Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Graphene-Based Coating Could Act As a Real-time De-Icer For Aircraft (rice.edu)

Posted by timothy on from the just-use-ice-loving-beetles dept.

hypnosec writes: Researchers have developed a graphene-based coating they have proved effective at melting ice from a helicopter blade, paving the way for a real-time de-icer. The thin coating of graphene nanoribbons in epoxy has been developed by researchers at Rice University. In their tests, researchers show the coating is capable of melting centimeter-thick ice from a static helicopter rotor blade in a -4 degree Fahrenheit environment. A small voltage was applied to the coating that delivered electrothermal heat — called Joule heating — to the surface, which melted the ice.

26 comments

  1. it COULD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It could, but it won't.

    1. Re: it COULD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, but just wait until they 3D print it. THAT will do the trick!

  2. Is there anything graphene *can't* do? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm now brushing my teeth with graphene, just in case.

  3. Heating my Joules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Joule heating - lest ye be sterile

  4. It's just resistive heating by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Why does this pave the way to real-time de-icing? From the research, it appears to simply apply resistive heating techniques on the blade. Couldn't this already be done? Has nobody tried heading surfaces from inside before? What was the technical challenge?

    1. Re:It's just resistive heating by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      This has been done for ages. Electro-thermal deicing devices are commonly used on propellers.

      My guess (TFA wasn't really clear in this respect) is that this is big news because we're talking about a coating. Deicing systems are usually bulky and used only on attack surfaces, which leads to some issues - on wings for example, if you don't set the right temperature ice will melt only to flow over the surface only to solidify again, harder, on a different place.

    2. Re:It's just resistive heating by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 1

      And we're assuming, of course, that this graphene coating will be able to hold up to the stresses and impacts encountered by helicopter blades. It seems like that would be much bigger news than "it can act like a resistor".

    3. Re:It's just resistive heating by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      But ... isn't graphene magic, and any purpose to which it's applied produces a magically correct outcome?

      Surely graphene just knows it's supposed to hold up to the stresses and remove the ice, right?

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    4. Re:It's just resistive heating by penguinoid · · Score: 1

      Bow down to the awesomeness that is graphene. Resistance is futile.

      --
      Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    5. Re:It's just resistive heating by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 1

      Resistance is the whole point of "electrothermal heat".

    6. Re:It's just resistive heating by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Well, if it's a coating across the entire blade, you're good until there's a complete electrical separation.

      After that, hopefully just spray some more epoxy on.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    7. Re:It's just resistive heating by slinches · · Score: 3, Insightful

      An epoxy based coating on the leading edge of a helicopter rotor will be gone almost instantly. The blades are basically sand blasted on every takeoff and landing from the dirt and sand that gets kicked up by the rotors. That's why they have that metallic cap.

      Also, the reason they don't heat the entire rotor blade now is because the electrical power requirements would be excessively high and it isn't necessary. The metallic ribbon heating elements they currently use are such a small contributor to the overall weight that it's almost negligible. The rest is thermal mass and insulation necessary to evenly distribute the energy across the anti-iced section of the blade and to protect the composite blade structure from the heat. Maybe, due to reduced thickness and uniform heat output, this new coating could be applied closer to the back side of the LE abrasion shield and be more resistant to foreign object damage being a continuous sheet, but I don't expect it to revolutionize the industry. It certainly won't grossly increase the range of application of aircraft anti-ice systems. Outside of rotors/propellers, aircraft generally use engine bleed air for anti-icing since that is readily available and the electric power needs to replace those systems would require much larger and heavier generators.

      --
      Knowledge Brings Fear
  5. Real time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As opposed to what? Turn-based?

    1. Re:Real time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As opposed to what? Turn-based?

      Correct! Turn based.

      Fly for a while and get it all ice up and go back to base where someone takes his turn with the helicopter and de-ices it.

    2. Re:Real time? by jeffb+(2.718) · · Score: 1

      As opposed to "batch", perhaps, if the submitter is old like me?

    3. Re:Real time? by magarity · · Score: 1

      Do you really not know or are you being incorrectly sarcastic? De-icing is a horribly slow turn-based process now. Your plane gets in a slow line and moves up to the de-icing truck near where the taxiway meets the runway. Eventually, your plane gets the de-icing treatment and then because of the delay waiting for de-icing, the takeoff group is delaying because the next incoming bank has started arriving. By the time you take off, there's just as much snow built back up on the plane as when you left the gate.
      This whole thing ought to be done more intelligently in regards to snow types. One time leaving Denver in a snowstorm, super-fine and dry Colorado powder was falling that blows away if the plane moves much at all but we sat through a long delay waiting for de-icing anyway. The captain was probably had some rule to follow that says sit through de-icing if snow is falling no matter what.

    4. Re:Real time? by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      As opposed to what? Turn-based?

      No, as in "in-flight" de-icing a helicopter's rotors ... you know, real time, under load, while in the air.

      Typically you don't want a helicopter getting ice on the rotor, bad shit happens and it stops being able to fly.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    5. Re:Real time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Helicopter rotors don't operate well in static air. The tests were done without air flowing over the rotor section. Yet another graphene miracle cure that will wait until the heat death of the universe to actually be found in general use. The article also states that the coating may aid in making an aircraft more resistant to lightning strikes. Without full-scale testing, this is highly dubious. For instance, if the coating is placed in composite structures, it may lead to structural failure as the extreme temperatures may cause de-bonding in the laminate. This could lead to a structural failure at the worst, or very expensive repairs in the least.

      I look forward to their results in testing actual rotors in icing conditions while in flight. I am not holding my breath, however.

    6. Re:Real time? by brambus · · Score: 3, Informative

      Deicing doesn't deal with snow, or, well, not of the light fluffy kind anyway. It's mean to remove thick layers of solid ice that can form on surfaces and significantly affect aircraft performance. The reason for deicing when you see snow on the aircraft is because you can never be sure that there isn't at least part ice underneath it. That's why they deice, just to be sure. I'm sure you'll rather sit through an unnecessary deice 1000 times over than die once when it was really needed. Ice is no joke and people absolutely have died in aircraft because of it.
      That having been said, the way it works is that they have types of deicing fluid, each of which is certified for a particular temperature and protection time. So something like up to 15 minutes of protection at -10C, 10 minutes of protection at -15C and 5 minutes of protection at -20C. The aircraft then has that allowable time window to line up and get airborne. In flight, it'll then either have to fully rely on its own anti-icing equipment, or exit the icing conditions (which usually happens fairly quickly).
      The reason why we don't use an aircraft's own anti-icing equipment on the ground is because it isn't very extensive. It usually only protects critical components (typically wing leading edges, engine inlets/props and the main cockpit windshield panels plus some external sensors such as pitot-static tubes and AoA vanes) and may not be even be available for performance-critical phases of flight (such as takeoff), because it robs too much power. Adding more anti-icing equipment would add lots of weight and cost, not to mention power demand. *That's* why we thoroughly de-ice on the ground. Give the whole aircraft a good rinse, takeoff and quickly leave the icing conditions.

    7. Re:Real time? by bruce_the_loon · · Score: 1

      De-icing is a two-fold thing. The first part is to loosen any current ice buildup on the wings before takeoff so that the profile of the wing isn't affected. This is mostly accomplished by the pressure and heat of the de-icing fluid being sprayed about.

      The second part is to reduce the formation of new ice buildup on the wing. Planes have waited too long in queues for takeoff and crashed because new ice formed since the last de-icing. The fluids have a sticky nature, like a syrup, that forms a layer of anti-freeze on the wing for a period of time. De-icing fluids are rated by the holdover time of the layer, which ranges from 5 minutes to 80 minutes depending on conditions and fluid type.

      The airline industry has learned harsh lessons in the past about icing conditions and even if that dry Colorado powder can blow off when the plane moves, some might melt on contact with the surface of the wing and then freeze again on a different, colder, part of the wing. Be thankful for that rule that forces de-icing, otherwise airlines and pilots might take a chance they shouldn't.

      Have a look at the accident reports for Scandinavian Airlines Flight 751, China Eastern Airlines Flight 5210, Air Florida Flight 90, Air Ontario Flight 1363 and USAir Flight 405. Decisions made by pilots, especially when under time constraints, within existing rules at the time can be really dumb sometimes and results in new rules.

      --
      Trying to become famous by taking photos. Visit my homepage please.
    8. Re:Real time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As opposed to what? Turn-based?

      Actually, on some fixed-wing airplanes, yes, the deicer is essentially turn-based: many smaller airplanes (which lack the heat or electrical budget for heated systems) have pneumatic boots at the leading edge of the wings and tail. After a bit of ice builds, the pilot inflates the boots, fracturing the ice, which separates from the airframe. Rinse, lather, repeat throughout your flight. Other light aircraft use alcohol as an anti-ice system, but that has a limited capacity (aircraft with boots often incorporate an alcohol "slinger" on the props).

      Larger fixed-wing aircraft use hot wings, which take bleed air from the engines and pass it through the leading edges of the wings to prevent ice formation. Helicopters don't really have that option, despite having plenty of heat budget, because the rotor blades are too thin to incorporate the necessary ductwork, especially all the way out to the blade tips.

    9. Re:Real time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As opposed to what? Turn-based?

      No, as in "in-flight" de-icing a helicopter's rotors ... you know, real time, under load, while in the air.

      Typically you don't want a helicopter getting ice on the rotor, bad shit happens and it stops being able to fly.

      The wooosh is strong with this one.

  6. Hmm by Etcetera · · Score: 1

    The last time Science tried to come up with a new de-icer it didn't work out too well...

    Just saying.

    --
    Hire a Linux system administrator, systems engineer,
  7. You could also ... by PPH · · Score: 1

    ... not use O'Hare as a hub for flights from St. Louis to San Diego, for example.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  8. Bugs as well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But does it cook the smashed bugs from the leading edges into a harmlessly dispersing shell? One solution for two problems would be nice.

  9. OK for chopper but for fixed wing airplane? by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1
    1 cm thick coating of ice happens only on ground for aircraft. While flying they can not tolerate 1 cm change in the air foil shape. Especially choppers with thinner rotor cross sections. But if the parked aircraft picks up that much of an ice coating, heating the contact layer will melt that layer and debond the ice from the wings. As the chopper spins up the rotor, the airflow and other flexings will throw the ice off. Very good for choppers.

    For fixed wing aircraft they can't take off hoping airflow will shake the ice off. Most likely they might still use high pressure water hose to shake the ice loose once it has been debonded from the wings. But plain water would freeze again. So it is back to glycol? May be heating the layer of ice right next to the wing will reduce the amount of antifreeze needed to de ice the wings.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact