials for the way in which they carried out the trials. We look forward to the club's report.