Induction Heating Characteristics of Electroless Ni-Coated CFRP for Deicing and Anti-Icing
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Title: Induction Heating Characteristics of Electroless Ni-Coated CFRP for deicing And Anti-Icing
Reviewer comments:
The manuscript provides a comprehensive overview of the importance of flight safety, ice accumulation, and current de-icing methods. It also introduces the concept of using electrothermal de-icing techniques and discusses various research efforts in this field. This manuscript has been the focus on Induction Heating Characteristics of Electroless Ni-Coated CFRP for deicing And Anti-Icing, however I feel that the paper could be improved. Therefore, could you consider some points below for further improvement.
1. Abstract: Overall, the abstract provides a concise yet comprehensive overview of the study's objectives, methodology, and key findings. It effectively highlights the significance of the research in addressing aircraft deicing challenges and presents the nickel-plated CFRP material as a promising solution. Good job!
2. Introduction: The introduction is generally well-written and informative, but there are some areas where clarity and flow could be improved. However, please consider some improvement at the points below:
a) The introduction flows well, therefore please outlining the significance of ice accumulation, current de-icing methods, and the need for new techniques due to changes in aircraft materials. This logical progression helps the reader understand the context and importance of the study.
b) Please introducing specific incidents or studies (e.g., Iran's Aceman Airlines accident), providing a brief context or description would enhance understanding. For example, briefly explain the circumstances of the accident involving Iran's Aceman Airlines.
c) The author have discussing various research efforts related to electrothermal de-icing, therefore please provide a brief overview of what each study focused on. This would help the reader understand the breadth of research in the field and how your study fits in.
d) Explicitly state the research gap that your study aims to address. This could be positioned at the end of the introduction to clearly define your study's contribution. For instance, "Despite the promising nature of electrothermal de-icing techniques, no attempts have been made to electroless deposit nickel on CFRP materials as a heater for aircraft deicing. This study aims to fill this gap by plating nickel particles on CFRP surfaces and evaluating their de-icing performance."
e) Please consider adding a short transition sentence at the end of the introduction to smoothly lead the reader into the methodology section. This would make the transition between the introduction and the specific study design more seamless.
3. Material & Method: This section provides a comprehensive overview of your experimental setup and procedures. Therefore, the author should ensure consistent formatting, units, and symbols. Besides, the author also should further improve the clarity and professionalism of the text.
4. Results and Discussion: Overall, this section effectively presents and interprets author experimental findings. Otherwise, please ensure the inclusion of the referenced figures and diagrams, maintain consistent formatting and language, and consider incorporating in-text citations where appropriate.
5. Conclusion: The conclusion effectively summarises the study's outcomes, potential applications, and implications. It provides a sense of closure to the research and highlights its significance in the context of aircraft deicing solutions.
6. Similarity: 19%
a) Similarity of this manuscript good.
7. Language: The language used is clear and to the point, which is ideal for this manuscript narrative.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Authors of this manuscript suggested and developed the well-known idea about deicing aircrafts by heating their surfaces. The main input of the approach is a treatment of parts prepared from composite materials (carbon fibers as reinforcing phase and epoxy resin as a binder, CFRP) by electro-conductive metal, partly nickel. It was elaborated the scheme of coating the surface of model substrates (prepregs, consisting of five layers of CFRP with different orientation of carbon fibers) by means of their preliminary grinding on 3.5x3.5 pieces, their cleaning ultrasound treatment in acetone-ethanol medium, and etching with ammonium fluoride and hydrofluoric acid. The etching procedure led to creation on the substrate surface of irregular tiny pits, which played important role in further introducing and crystallization of Ni atoms. Then the etched substrates were immersed in the NiSO4 and NaBH4 solution for electroless nickel plating. Adding the hypophosphite allows for partial reducing Ni ions to Ni atoms, which more-less uniformly were located in the rough surface, predominantly in pits. Thermal treatment results in Ni and P crystallization in different forms, including pure Ni and its phosphides. As a result, the Ni-coated CFRPs were prepared, which contained 0.08 g, 0.11 g, 0.14 g, 0.17 g, and 0.21 g of Ni.
The prepared samples were characterized by morphological images, hydrophobic properties and adhesion of coating to CFRP surface. Almost all tests were positive. At last, authors studied electroconductivity and heating performance. In the first case, it was shown, that the introduction of nickel plating improves the surface conductivity of CFRP. In the second one, two methods were tested: inductive and electrical heating. The inductive heating allows for reaching the equilibrium temperature of 185oC at voltage of 30 V, and at electrical excitation - ~80oC at voltage of 1.5 V. As a result, for intensive inductive heating it takes 110 seconds to melt the ice layer with a thickness of 30 mm. In addition, the cycling of inductive heating was tested with the positive result. So, infrared heating is more efficient for preflight processing, while the electrical one can be switch on by pilot during the flight.
All above mentioned relates to advantages of this manuscript, but there exist some notes and doubts which are disclosed below.
1. The Introduction is very schematic. It seems to me that authors should underline one or the other methods of deicing, indicating advantages and disadvantages.
2. The used prepregs are hidden under aircrafts painting. To be sure that the described principle of deicing works, the substrate should be tested under paint.
3. According to chemical formulas (1) – (7), the phosphorus participated in the substrate surface. What is its role in possible chemical transformations of Ni and its phosphides? By the w2ay, formulas (6) and (7) were not discussed.
4. I am not sure that the word “face” in page 5 is correct. It should be “phase”!
5. The image in Fig. 3b is not illustrative.
6. The discussion of formulas (8) – (10) is superficially, especially in the lack of explanation after enumeration of parameters (lines 276 and 279).
7. Suggestion about “eddy current” has not confirmation.
8. When authors say in Conclusion “our polymer”, what they keep in mind?
9. And the last note: I am not sure that “fight” is correct word. Sooner, it must be “flight”.
Authors of this manuscript suggested and developed the well-known idea about deicing aircrafts by heating their surfaces. The main input of the approach is a treatment of parts prepared from composite materials (carbon fibers as reinforcing phase and epoxy resin as a binder, CFRP) by electro-conductive metal, partly nickel. It was elaborated the scheme of coating the surface of model substrates (prepregs, consisting of five layers of CFRP with different orientation of carbon fibers) by means of their preliminary grinding on 3.5x3.5 pieces, their cleaning ultrasound treatment in acetone-ethanol medium, and etching with ammonium fluoride and hydrofluoric acid. The etching procedure led to creation on the substrate surface of irregular tiny pits, which played important role in further introducing and crystallization of Ni atoms. Then the etched substrates were immersed in the NiSO4 and NaBH4 solution for electroless nickel plating. Adding the hypophosphite allows for partial reducing Ni ions to Ni atoms, which more-less uniformly were located in the rough surface, predominantly in pits. Thermal treatment results in Ni and P crystallization in different forms, including pure Ni and its phosphides. As a result, the Ni-coated CFRPs were prepared, which contained 0.08 g, 0.11 g, 0.14 g, 0.17 g, and 0.21 g of Ni.
The prepared samples were characterized by morphological images, hydrophobic properties and adhesion of coating to CFRP surface. Almost all tests were positive. At last, authors studied electroconductivity and heating performance. In the first case, it was shown, that the introduction of nickel plating improves the surface conductivity of CFRP. In the second one, two methods were tested: inductive and electrical heating. The inductive heating allows for reaching the equilibrium temperature of 185oC at voltage of 30 V, and at electrical excitation - ~80oC at voltage of 1.5 V. As a result, for intensive inductive heating it takes 110 seconds to melt the ice layer with a thickness of 30 mm. In addition, the cycling of inductive heating was tested with the positive result. So, infrared heating is more efficient for preflight processing, while the electrical one can be switch on by pilot during the flight.
All above mentioned relates to advantages of this manuscript, but there exist some notes and doubts which are disclosed below.
1. The Introduction is very schematic. It seems to me that authors should underline one or the other methods of deicing, indicating advantages and disadvantages.
2. The used prepregs are hidden under aircrafts painting. To be sure that the described principle of deicing works, the substrate should be tested under paint.
3. According to chemical formulas (1) – (7), the phosphorus participated in the substrate surface. What is its role in possible chemical transformations of Ni and its phosphides? By the w2ay, formulas (6) and (7) were not discussed.
4. I am not sure that the word “face” in page 5 is correct. It should be “phase”!
5. The image in Fig. 3b is not illustrative.
6. The discussion of formulas (8) – (10) is superficially, especially in the lack of explanation after enumeration of parameters (lines 276 and 279).
7. Suggestion about “eddy current” has not confirmation.
8. When authors say in Conclusion “our polymer”, what they keep in mind?
9. And the last note: I am not sure that “fight” is correct word. Sooner, it must be “flight”.
Almost perfect.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
