Anti-icing performance on aluminum surfaces and proposed model for freezing time calculation
Authors: Su Shiung Lam
Van-Huy Nguyen
Thanh-Binh Nguyen
Quyet Van Le
Thi Hong Hanh Vu
Hien Thu Pham
Ba Duc Nguyen
Soo Young Kim
Mohammadreza Shokouhimehr
Dai-Viet N Vo
Journal: Scientific Reports (2021)
Discipline: Multidisciplinary
Keywords: superhydrophobic surface; anti-icing performance; hierarchical structure; wet etching method; chemical compound coating
Affiliations: Department for Management of Science and Technology Development, Ton Duc Thang University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. ., Faculty of Applied Sciences, Ton Duc Thang University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. ., Basic Science Department, Tan Trao University, Tuyen Quang, Vietnam., Surface Analysis Department, Samsung Display Vietnam, Bac Ninh, Vietnam., Pyrolysis Technology Research Group, Higher Institution Centre of Excellence (HICoE), Institute of Tropical Aquaculture and Fisheries (AKUATROP), Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, 21030, Kuala Terengganu, Terengganu, Malaysia., Center of Excellence for Green Energy and Environmental Nanomaterials (CE@GrEEN), Nguyen Tat Thanh University, 300A Nguyen Tat Thanh, District 4, Ho Chi Minh City, 755414, Vietnam., Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Research Institute of Advanced Materials, Seoul National University, Seoul, 08826, Republic of Korea., Physics Faculty, Thai Nguyen University of Education, Thai Nguyen, Vietnam., Physics Faculty, Thai Nguyen University of Education, Thai Nguyen, Vietnam. ., Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Institute of Green Manufacturing Technology, Korea University, 145 Anam-ro, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, 02841, Republic of Korea. ., Institute of Research and Development, Duy Tan University, Da Nang, 550000, Vietnam. .

Abstract:  In this work, we proposed a facile approach to fabricate a superhydrophobic surface for anti-icing performance in terms of adhesive strength and freezing time. A hierarchical structure was generated on as-received Al plates using a wet etching method and followed with a low energy chemical compound coating. Surfaces after treatment exhibited the great water repellent properties with a high contact angle and extremely low sliding angle. An anti-icing investigation was carried out by using a custom-built apparatus and demonstrated the expected low adhesion and freezing time for icephobic applications. In addition, we proposed a model for calculating the freezing time. The experimented results were compared with theoretical calculation and demonstrated the good agreement, illustrating the importance of theoretical contribution in design icephobic surfaces. Therefore, this study provides a guideline for the understanding of icing phenomena and designing of icephobic surfaces. 

Retracted: No

PubPeer comments:
 Two papers feature identical images of surfaces subject to distinct surface processing testing techniques. It is not possible for both papers to be accurate given distinct descriptions. One author is common to both papers. Can the authors explain?  https: www.nature.com articles s41598-020-80886-x#citeas https: www.sciencedirect.com science article pii S1226086X18305793#!! , 
 I am the common author of two papers. Thank you very much for pointing out this oversight of ours works. Actually, both papers feature identical images using the same fabrication techniques on Al substrate. As you can see, in the method section, we have cited the previous one as ref 24 as preparing procedure. Because 2 papers developed from the same materials, we unintentionally use the same SEM images. On a positive note, these do not directly affect the hypothesis and conclusion of our work when two papers consider totally different aspects. We will supply an erratum to correct our mistake. Once again, thank you so much for your consideration. , 
 I am the common author of two papers. Thank you very much for pointing out this oversight of ours works. Actually, both papers feature identical images using the same fabrication techniques on Al substrate: sandblasting (griding) and then wet-etching (HCl solution). We are sorry for the lack of information in the description of the fabrication process such as  0.1 M hydrochloric acid solution containing IPA and DI water in the Journal of Industrial Engineering paper, or  sandblasting work on Scientific Report paper. On a positive note, these do not directly affect our hypothesis when they consider totally different aspects. We will do our best to making a checking process to prevent it from happening again. Once again, thank you so much for your consideration! , 
 #2 Could you please add more details to the story? Specifically, would you kindly confirm or refute my observation that the 2019 image is more stretched horizontally than the 2021 one? If I am correct, I struggle to understand how that happened unintentionally. Also it is noteworthy that the affiliations of those responsible for experiments are completely non-overlapping. (See, e.g., the contribution statement for the 2021 paper). It makes even harder to conceive the mix-up of data presumably coming from different labs. , 
 I am a little bit confused by this response. The paper relates to two different coating de-icing procedures I am unclear on how these micrographs can then be identical. How does the hypothesis (and integrity of the work) therefore remain valid? In addition the images have been distorted and cropped. A second image in the paper is also identical. See below.  , 
 The microscope image in the most recent paper features an information bar including the acronym KIMM . Which presumably stands for Korea Institute of Machinery and Materials . There is no author with this affiliation on this paper (there is on the paper from 2019). How can this be achieved mistakenly?  ,