Scribd
Upload
25 views

Ice Protection Systems

Uploaded by

Oscar Kobogau
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
25 views

Ice Protection Systems

Uploaded by

Oscar Kobogau
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Ice Protection Systems

Description
Aircraft and engine ice protection systems are generally of two
designs: either they remove ice after it has formed, or they
prevent it from forming. The former type of system is referred to
as a de-icing system and the latter as an anti-icing system.

De-Icing Systems
A de-icing system has two very attractive attributes. First, it can
utilize a variety of means to transfer the energy used to remove
the ice. This allows the consideration of mechanical (principally
pneumatic), electrical and thermal methods. The second attribute
is that it is energy efficient, requiring energy only periodically
when ice is being removed, with some mechanical designs
requiring relatively little energy overall. This is a significant
consideration when designing ice protection for aircraft with
limited excess power.

The principal drawback to the de-icing system is that, by default,


the aircraft will operate with ice accretions for the majority of the
time in icing conditions. The only time it will be free of ice
accretions will be the time during and immediately after the
cycling of the de-ice system. This requires an understanding on
the part of the designer and the pilot of what effects the ice
accretions will have on aircraft performance, both prior to and
during system operation.

Any design which utilizes either a mechanical means of breaking


the bond of ice to the surface, or which operates on a periodic
cycle, is necessarily a de-ice system.

Anti-Icing Systems
Anti-icing systems reverse this paradigm. Properly used, they
prevent the formation of ice continuously, resulting in a clean
wing with no aerodynamic penalties. An anti-icing system must
have a means of continuously delivering energy or chemical flow
to a surface in order to prevent the bonding of ice. The typical
thermal anti-icing system does this at significant energy expense.
The concept is not viable for aircraft that do not have the
requisite excess energy available during all flight phases. An
exception to this is the use of a chemical system such as TKS.

Design Considerations
It is not uncommon for a system that is designed as an anti-ice
system to be used initially as a de-ice system. For example, the
manufacturer may recommend that the wing thermal ice
protection system be selected on when ice accretion has been
detected, thus initially bypassing the anti-ice capability. Once
selected on, the system is usually left on until icing conditions
have been departed, allowing the anti-icing capability to function
as intended.

The selection of system design and the determination of


operating procedures are based on the manufacturer’s
understanding of the tolerance to ice accretion exhibited by the
particular aerodynamic surface. For example, turbojet/turbofan
engine inlets are almost universally protected by thermal anti-
icing systems. These systems are nearly always used in an anti-
icing manner, which is to say they are selected ON upon
encountering visible moisture and crossing below a temperature
threshold. This approach is due to the intolerance of the
compressor inlet to ice ingestion; an imprecise de-ice cycle would
lead to damage and/or loss of power.

On the other hand, the same airplane may use a thermal anti-ice
system for the protection of the wings, but the manufacturer may
recommend that the system not be activated until ice accretion is
noted on some representative surface. The judgment here is that
the aerodynamic penalties associated with such “pre-activation”
ice are acceptable and pose no safety hazard.

Any time a design utilizes an ice detection system as a primary


and automatic means of operating the ice protection system, the
system becomes a de-ice system. An automatic means of
activation will necessarily have a threshold for triggering both
activation of the system and de-activation of the system. This is
almost universally accomplished by means of an ice detector,
which, as the name implies, must have some ice present to
detect. Thus, the system is not activated until ice has accreted.
Once the ice has been removed, the system automatically
terminates, and awaits another ice detection trigger before
cycling again. This is the de-ice cycle.

Thermal Systems
A thermal anti-ice system is designed to operate in one of two
ways: fully evaporative or running wet. In the former case,
sufficient energy is provided to cause impinging supercooled
water to completely evaporate. This has an obvious advantage of
protecting the aft, unheated portion of the airfoil, since the
evaporated water cannot re-condense before the airfoil has
passed. It is a very effective means of ice protection, but the
concept requires a great deal of excess energy.

A running wet system can only prevent impinging water from


freezing. This requires rather less energy. However, it can fail to
prevent runback ice, which forms when the running water passes
aft of the heated surface and freezes.

Any fully evaporative system will necessarily transition through a


running wet phase as it both heats and cools. The ideal method
for operating a fully evaporative system is to activate it prior to
entering icing conditions, thus allowing the surface to stabilize at
the required temperature. Many contemporary designs feature a
minimum engine rotor speed that is automatically limited when
ice protection is selected on. This ensures adequate heat to the
surfaces, but may also impact descent planning.

A thermal de-icing system requires much less energy. Using


either engine bleed air, exhaust-heated air, or electrical heating,
this system is intended only to periodically break the bond
between accreted ice and the surface. A typical example would
be propeller de-ice systems, which use electrically heated pads on
the inboard leading edges of the propeller blades.

Pneumatic De-Ice Boots


A very common de-icing system utilizes pneumatically inflated
rubber boots on the leading edges of airfoil surfaces. This
typically includes the wings and horizontal stabilizer, but may also
include struts, cargo pods, or even antennae. The system uses
relatively low pressure air to rapidly inflate and deflate the boot.
This is usually done in a sequence of segments, for example, the
outer wings followed by the inner wings followed by the horizontal
stabilizer. Depending on the manufacturer's specifications, the
system may be operated either automatically, through a timing
circuit, or manually, using a cockpit control to initiate the boot
cycle sequence.

Early pneumatic boot designs had relatively low volume air


supplies to draw from, and were slower to inflate and deflate. A
phenomenon which was thought to be occasionally observed with
these systems was known as "ice bridging", in which the boot
expanded under the ice and stretched it without breaking its
structure. This led to a space beneath the ice shape which
allowed the boot to inflate and deflate with no effect. The problem
was addressed by allowing a particular thickness of ice to develop
before inflating the boot. Once the requisite thickness was
attained, the boot inflation would shatter the ice and clear it off
the surface. At least with contemporary, rapidly inflating systems,
there is almost no evidence other than anecdotal which supports
the existence of this phenomenon. That said, research dating
from the mid 1950's and validated within the last few years has
indicated that several uniform cycles of boot inflation/deflation
may be required to thoroughly shed an ice accretion. It is likely
that the results observed after the first couple of cycles may be
less than satisfactory. It becomes extremely important to adhere
to the manufacturer's recommendations for system operation as
found in the relevant Pilot Operating Handbook or Flight Crew
Operating Manual (or their equivalents). Equally important is the
correct maintenance of the boots, including adequate treatment
with restorative substances and inspection for pinholes and other
damage.

You might also like