31

I noticed this initially when learning to fly Robinson Helicopters but fail to remember the reason my instructor gave me; this again came up when watching a video about the ISS.

  • In helicopters (Robinson R22/44), the main rotor typically operates at 104% RPM.
  • On the space shuttle, after max q, they throttle back up to 104%.

What is the significance of 104%? If this is the maximum, why is this not called 100%, and everything scaled back to fit? This seems the most fit place to ask this, as I have only seen this in aviation / aerospace.

200_success
  • 1,257
  • 10
  • 24
Matt Clark
  • 536
  • 5
  • 13

2 Answers2

44

This happens when the maximum output was changed after design.

100% is simply a reference to a certain value. In the space shuttle's case, the engine output was increased after the initial design. Instead of updating the engine value everywhere, they decided to simply keep the initial value constant.

The same goes for N1 in turbo engines. 100% N1 is simply referencing a certain datum defined by the manufacturer. Going over 100% is not necessarily unsafe.

kevin
  • 39,731
  • 17
  • 148
  • 278
15

@kevin has given the general answer, so I will only give the answer to the very specific question you asked:

What is the significance of 104%

None.

As was explained by Kevin, 100% is the design reference point. Engineers are generally very good at predicting performance, so they will typically only be off by a tiny amount. They are also typically conservative, so they will be off in the lower direction.

This means that the actual performance will typically be just a tiny bit above 100%, and there are not that many numbers that are a tiny bit above 100%. So, it is not surprising that out of the vast number of rockets, airplanes, motors, turbines, engines, etc. you have found two which happen to have the same rated performance figure of 104%.

Jörg W Mittag
  • 5,790
  • 28
  • 37
  • There is often actually very significant difference between rated performance (what the 100% is based on) and possible performance, though, due to significant safety margins in the designs. For example, the GE9X is only supposed to be rated for 105,000 lbf thrust, but produced 134,300 lbf in testing, breaking the previous world record of 127,900 lbf set by its predecessor, the GE90-115b (which was itself 'only' rated for 115,200 lbf.) – reirab Sep 03 '19 at 18:15