Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 19, Issue 1, pp 73–81 | Cite as

Adhesion of ice to a flexible substrate

  • E. H. Andrews
  • H. A. Majid
  • N. A. Lockington


The adhesion of ice to a flexible substrate, polyurethane elastomer, has been studied using the Andrews-Stevenson test procedure which involves the pressurization to failure of an enclosed interfacial crack. The temperature, rate of pressurization and substrate layer thickness were varied and the failure energy (critical energy release rate) determined. If energy release from the flexible substrate is ignored an apparent failure energy is obtained which first increases and then decreases as the layer thickness rises from zero to 4 mm. This thickness effect results in a large variation in the pressure needed to produce failure, and is thus important in relation to the ice-release properties of the substrate. It is shown that the thickness effect can be explained quantitatively in terms of the energy release from the flexible substrate, which, in turn, depends on its visco-elastic properties. The true failure energy is derived and is also found to correlate with the visco-elastic response of the rubber. Finally, these ideas are used to explain the effects of rate and temperature on the conditions of failure.


Polymer Rubber Layer Thickness Release Rate Polyurethane 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    E. H. Andrews andN. A. Lockington,J. Mater Sci. 18 (1983) 1455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    P. V. Hobbs, “Ice Physics” (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1974).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    H. H. G. Jellinek,Proc. Phys. Soc. (Lond.) 71 (1958) 797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    I. Hawkes andM. Mellor,J. Glaciology 11 (1972) 103.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    H. C. Wu, K. J. Chang andJ. Schwarz,Eng. Fract. Mech. 8 (1976) 365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    L. W. Gold,Canadian J. Phys. 41 (1963) 1712.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    H. H. G. Jellinek,J. Coll. Interface Sci. 25 (1967) 192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    D. J. Goodman andD. Tabor,J. Glaciology 21 (1978) 651.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    D. J. Goodman, “Physics and Mechanics of Ice”, edited by P. Tryde (Springer Verlag, Berlin, 1980) p. 129.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    H. W. Liu andK. J. Miller,J. Glaciology 22 (1979) 135.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    E. H. Andrews andA. Stevenson,J. Mater. Sci. 13 (1978) 1680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    E. H. Andrews, He Pingshen andC. Vlachos,Proc. Roy. Soc. (Lond.) A. 381 (1982) 345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    H. Dannenberg,J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 14 (1971) 125.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    S. Bennett, K. De Vries andM. L. Williams,Int. J. Fract. 10 (1974) 33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    E. H. Andrews andY. Fukahori,J. Mater. Sci. 12 (1977) 1307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Chapman and Hall Ltd 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. H. Andrews
    • 1
  • H. A. Majid
    • 1
  • N. A. Lockington
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of MaterialsQueen Mary CollegeLondonUK

Personalised recommendations