41st Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit AIAA 2003-567

6-9 January 2003, Reno, Nevada

OBJECTIVE EVALUATION OF FLUID, BLOWER,

AND INFRARED GROUND DEICING TECHNOLOGIES

Charles Ryerson
Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC)
Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory (CRREL)
72 Lyme Road, Hanover, NH 03755

Mary Wyderski
ASC/ENVV
1981 Monahan Way, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433

Donald Tarazano
Independent Consultant
161 Terrace Ville Drive, Centerville, OH 45459

James Davila
Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC)
4301 Colonel Glenn Highway, Beavercreek, OH 45431

Abstract re-engineering, infrared throughput and thermal

The high cost of aircraft deicing fluid recovery
facilities and the relative infrequency of military
versus commercial flights in icing conditions has
caused the Air Force to seek alternative deicing
technologies. In April 2002, an experiment was
conducted at Eglin Air Force Base’s McKinley
Climatic Laboratory to evaluate fluid, forced air,
and infrared deicing technologies, and ice imaging
systems, that could be integrated into a trans-
portable deicing system. The experiment focused
on infrared deicing, with standard glycol-based
SAE AMS 1424 deicing fluid serving as a baseline.
In addition, a new non-glycol deicing fluid was
evaluated. Experiment goals included establishing
infrared deicing rates, maneuverability, refreeze,
and thermal control, and assessing the ice imaging
systems, the non-glycol fluid, and costs. Infrared
energy deiced clear ice at about one-half the speed
of fluids, and suffered from refreeze as water ran
off deiced test articles. The infrared system was
slow melting snow. However, the forced air system
removed dry snow well, and removed heavy, wet
snow effectively with fluid injection. The environ-
mentally safe deicing fluid was as effective as
glycol fluids, except that more fluid was required
to attain deicing performance similar to glycol.
Though the infrared system did cause some over-
heating of composites, the thermal control system
did reduce the amount of overheating. With
_______________
This paper is declared a work of the U.S. Government and is
not subject to copyright protection in the United States.
control could be improved, making it an effective
component of an integrated deicing system. The
utility of an infrared emitter may be climate-
specific since its effectiveness is greater with ice
than with snow. However, the integrated system’s
throughput is seen to be competitive.
Introduction
Procedures for deicing commercial parked
aircraft are well established and generally allow
aircraft to depart safely after snow or ice events or
during freezing precipitation. Nearly all preflight
deicing is performed today with SAE AMS 1424
propylene glycol aircraft deicing fluids (ADFs).
However, monetary and environmental costs of
using ADFs are quite high. For example, fluid
recovery costs for the roughly 11 million or more
gallons of deicing fluids used annually in the U.S.
are about $11–$13/gallon.1 Approximately 70% of
the cost per gallon is for recovery, recycling, and
disposal of used fluid to prevent its discharge into
ground and surface water, and wastewater treat-
ment facilities (driven by EPA under the Clean
Water Act). Airports must construct expensive con-
tainment facilities to recover, store, and process
used fluids. Current Air Force practices prevent
fluid reuse.2
Military fixed-wing aircraft collocated with
commercial airline operations typically use
available commercial deicing services. However,
military aircraft fly less frequently than com-
mercial aircraft, making costs of fluid recovery

1
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
This material is declared a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States.
facilities at military airfields prohibitively more
expensive per flight. This has caused some air
bases to curtail operations during and immediately
after freezing precipitation. In addition, the Army
prohibits the use of glycol-based deicing fluids on
helicopters because of potential damage to rotor
head bearings.3 These limitations in Operational
Readiness are why the Air Force and Army are
actively seeking alternatives to glycol-based
deicing fluids.4
In April 2002, the Air Force conducted a
deicing critical technology evaluation experiment
at the Eglin Air Force Base McKinley Climatic
Laboratory to assess the capabilities of integrating
alternative deicing technologies into one system.
The overall goal of the project was to assess the
potential of integrating fluid, forced air, infrared,
and ice imaging technologies to create a
transportable Mobile Integrated Deicing System
that would deice at rates comparable to glycol-
based systems but at lower cost, smaller logistic
footprint, and smaller environmental impact. This
paper describes the goals of the experiment, the
hardware evaluated, the conduct of the experiment,
and initial results.
Hardware
Glycol-fluid deicing technologies are the
mainstay of the commercial aviation industry
because they are fast, effective in most climates,
and enable airlines to maintain schedules. This, of
course, comes at a considerable dollar cost.
However, the availability of several new
technologies has allowed the Department of
Defense (DoD) to design an integrated, multiple
technology deicing system that would allow
deicing operations to be conducted using the most
effective system for the conditions with the least
environmental impact. The core of the
transportable system is a portable infrared deicing
panel that melts ice and snow using infrared energy
in a manner similar to a stationary system
examined by Ryerson et al.4 The system also will
include fluid-assisted forced-air, a separate fluid
dispensing system, and an ice imaging system.
Though a complete, integrated prototype was
desired for the Eglin experiment, resources did not
allow full prototype design or construction.
Instead, systems were operated individually in an
attempt to demonstrate the capability of a fully
integrated system.
Infrared Deicing
The centerpiece of the intended integrated
system is the Ice Cat, a gas-fired catalytic converter
2
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
infrared panel developed by Infrared Technologies,
Inc., of Kansas City (Figure 1). Advantages of the
Ice Cat include its portability, two-axis
maneuverability of the boom-mounted deicing
panel, flameless infrared emitters, and temperature
sensors that allow system regulation should the
deicing surface warm above preset temperatures.
Emitting in the mid-wavelength infrared, the
wavelengths of maximum emission fall between
about 3.2 µm and 4.1 µm with the panel operating
at temperatures between about 700°K and 900°K,
though at the Eglin experiment the panel
temperature never exceeded about 700°K. The
infrared panel consists of three independently
regulated zones. The temperature of each zone is
regulated by a feedback loop between infrared
radiometers that sense the temperature of the
surface being deiced, and the infrared panel gas
supply valves.
Figure 1. Ice Cat deicing system with infrared
panel in foreground.
The Ice Cat system has been demonstrated at
several commercial airports and at several Air
Force bases. However, it is still a prototype and no
units are currently field operational. In the
integrated system concept significant engineering
issues still need to be addressed.
Forced Air and Fluid Deicing
The Global AirPlus!, another critical com-
ponent of the integrated deicing system, is
currently operated as a truck-mounted fluid and
blower deicing system throughout the Air Force
(Figure 2). Equipped with a boom-mounted cab,
and blower and fluid nozzles, the system operates
in any of three modes. A high-velocity air mode
operating at a velocity of 313 m s–1 and a pressure
of 53.7 kg m–2 removes loose snow and ice. Air
alone is the preferred deicing mode because
hazardous and costly fluids are not used. Fluid
injection into the air stream abrades and erodes
snow, and melts thin ice and frost. Fluid use in this
mode is low, and is used whenever air alone is not
effective. If air with fluid injection is not effective,
additional fluid is sprayed from a separate nozzle.
Fluid is heated to 80°C before entering either of the
two nozzles. A prototype system would co-locate
air and fluid nozzles, ice imagers, and the infrared
emitter, on a single truck-mounted boom.
Figure 2. Air Force Global AirPlus! truck.
Deicing fluids
Two ADFs were used during the experiment: a
standard commercial SAE AMS 1424 propylene
glycol deicing fluid, Octaflo, and a biobased fluid
developed by Battelle Institute. The biobased fluid,
Degradable by Design Deicer (D3), contains no
glycol, and is designed as a drop-in replacement for
current Type 1 deicers.
Ice imaging
Ice imaging systems map the location of ice on
aircraft surfaces and show where deicing is not
complete. They are most valuable in situations
where ice is thin and clear and not easily detected
by eye or tactile techniques, and in low visibility
environments. In the integrated system concept, an
ice imager would also be located on the truck-
mounted boom with the blower, fluid nozzle, and
the infrared emitter. A graphic display would be
available in the operator’s position. Goodrich
3
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
demonstrated its IceHawk active imaging system,
and Cox & Company demonstrated a passive
infrared-based system, the Contamination Detec-
tion System (CDS). The Goodrich system uses
polarization to determine the presence of ice or
snow. The Cox system relies upon spectral
analysis. Both processes are proprietary.
Experiment
The use of infrared heaters to operationally
deice aircraft is a recent technology. There is little
experience and documentation providing objective
guidance regarding its potential performance on
various aircraft surface materials, in various tem-
peratures, and in ice and snow.4 Obtaining objec-
tive measures of performance requires comparing
the infrared against other technologies in the same
conditions and on the same materials. As a result,
an experiment was designed to allow for compari-
son of infrared heaters against standard fluid
deicing technologies under controlled temperature,
snow, and ice conditions. Because large aircraft
components and machinery were involved, and
because uniformity of snow and ice coverage of
components was necessary, the McKinley Climatic
Laboratory at Eglin Air Force Base was chosen for
the experiment. The laboratory is a large aircraft
hangar that has been converted for climatic testing.
It has the capability of creating glaze ice and snow
and maintaining temperature within a few degrees
for many hours.
The experiment had several goals.
Deicing rate
The most important goal of the project was to
quantify the deicing speed of the infrared system
when compared to the Air Force standard Global
AirPlus! (air-assisted fluid) deicing system. The
deicing speed of glycol-based SAE AMS 1424
Type 1 fluids is sufficient for most operational
requirements. Therefore, the combined technolo-
gies must equal or exceed glycol performance with
snow or ice in a wide range of temperature
conditions and on a wide range of geometric
surfaces.
Refreeze
Identify refreezing of melted ice and snow
caused by each technology.
Maneuverability
Identify maneuverability restrictions of each
technology around complex aircraft geometries,
such as helicopters. Excessive truck movement
increases the danger of collision with aircraft. This
is especially critical for the infrared system with its
large panel.
Thermal control
Composite materials are sensitive to heat, with
delamination possible for some materials when
surface temperatures exceed approximately 66°C.4
Test article surface temperatures were monitored to
determine if the infrared system, with its feedback
control system, could control composite surface
temperatures.
D3 deicer performance
In addition to reducing recovery and recycling
costs, as with the infrared system, deicing speed
and efficacy of the D3 fluid was quantified and
compared to standard glycol-based fluid.
Ice imaging
Assess the capability of ice imaging systems to
identify areas with and without ice with minimal
false positive and false negative responses.
Cost
Quantify the cost of each technology and
compare to the cost of glycol and its recovery,
containment, and disposal.
Design and Conduct of Experiment
The primary purpose of the experiment was to
compare infrared deicing rate against standard
glycol deicing rates, and a secondary goal was to
assess the performance of the D3 fluid against
glycol. Therefore, three sets of identical test
articles were placed on stands within the chamber
for the comparisons. Test articles included trainer
aircraft wings, auxiliary fuel tanks, and Army
Apache helicopter blades. Apache blades were
placed only at the infrared test station, but they
were deiced with air and fluid during the
experiment. In addition, four 0.9-m square
aluminum panels 3 mm thick and painted “Air
Force” gray were placed at each of the three test
stations and tilted to an angle of 10° to allow runoff
of meltwater as occurs on most airfoils (Figure 3).
These panels mimic a standard unpainted panel
design created by the FAA Technical Center
expressly for evaluating the performance of
infrared systems. Unpainted FAA panels were also
used during the experiment. The painted panels
were the most important test articles for this
4
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
experiment because they were used at each test
station.
Army thermal experiments were conducted on
a 3-m-long section of a Black Hawk helicopter
blade instrumented with thermocouples. All other
test articles had at least one thermocouple attached
to the deicing surface, and another under the
article. Only the 0.9-m square panels had no
thermocouples on the deice surfaces; thermo-
couples were placed on the backside of the panels.
Figure 3. Air Force deicing panels based on FAA
design.
Test Article Layout
Test articles were spaced within the climatic
chamber to avoid cross-contamination of one
deicing method by another, but also to avoid
interference during vehicle movements and yet
allow sufficient coverage with ice or snow.
Deicing vehicles included two Air Force
Global AirPlus! trucks for applying glycol and D3,
and the Ice Cat vehicle. Ice imaging cameras were
mounted on a forklift allowing them to be placed at
optimum height and position during each deicing
operation. Finally, infrared maneuverability experi-
ments were conducted with a retired Army UH-1
“Huey” helicopter fitted with four 7.6-m-long rec-
tangular aluminum “rotor blades” to represent the
geometry of a Black Hawk or Apache helicopter.
The experiment was conducted over a 4-day
period, excluding setup and teardown. The first two
days of the experiment involved deicing clear ice-
covered surfaces at temperatures of –3°C and
–21°C, and the second two days deicing snow-
covered surfaces at –3°C and –21°C. Clear ice,
accreted to a nominal 6-mm thickness, was created
using rain frames hung from the climatic chamber
ceiling. Snow, to a nominal thickness of 100 mm,
was created from standard fan-driven snowmaking
machines.
 Results

Snow and Ice Characterization

Prior to each of the four deicing trials, ice and

snow conditions were characterized. Measured ice
characteristics included thickness and ice density.
Ice was created from water drops falling from
ceiling-mounted rain racks at a chamber tempera-
ture of about –2.5°C. After sufficient ice was
created, the chamber was cooled or warmed to the
appropriate temperature for deicing operations. At
the start of the –3°C clear ice test, ice thickness
ranged from 4 to 7 mm and averaged 6 mm, and at
the start of the –21°C test, ice thickness ranged
from 4 mm to 9 mm and averaged 6 mm. Ice Figure 4. Clear ice covering thermocouple on heli-
thickness varied as a result of the different copter blade.
geometries of test articles. Water ran from some
articles before freezing, or pooled and froze in low
areas, causing a range of thickness as would occur Table 1. Snow characteristics
in natural conditions. Flat panel test articles pro- Wet Snow Dry Snow
vided the most uniform ice surfaces. This design (–2.4°C) (–21°C)
had been selected to be consistent with the FAA Thickness mean (cm) 10.5 9.8
test stand and proved useful. Ice density averaged Thickness max (cm) 14.4 11.6
about 880 kg m–3, and ranged from 820 kg m–3 to Thickness min (cm) 5.0 6.0
920 kg m–3 (Figure 4). Density mean (kg m-3) 530 410
Density max (kg m-3) 860 510
Many more characteristics of snow were Density min (kg m-3) 450 370
measured and included: thickness, density, shear Temperature mean –1.9 –19.6
strength, and hardness (Table 1). Unlike the ice, (°C)
snow was created at a temperature of about –18°C. Temperature max (°C) 0.0 –18.3
The chamber was then either cooled or warmed to
Temperature min (°C) –4.6 –20.5
the appropriate deicing temperature. Snow depths
Hardness mean 79.3* 53*
varied considerably around the 100-mm target
(penetrometer)
depth caused by the difficulty of evenly distri-
buting snow from the snowmaking machine Hardness maximum 84* 67*
plumes in the chamber. The average snow depths (penetrometer)
were very close to the desired depth. Snow Hardness min 75* <50*
densities were high for both snow events. The (penetrometer)
density of new, natural snow ranges from about 50 Shear mean (kg m) 12.0 2.2
kg m–3 in cold, calm conditions to about 350 kg Shear max (kg m) 16.6 5.9
m–3 in warm and windy conditions. The wet snow Shear min (kg m) 0.26 0.19
density resembled that of an aged metamorphosed
pack, as did the dry snow density. The densities are * Penetrometer values: 98–94 - ice, 94–84 - X-
acceptable for representing snows that might hard, 84–70 - standard medium, 70–60 - soft, 60–
accumulate on military aircraft that sit for days 50 - pack. Hardness <50 - not scaled.
with snow metamorphosing on airfoils. The
densities are probably too high for representing Infrared Versus Fluid Deicing Results
snow on commercial aircraft that are deiced with
high frequency. The snowpacks were of high Glycol-based Type 1 deicing fluid, as applied
density because the snow was largely composed of by the Air Force Global AirPlus! truck, was the
ice pellets rather than snowflakes (Figure 5). baseline to which the infrared Ice Cat system was
Figure 6 shows that the size distributions of the ice compared. Deicing fluid removes ice from air-
particles created by the snowmaking machines frames thermally, through chemical depression of
were somewhat narrow compared to natural snow the freezing point, and through mechanical action.
because the snowmaking machines typically create In addition, refreeze of runoff is prevented by the
ice particles rather than snowflakes.5 chemically depressed freezing point.

5
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

Figure 5. Particles captured in air from snow-
making machines. Snow crystals (left) are
uncommon products of snowmaking machines and
represent only a small number of the total particles
collected, which were ice pellets (right).
Comparison of deicing fluid and Ice Cat
deicing times required normalization to remove the
effects of activities that occurred during the
experiment that were not representative of acti-
vities that would occur operationally for an in-
tegrated system. These operations consisted of
moving the emitter to allow a momentary
unobstructed view of the surface being deiced by
the ice imaging systems, and bringing the fluid
assisted blower into play. In addition, corrections
were made for varying ice thickness from one test
article to another.

30 Deicing clear ice with the Ice Cat took

Wet Snow Size Distribution approximately twice as long as the ADF using the
25 Air Force Global AirPlus! truck. The infrared
system required about 4.8 min/mm of ice. The
20
deicing fluid required 2.4 min/mm of ice. Deicing
speeds were considerably faster at –3°C than at
–21°C. When deicing the wing and flat panels, the
Count

15
infrared system averaged 4.1 min/mm of ice at
–3°C and 6.4 min/mm of ice at –21°C, and the
10
deicing fluid averaged 1.7 min/mm of ice and 3.0
min/mm of ice, respectively, at the two
5 temperatures. Both technologies deiced at about
40% of their –3°C rate at –21°C. Total deicing
0 times for a nominal 6 mm of clear ice at –21°C, for
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Size (microns)
example, would require the infrared system about
35
38 minutes with no assistance from blowers or
chemicals.
Dry Snow Size Distribution
30
Performance comparisons were more difficult
25 for the snow tests because the infrared system was
slow and was typically supplemented by the fluid
20 or the blower system before a significant amount of
Count

snow could be melted. During the ice experiments,

15
10
5
0
0 200 400 600
Size (microns)
Figure 6. Size distribution of particles captured in
air from snow machines.
The infrared system removes ice and snow by
heating and melting. Though some infrared energy
may penetrate through clear ice to the ice-substrate
interface, most melting appeared to occur from the
top of the ice surface. No observations were made
of sheets of ice or snow sliding from the pitched
panels until melting was nearly complete,
suggesting that melting at the ice/substrate
interface was minimal. The infrared emitter
typically operated at distances from the deicing
surface of 0.7 to 1.5 m.
time-series of thermocouple temperatures on most
test articles showed that ice rapidly warmed to near
0°C until all ice melted, whereupon surface
temperatures rapidly increased. During experi-
ments with 100 mm of snow, no measurable
heating occurred at the snow/test article interface
800 1000 during infrared deicing, but heating did occur at the
snow surface. Shortly after the infrared heater was
placed over the snow surface, snow surface
temperatures warmed to near 0°C, the top of the
snow would gradually darken as meltwater
accumulated within the snowpack, and the snow
surface would soften as indicated by tactile and
cone penetrometer evidence. Ultimately, if the
infrared heater remained in place for sufficient time
at –3°C, meltwater would reach the base of the
snowpack and run off. An experiment with 12 mm
of dry snow on the gray aluminum plates at –21°C
showed that snow could be completely removed by
the infrared system with no aid from other tech-
nologies. However, complete melt of the snow
required approximately 40 minutes. Though not

6
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
used in the 12-mm snow test, air and deicing fluid
were used to remove most snow in the 100-mm
snow depth tests, with final residuals of snow
removed by the infrared system.
Snow was also a challenge for the Air Force
Global AirPlus! truck. Wet snow 100 mm thick
proved difficult for the AirPlus! system to remove.
As with ice, forced air could not penetrate between
heavy wet snow and the substrate and lift the snow
from the surface. However, fluid injected into the
air stream acted as an abrasive, rapidly eroding the
snow, and occasionally lifting it. This approach
used significantly less deicing fluid than would
have been required if deicing fluid had been used
without air.
Thermal results
The thermal response of all test articles was
evaluated from thermocouples placed at strategic
locations on their surfaces. Thermocouples were
attached with metallic adhesive tape. In general,
tape was left with its natural metallic color exposed
to minimize infrared energy absorption and to
encourage heat to be conducted to the
thermocouple from deicing surfaces surrounding
the tape. However, tape used to fasten thermo-
couples to the two Apache helicopter blades was
painted black to match the color of the blade
surface.
In addition, a dedicated thermal experiment
was conducted on a 3-m section of a Black Hawk
helicopter blade to determine the capability of the
Ice Cat thermal control system. Fourteen thermo-
couples were placed on the blade surface, with
twelve on the blade top, and two on the blade
bottom. Thermocouples on the blade top were
distributed along the blade span, with one-third of
the thermocouples placed on the leading edge, a
third over the spar, and the remainder over the
honeycomb area aft of the spar to capture effects of
varying substrate thermal conductivity and thermal
mass. Again, all metallic tape attaching thermo-
couples to the blade surface was painted black to
match the blade. In addition to thermocouples, a
contact radiometer was used to read the effective
temperature of the snow, ice, and wet and dry blade
surface over the leading edge, spar, and honey-
comb as deicing occurred. Radiometer observa-
tions were made every 1–2 minutes. Contact radio-
meter measurements were also made on other test
articles whenever possible. Finally, a scanning
infrared camera was used to image the Black Hawk
blade test section as it was heated.
7
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
The Ice Cat was operated at several set
threshold temperatures during the experiments:
55°C for warm ice, 66°C for cold ice, and with no
thermal regulation for warm snow. The last test
was in cold conditions, but the blade was not
covered with snow to determine how rapidly the
blade would warm by the infrared heating if not
covered with ice or snow.
100
Radiometer Honeycomb
Thermocouple Honeycomb
80
Radiometer Spar
Thermocouple spar
60
Ice Cat set temperature 66oC
at 1.5 m
o
Chamber -21 C
C
40
o
20
0
-20
0 500 1000 1500 2000
Seconds
Figure 7. Cold thermal response with 6 mm of ice.
Figure 7 illustrates the period required to melt
approximately 6 mm of ice at –21°C. All
temperatures remained below the 66°C set
temperature of the Ice Cat except for the
radiometer-measured honeycomb temperature,
which reached about 72°C. Shortly after the
infrared heat was applied, ice surface temperatures
warmed to near 0°C until full melt occurred. The
rapid temperature rise at 900-s indicates that ice
has melted over the honeycomb, but the surface is
still wet. Thereafter the surface fully dries and tem-
perature continues to rise. The maximum thermo-
couple temperature over the honeycomb is about
10°C to 20°C cooler than the contact radiometer
temperature. This may be, in part, due to water that
could have been trapped within the taped thermo-
couple area. Alternatively, the black paint covering
the metallic tape may have still allowed reflection
of infrared energy, and the low thermal conduc-
tivity of the composite may have slowed heat
transport from heated areas around the tape to the
thermocouple. The contact radiometer excludes
reflections, therefore the radiometer temperatures
are probably reliable, though the actual surface
temperature may lie between the thermocouple and
radiometer-measured honeycomb temperature.
Figure 8 shows the thermal results of
unregulated heating of the Black Hawk blade by
 the Ice Cat. Fifty millimeters of snow delayed
rapid temperature rises above 0°C for about 2100 s
(35 min) until all snow had melted. Thereafter, the
radiative temperature of the honeycomb rapidly
warmed to over 100°C, and to over 80°C for the
thermocouple honeycomb temperatures. Spar tem-
peratures remained below 66°C despite the absence
of thermal control.
120
Radiometer Honeycomb
Thermocouple Honeycomb
100
Radiometer Spar
Thermocouple Spar
80
Ice Cat set temperature unregulated at 1.0 m
o
Chamber -2.8 C
60
C
o
40
20
0
0 600 1200 1800
Seconds
Figure 8. Warm thermal response with 50 mm of
snow (blade collected less snow than other
chamber test articles).
It is apparent that the Ice Cat thermal control
does reduce maximum temperatures, though tem-
peratures can still occasionally exceed the set tem-
perature. Ideally, thermal sensors could scan or
image the deicing surface, locate the warmest
temperature, and maintain that temperature below
the set temperature of the Ice Cat. This is a difficult
task considering the potential variations of surface
geometry, thermal structure, and radiative
emissivities.
As indicated above, the four painted aluminum
panels placed at each test station provided a
common test article for each deicing technology.
Thermocouples were attached only to the bottom of
each 3-mm-thick aluminum panel under the
assumption that the underside temperature closely
represents the temperature at the substrate/ice
interface. Figure 9 indicates that the thermal
response of the panels during infrared deicing was
similar in signature to the thermal response of the
Black Hawk blade. Ice temperature, as measured
by the bottom-mounted thermocouples, rapidly
warmed when the infrared heater was moved
overhead but, until complete melt had occurred, did
not warm above freezing. Surface temperatures
warmed rapidly after ice melted, and continued to
warm until the infrared heater was removed at
approximately 4500 s (about 1.25 hour after the
8
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
experiment started). All temperatures remained
below the Ice Cat set temperature. However, note
that the panel temperatures warmed only to about
–5°C to –10°C and did not warm to 0°C when
heating and ice melting started. This may be a
result of placing the thermocouples on the bottom
of the panels and not at the ice/substrate interface.
The thermocouples were exposed to the –21°C
chamber temperature and heat flowing from the ice
through the bottom of the plates was insufficient to
warm the thermocouples to 0°C. This also suggests
that the temperatures recorded on the plates after
ice melt had occurred may also be too low.
Maneuverability results
Maneuverability of the Ice Cat and the Air
Force Global AirPlus! truck were evaluated to
determine their ability to deice a complex aircraft
structure without physical contact. A surplused
UH-1 Huey helicopter fuselage served as the
maneuverability test article, with four 7.6-m rec-
tangular extruded aluminum tubes replacing the
2400 3000 two typical Huey blades to better represent the geo-
metry of modern helicopters. The helicopter was
covered with ice or snow in the same manner as
other test articles. Though the Ice Cat was the
focus of the maneuverability tests because of its
large, flat panel, the Global AirPlus! truck was also
evaluated when the Ice Cat could not successfully
remove snow. Under normal conditions glycol is
not used on helicopters, but the operation was
conducted to experience the possible future use of
helicopter-acceptable fluids that may be developed.
60
o
Ice Cat set temperature 66 C at 1.5 m
50
Chamber -21oC
40
30
C
20
o
10
0
-10
-20
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
Seconds
Figure 9. Panel temperatures during melting of 6
mm of ice on flat, gray panels. Thermocouples
were located on the underside of the panels.
Despite the size of the Ice Cat infrared emitter
panel, the unit was flexible in two axes and proved
to be quite dexterous around the helicopter. The
panel was placed almost vertically for deicing the
fuselage sides and was placed overhead for deicing
the aircraft roof and blades. In addition, the panel
could be canted to allow deicing of the tail boom
and tail rotor. Typically, because of the small size
of the Huey and the extended reach of the Ice Cat
boom, only two or three truck movements were
necessary to deice the entire aircraft.
Though all parts of the helicopter could
generally be reached with the infrared heater panel,
the panel did occasionally move too close to por-
tions of the aircraft, especially the vulnerable
blades. This is a particular concern because at some
geometries the infrared sensors in the Ice Cat panel
may not sense blade or other surface temperatures.
Viable engineering solutions may be an articulated
infrared panel, proximity distance sensing, and
scanning infrared temperature sensors.
The Air Force Global AirPlus! truck also
maneuvered successfully around the helicopter,
though reaching all portions of the aircraft required
several truck movements. Proximity to the heli-
copter was not a serious problem, but deicing the
false blades with the AirPlus! system caused con-
siderable whipping of the “blades.” Though these
blades were extruded aluminum tubing, actual
rotorblades may experience similar dynamics with
the high velocity AirPlus! blower system.
D3 Deicing Fluid
Battelle Institute’s biobased deicing fluid D3
was evaluated principally against the propylene-
glycol-based Octagon Type 1 fluid. Direct com-
parisons were made between the two fluids by
deicing identical test articles in the same conditions
with the two fluids. The advantage of the D3 fluid
is its lower toxicity and Biological Oxygen
Demand (BOD) than standard glycol-based fluids.
In all tests, the D3 fluid performed similarly to
the glycol-based fluid. Though deicing times were
similar, D3 fluid usage was greater than the glycol
fluid when deicing the wings panels and fuel
tanks.6 Though some of the additional fluid usage
may be attributable to operator experience since the
D3 was typically used before the glycol in tests, the
additional fluid required may somewhat negate the
advantage of lower BOD. Overall, the deicing rate
of the Battelle fluid was similar to that of the
glycol-based fluid.
Ice imaging
A full performance analyses of the Goodrich
and Cox ice imaging systems had not yet been
9
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
assessed at the time of this writing. The imaging
systems correctly indicated ice/no ice conditions
during many of the test runs. However, there were
conditions when the imaging systems showed no
ice remaining when the operator/observer, using
visual and tactile methods, determined that ice
remained on the test articles. We believe that some
of this may have been caused by degradation of the
ice signature by the distance and angle of the test
articles from the imagers, fog and airborne ice
particles in the chamber, residual foamy fluid on
the test articles, and vibration of the camera mount.
Costs
Though a cost analysis of each deicing techno-
logy had not been fully assessed at the time of this
writing, the infrared system uses less total energy
and impacts the environment less than its counter-
part fluid technologies. However, unless the de-
icing rates are improved, the longer deicing times
and its apparent inability to remove dense snow
will add time that can be translated to added cost to
commercial application, or delays in missions for
military applications. The infrared system will
enjoy most of its cost advantage from the
elimination or minimization of storage, collection,
and disposal cost when compared to glycol-based
deicing fluids. Most of the fluids cost comes from
collection, containment, and disposal operations.
Discussion
A complete analysis of the experiment results
will provide information necessary to evaluate the
practicality of an integrated, portable system in an
operational environment. The use of several tech-
nologies together will be necessary. If the engi-
neering challenges are overcome, funding is avail-
able to test a full, integrated prototype under field
conditions at Air Force, Army, and Navy airfields.
Early observations indicate that baseline
deicing rates from the standard Global glycol
deicing system, using experienced operators, were
rapid and essentially representative of typical
operational conditions, but large quantities of fluid
were used. Larger quantities of the biobased D3
deicing fluid were used than glycol when applied
with the Global truck for the same deicing perfor-
mance. Forced air was rapid with dry snow, and
somewhat less effective with heavy, wet snow.
Forced air was generally ineffective against ice
unless the air was able to penetrate the ice/substrate
interface and lift the ice. Fluid injection into the
forced air stream speeded removal of snow and ice
because, in effect, the fluid served as an abrasive
media. Overall, the infrared system was slower
than the heated deicing fluid or fluid-injected
blower. This is especially true for deep snow. The
infrared energy appears to melt deep snow from the
top down, saturating the snow in the process, but
not penetrating to the snow/substrate interface. A
more detailed study is required to develop a better
understanding of the penetration of infrared energy
into the ice and snow, and how it affects temper-
atures at the ice/substrate or snow/substrate inter-
face. The slowness of the infrared deicing system
was attributed, in part, to a restriction in the gas
supply system preventing the catalytic heaters from
reaching maximum temperature. The large infrared
emitter proved to be sufficiently agile to accom-
plish deicing around most aircraft geometries.
Conclusions
Appropriate technologies are, in part, a
function of the weather conditions, or climate of a
location where deicing occurs. For example,
locations receiving more frequent frost and
freezing rain events and less snow may benefit
significantly from an infrared system even if it
does prove to be slower than other technologies
after hardware upgrades. However, locations well
endowed with snow may not benefit significantly
from infrared systems. An optimum strategy may
be to adapt the system to the climate, rather than to
require one technology suite to “fit all.” Environ-
mental drivers will continue to pressure both
military and commercial operators to find alterna-
tives to present fluids. Many airports are facing
litigation precipitated from the use of glycol-based
fluid to deice parked air vehicles.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank D. Bell and the crew of the
McKinley Climatic Laboratory for support, J.
White and photo crew of the FAA Technical
10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Center for experimental and photographic support,
Cox and Company and Goodrich Sensors Division
for supplying ice imaging systems, A. Lozada-Ruiz
of WPAFB, R. Pitzen and MAJ J. Stinson of
Brooks AFB, R. Giroux of Elmendorf AFB, SSG
K. Spears of Dyess AFB, N. Conkle and S. Kuczek
of Battelle, R. Wendrzycki and R. Gain from the
U.S. Navy, MAJ P. O’Brien of the United States
Military Academy, J. Ferrandini of Octagon
Process, Inc., and R. White and W. Brasses of
Infrared Technologies. Funding was provided by
Headquarters Air Force Materiel Command, Direc-
torate of the Command Civil Engineer, Environ-
mental Division.
References
1. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000,
Preliminary Data Summary, Airport Deicing
Operations (Revised). EPA-821-R-00-016.
2. Wyderski, M., L. Gulley, and C. Ryerson, 2001,
Mobile Integrated Infrared Aircraft Deicing
System. In Proceedings of the 6th Annual Joint
Services Pollution Prevention and Hazardous
Waste Management Conference and Exhibition,
20–23 August, San Antonio, 8 p.
3. Peck, L., C. Ryerson, and J. Martel, 2002, Army
Aviation Icing. ERDC/CRREL Report TR-02-13,
128 p.
4. Ryerson, C., T. Gilligan, and G. Koenig, 1999,
Evaluation of Three Helicopter Preflight Deicing
Techniques. 37th AIAA Aerospace Sciences
Meeting and Exhibit, AIAA-99-0499, 11–14
January, Reno, 9 p.
5. Gray, D.M., and D.H. Male, 1981, Handbook of
Snow. Pergamon Press, Toronto, 776 p.
6. Stinson, J., H.N. Conkle, and S.F. Kuczek, 2002,
Biodegradable Deicing Fluid Demonstration. Draft
Phase II Interim ESTCP Report, Brooks AFB and
Battelle.