PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 21, 2026Processes3 citationsOpen Access

Advances and Challenges in Ice Accretion on Passive Icephobic Surfaces

View Full Paper
MHMilad HassaniMTMoussa Tembely

Key Points

  • This review aims to synthesize recent advances in passive icephobic surfaces and their implications for ice accretion mitigation.
  • Review of literature on passive icephobic surface technologies
  • Comparison of different ice-mitigation strategies
  • Assessment of ice-adhesion measurement approaches
  • Analysis of failure modes and durability limits across applications
  • Identified that durability and failure modes are the main barriers to effective icing mitigation
  • Reviewed various surface technologies, including low-surface-energy coatings and superhydrophobic surfaces
  • Presented a checklist for improved comparability in ice-adhesion measurement
  • Highlighted case studies illustrating diverse applications of these surfaces in multiple industries

Abstract

Ice accretion on aircraft, wind-turbine blades, power networks, civil infrastructure, and exposed sensors poses severe safety risks and economic costs. Passive icephobic surfaces mitigate icing by delaying heterogeneous nucleation, altering droplet impact/solidification and wetting transitions, and/or weakening the ice–substrate bond so that accreted ice sheds under modest aerodynamic, gravitational, or vibrational loads. This review synthesizes recent progress using a unified mechanism framework linking (i) nucleation and early freezing, (ii) droplet dynamics during impact or condensation/frosting, and (iii) ice accretion and removal governed by interfacial fracture. Smooth low-surface-energy coatings, textured (superhydrophobic) surfaces, slippery liquid-infused porous surfaces (SLIPS), and low-interfacial-toughness strategies are critically compared in terms of achievable performance ranges, failure modes, durability limits, fabrication scalability, and test-method dependence. Ice-adhesion measurement approaches (push-off, pull-off/tensile, centrifugal) are assessed and a minimum reporting checklist is provided to improve comparability. Case studies across aviation, wind energy, power infrastructure, sensors, and emerging civil-engineering coatings highlight that durability and scale-dependent failure modes remain the dominant barriers to durable, energy-free icing mitigation. The review concludes with priorities for eco-friendly chemistries, self-healing or renewable layers, standardized testing/reporting, and data-driven (machine learning-assisted) optimization to accelerate translation into durable passive ice-mitigation technologies.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Hassani et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69be38006e48c4981c67821dhttps://doi.org/10.3390/pr14060985
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Unraveling Ice–Solid Interface Rupture Dynamics: Insights from Molecular Dynamics Simulations2024 · 9 citations
  2. 2Thermally Sprayed Coatings: Novel Surface Engineering Strategy Towards Icephobic Solutions2020 · 35 citations
  3. 3A simple lab screening test to evaluate ice adhesion2025 · 2 citations
  4. 4Quasicrystalline Coatings Exhibit Durable Low Interfacial Toughness with Ice2021 · 49 citations
  5. 5Icephobicity: Definition and Measurement Regarding Atmospheric Icing2018 · 23 citations