2013/07/12 by Vahid Hejazi, Константин Соболев, Michael Nosonovsky · 361 citations
Materials Science · Engineering · Chemistry · #Surface Modification and Superhydrophobicity #Icing and De-icing Technologies #Adhesion, Friction, and Surface Interactions #Adhesion #Folding (DSP implementation) #Icing #Materials science #Nanotechnology #Crystallization #Chemistry #Composite material #Physics #Mechanical engineering #Engineering #Meteorology
paper · pdf · doi:10.1038/srep02194
published in Scientific Reports 3(1), 2194 (Nature Portfolio)
openalex publication_date 2013/07/12 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/05
The term "icephobicity" has emerged in the literature recently. An extensive discussion took place on whether the icephobicity is related to the superhydrophobicity, and the consensus is that there is no direct correlation. Besides the parallel between the icephobicity and superhydrophobicity for water/ice repellency, there are similarities on other levels including the hydrophobic effect/hydrophobic interactions, mechanisms of protein folding and ice crystal formation. In this paper, we report how ice adhesion is different from water using force balance analysis, and why superhydrophobic surfaces are not necessary icephobic. We also present experimental data on anti-icing of various surfaces and suggest a definition of icephobicity, which is broad enough to cover a variety of situations relevant to de-icing including low adhesion strength and delayed ice crystallization and bouncing.