Interlaboratory Study of Ice Adhesion Using Different Techniques
Source abstract
Abstract
Low ice adhesion surfaces are a promising anti-icing strategy. However, reported ice adhesion strengths cannot be directly compared between research groups. This study compares results obtained from testing the ice adhesion strength on two types of surfaces at two different laboratories, testing two different types of ice with different ice adhesion test methods at temperatures of −10 and −18 °C. One laboratory used the centrifuge adhesion test and tested precipitation ice and bulk water ice, while the other laboratory used a vertical shear test and tested only bulk water ice. The surfaces tested were bare aluminum and a commercial icephobic coating, with all samples prepared in the same manner. The results showed comparability in the general trends, surprisingly, with the greatest differences for bare aluminum surfaces at −10 °C. For bulk water ice, the vertical shear test resulted in systematically higher ice adhesion strength than the centrifugal adhesion test. The standard deviation depends on the surface type and seems to scale with the absolute value of the ice adhesion strength. The experiments capture the overall trends in which the ice adhesion strength surprisingly decreases from −10 to −18 °C for aluminum and is almost independent of temperature for a commercial icephobic coating. In addition, the study captures similar trends in the effect of ice type on ice adhesion strength as previously reported and substantiates that ice formation is a key parameter for ice adhesion mechanisms. Repeatability should be considered a key parameter in determining the ideal ice adhesion test method.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Icing and De-icing Technologies · Surface Modification and Superhydrophobicity · Smart Materials for Construction
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Structural Engineering, Norwegian University for Science and Technology (NTNU), NO-7491 Trondheim, Norway
Anti-Icing Materials International Laboratory (AMIL), Université du Québec à Chicoutimi, 555 Blvd. de l’Université, Chicoutimi, QC G7H 2B1, Canada
Funding
Norges Forskningsråd
References (57)
Show source-provided references
1. Brassard, J., Laforte, C., Guerin, F., and Blackburn, C. (2017). Icephobicity: Definition and Measurement Regarding Atmospheric Icing. Advances in Polymer Science, Springer.10.1007/12_2017_36 ↗
2. Bio-inspired strategies for anti-icing10.1021/nn406522n ↗
3. Design of anti-icing surfaces: Smooth, textured or slippery?10.1038/natrevmats.2015.3 ↗
4. Ice Adhesion—Theory, Measurements and Countermeasures10.1163/016942411X574583 ↗
5. Chen, J., Liu, J., He, M., Li, K., Cui, D., Zhang, Q., Zeng, X., Zhang, Y., Wang, J., and Song, Y. (2012). Superhydrophobic surfaces cannot reduce ice adhesion. Appl. Phys. Lett., 101.10.1063/1.4752436 ↗
6. Frost formation and ice adhesion on superhydrophobic surfaces10.1063/1.3524513 ↗
7. Phase transition enabled durable anti-icing surfaces and its DIY design10.1016/j.cej.2018.11.224 ↗
8. Rønneberg, S., He, J., and Zhang, Z. (2019). The Need for Standards in Ice Adhesion Research: A Critical Review. J. Adhes. Sci. Technol.10.1080/01694243.2019.1679523 ↗
9. Stress-Localized Durable Icephobic Surfaces10.1039/C8MH01291A ↗
10. Low–interfacial toughness materials for effective large-scale deicing10.1126/science.aav1266 ↗
11. Design and Preparation of Sandwich-Like Polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) Sponges with Super-Low Ice Adhesion10.1039/C8SM00820E ↗
12. Relationships between Water Wettability and Ice Adhesion10.1021/am1006035 ↗
13. Schulz, M., and Sinapius, M. (2015). Evaluation of Different Ice Adhesion Tests for Mechanical Deicing Systems, SAE International.10.4271/2015-01-2135 ↗
14. Laboratory test for ice adhesion strength using commercial instrumentation10.1021/la4044254 ↗
15. Durable and scalable icephobic surfaces: Similarities and distinctions from superhydrophobic surfaces10.1039/C5SM02295A ↗
16. Rønneberg, S., He, J., and Zhang, Z. (2019, January 23–28). Standardizing the testing of low ice adhesion surfaces. Proceedings of the International Workshops on Atmospheric Icing of Structures (IWAIS) 2019, Reykjavik, Iceland.
17. A critical review of the measurement of ice adhesion to solid substrates10.1016/j.paerosci.2018.03.001 ↗
18. Kasaai, M.R., and Farzaneh, M. (2004, January 20–25). A critical review of evaluation methods of ice adhesion. Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Vancouver, BC, Canada.10.1115/OMAE2004-51264 ↗
19. The Relationship between Water Wetting and Ice Adhesion10.1163/016942409X12510925843078 ↗
20. Superhydrophobic Surfaces: Are They Really Ice-Repellent?10.1021/la104277q ↗
21. Ice adhesion on super-hydrophobic surfaces10.1016/j.apsusc.2009.05.033 ↗
22. How wetting hysteresis influences ice adhesion strength on superhydrophobic surfaces10.1021/la901439c ↗
23. On ice-releasing properties of rough hydrophobic coatings10.1016/j.coldregions.2010.01.001 ↗
24. Analytical model based on experimental data of centrifuge ice adhesion tests with different substrates10.1016/j.coldregions.2015.10.011 ↗
25. Douglas, R.G., Palacios, J., and Schneeberger, G. (2018, January 25–29). Design, Fabrication, Calibration, and Testing of a Centrifugal Ice Adhesion Test Rig with Strain Rate Control Capability. Proceedings of the 2018 Atmospheric and Space Environments Conference, Atlanta, GA, USA.10.2514/6.2018-3342 ↗
26. The influence of freezing and ambient temperature on the adhesion strength of ice10.1016/j.coldregions.2017.05.001 ↗
27. Performance and durability tests of smart icephobic coatings to reduce ice adhesion10.1016/j.apsusc.2017.02.206 ↗
28. Elaboration of Al2O3/PTFE icephobic coatings for protecting aluminum surfaces10.1016/j.surfcoat.2009.01.030 ↗
29. Icephobicity of Slippery Liquid Infused Porous Surfaces under Multiple Freeze–Thaw and Ice Accretion–Detachment Cycles10.1002/admi.201800828 ↗
30. Koivuluoto, H., Stenroos, C., Ruohomaa, R., Bolelli, G., Lusvarghi, L., and Vuoristo, P. (July, January 28). Research on icing behavior and ice adhesion testing of icephobic surfaces. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Atmospheric Icing of Structures (IWAIS) 2015, Uppsala, Sweden.
31. Niemelä-Anttonen, H., Kiilakoski, J., Vuoristo, P., and Koivuluoto, H. (2019, January 23–28). Icephobic Performance of Different Surface Designs and Materials. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Atmospheric Icing of Structures (IWAIS) 2019, Reykjavik, Iceland.
32. Thickness Dependence of Ice Removal Stress for a Polydimethylsiloxane Nanocomposite: Sylgard 18410.1021/la5030444 ↗
33. Room Temperature Characteristics of Polymer-Based Low Ice Adhesion Surfaces10.1038/srep42181 ↗
34. Multiscale Crack Initiators Promoted Super-Low Ice Adhesion Surfaces10.1039/C7SM01511A ↗
35. Understanding the role of hollow sub-surface structures in reducing ice adhesion strength10.1039/C9SM00024K ↗
36. Enhancing the Mechanical Durability of Icephobic Surfaces by Introducing Autonomous Self-Healing Function10.1021/acsami.8b01866 ↗
37. One-Step Fabrication of Bioinspired Lubricant-Regenerable Icephobic Slippery Liquid-Infused Porous Surfaces10.1021/acsomega.8b01148 ↗
38. Wang, F., Xiao, S., Zhuo, Y., Ding, W., He, J., and Zhang, Z. (2019). Liquid layer generator for excellent icephobicity at extremely low temperature. Mater. Horiz.10.1039/C9MH00859D ↗
39. Organogel as durable anti-icing coatings10.1007/s40843-015-0069-7 ↗
40. The effect of ice type on ice adhesion10.1063/1.5086242 ↗
41. Influences of number of hydroxyl groups and cooling solid surface temperature on ice adhesion force10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2016.12.007 ↗
42. Durable gels with ultra-low adhesion to ice10.1039/C6TA07262C ↗
43. Golovin, K., Kobaku, S.P.R., Lee, D.H., DiLoreto, E.T., Mabry, J.M., and Tuteja, A. (2016). Designing durable icephobic surfaces. Sci. Adv., 2.10.1126/sciadv.1501496 ↗
44. A predictive framework for the design and fabrication of icephobic polymers10.1126/sciadv.1701617 ↗
45. Hejazi, V., Sobolev, K., and Nosonovsky, M. (2013). From superhydrophobicity to icephobicity: Forces and interaction analysis. Sci. Rep., 3.10.1038/srep02194 ↗
46. Anti-icing Coating with an Aqueous Lubricating Layer10.1021/am501252u ↗
47. Superhydrophobic Coatings with Reduced Ice Adhesion10.1163/156856109X433964 ↗
48. Amphiphilic icephobic coatings10.1016/j.porgcoat.2017.07.019 ↗
49. Metasurfaces Leveraging Solar Energy for Icephobicity10.1021/acsnano.8b02719 ↗
50. Coatings super-repellent to ultralow surface tension liquids10.1038/s41563-018-0178-2 ↗
51. Laforte, C., and Beisswenger, A. (2005, January 16). Icephobic Material Centrifuge Adhesion Test. Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on Atmospheric Icing on Structures (IWAIS), Montréal, QC, Canada.
52. Laforte, C., Blackburn, C., Perron, J., and Aubert, R. (2014, January 13–17). Icephobic Coating Evaluation for Aerospace Application. Proceedings of the 55th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, National Harbor, MD, USA.10.2514/6.2014-1327 ↗
53. Ecological Coatings (2019, October 01). Icephobic Coatings Anti-Ice. Available online: http://www.ecologicalcoatings.com/icephobic.html.
54. Evaluation of icephobic coatings—Screening of different coatings and influence of roughness10.1016/j.apsusc.2013.06.073 ↗
55. (2019, July 08). Mold Max TM Series Tin Cure Silicone Mold Rubber. Available online: https://www.smooth-on.com/product-line/mold-max/.
56. (2019, July 22). Dow Corning High-Vacuum Silicone Grease. Available online: https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/catalog/product/aldrich/z273554.
57. Work, A.H., Gyekenyesi, A.L., Kreeger, R.E., Salem, J.A., Vargas, M.M., and Drabiak, D.R. (2018, January 25–28). The Adhesion Strength of Impact Ice Measured Using a Modified Lap Joint Test. Proceedings of the AIAA Aviation Forum, Atlanta, GA, USA.