A comparative study of de-icing evaluation methods was conducted in this work, and their variations in response to surface characteristics were investigated. The mechanical de-icing measurements include centrifugal, push, and tensile methods. The centrifugal and the horizontal push (shear) methods suggested a linear relationship of ice adhesion strength with surface roughness, whereas the tensile (normal) method indicated an inverse curvilinear relationship with contact angle hysteresis. A partial correlation of contact angle hysteresis on the shear-based methods was also indicated over a specified range of surface roughness. Further attempts were also made on 1H,1H,2H,2H-perfluorooctyltriethoxysilane-coated surfaces, and the ice adhesion indicated a clear reduction in the normal de-icing method, whereas the shear-based methods did not show a considerable change in ice adhesion, highlighting their mechanical forces-centric response. Lastly, a further evaluation using a hybrid de-icing method was conducted, to verify the influence of surface characteristics on ice removal involving heating, which demonstrated a partial correlation of energy consumption with the ice adhesion strength over a specified range of surface roughness. The results obtained in this study provide crucial information on the influence of surface characteristics on ice adhesion and offer material-dependent correlations of the popular de-icing evaluation methods. The conclusions could be applied to define an appropriate testing method for the evaluation of icephobic surfaces and coatings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Memon et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: