A Proposal for Laser De-Icing and Anti-icing

[OVERTALK]

A Proposal for Laser De-Icing and Anti-icing

LINK-1 (http://www.iasa-intl.com/folders/belfast/laissez-faire.html)

and a 1.2mb download zipfile at:

LINK-2 (http://www.iasa-intl.com/folders/belfast/asw-laissez.zip)


The technology would seem to be feasible but laser energy spraying the exterior surfaces of an airplane for de-icing might present some safety issues (particularly if used for de-icing on the ground before flight).

However, for inflight use, I'd have thought that an application would be discrete enough to "treat" precise areas of wings and engines/props/empennage without constituting a hazard to passengers....... and therefore without needing the laser itself to be enclosed.

Any laser experts out there with a view?

OverTALK

[Carnage Matey!]

I haven't read the article yet ( can't be bothered to unzip it) but my initial thoughts are that the concept sounds a bit dodgy. Lasers are by definition highly focussed beams of light. Presumably any laser de-icing would require thermal removal of the ice by laser heating. Achieving consistent laser coverage of a complex shape such as a wing from a mobile unit operating outdoors seems like a rather complex, slow and expensive task when compared to hosing the wing down with diluted hot type I fluid. Thats before we start on the risk to eyesight from using high powered lasers in that sort of environment.

The anti-icing idea has me completely vexed. I can't see how a laser can provide any form of protection against precipitation once it has been removed, short of heating the skin which really wouldn't last very long.:confused:

[UNCTUOUS]

Carnage

The article's at the link and it's not zipped.

Maybe if you read it Carnage - and you'd then see that it's an integral onboard system that's being proposed.

Edited. Please keep remarks here a bit more polite.

Laser welding using CNC controllers can handle some very complex shapes. The proposal sounds feasible but laser safety concerns normally put paid to anything that might conceivably constitute an optical hazard. Not sure whether near infra-red lasers fall into that category.

However from a pure functionality point of view it should work (i.e. keep surfaces ice-free airborne and provide an incredibly economic and ecologically friendly means of de-icing preflight).
Keeping props individually de-iced might be a challenge - so they might have to be de-iced as a disk. But if interupters could be made to fire machine-guns through props in 1915, I'm sure that boffins can figure out how to laser zap a moving set of prop blades.

[Carnage Matey!]

OK well I admit its been some years since I studied optoelectronics and laser devices but having read the report I still think it's rubbish. Bearing in mind the number of big assumptions made (4 I believe) the entire scheme relies on being able to find a laser which will melt ice reliably at a distance of many feet in precipitation conditions, namely cloud, rain and snow, all of which reflect and refract laser light.

I am well aware CNC laser controllers can handle complex shapes but these generally utilise a moving welding head and require very close proximity to the workpiece to effect a good weld. In laser terms that is a whole world removed from the ability to direct a laser from many feet away to a remote point to effect thermal deicing. There is also a fifth unstated brash assumption that melting a strip of ice will lead to airflow assisted complete deicing, as opposed to the water running back and refreezing. The author also skips the issue of calibration of the device. Given the accuracy required will it self calibrate each flight, and will it be required to be recailbrated each time the wing surface receives a bash?

There is an acronym commonly used in engineering:KISS - Keep It Simple Stupid. Deicing boots and pneumatic thermal anti-icing are proven designs and cost effective. Now we have a proposal to use 'Death Star' technology on small (and relatively inexpensive) passenger aircraft.


A couple of quotes from the author:
. My only personal exposure to laser technology in an academic environment was during visits to WRELADS at DRCS
However my technical knowledge of the capabilities of different types of lasers is limited.

I'll look forward to using airborne laser deicing right after I receive my laser phaser pistol to fight off hijackers with.

[ARINC]

This looks quite impressive, I think it's operational at Oslo.

Infrared de-icing (http://www.radianteurope.no/)

Not for airborne use you understand.

[Loose rivets]

Just a gut feeling, but I think the first idea is somewhat based on wishful thinking.

If I were to be asked to design such a system, I would attempt to put strings of smaller devices along the relevant surfaces...imbedded in the surface like...erm, rivets. :O

Relatively low levels of energy would cause the ice to melt at the adhesion point, because there would be no need to heat the metal.

It would be a difficult system to retro-fit.

[pinkpilot150]

I don't think the safety concerns raised hold much water. When the aircraft is operating, there are plenty of things that can cause damage to people on the outside life engine intakes, radar emmisions. The system would have to be mechanically limited in its trajectory, and have similar safety levels to that used on the radar system etc?

Regarding "I am well aware CNC laser controllers can handle complex shapes but these generally utilise a moving welding head and require very close proximity to the workpiece to effect a good weld. In laser terms that is a whole world removed from the ability to direct a laser from many feet away to a remote point to effect thermal deicing. There is also a fifth unstated brash assumption that melting a strip of ice will lead to airflow assisted complete deicing, as opposed to the water running back and refreezing. The author also skips the issue of calibration of the device. Given the accuracy required will it self calibrate each flight, and will it be required to be recailbrated each time the wing surface receives a bash?" - see the link below!

http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/abl/

Using compressor bleed air to de-ice in-flight is very heavy on the engine sfc, and the primes are working hard to develop systems to reduce the arcraft consumption (if not eliminate it completely). and as it states in the report, the smaller jets just can't afford the toll it takes on engine performance.

I would say watch this space. Regarding the KISS theory - in which industry does logic come into it?

[OVERTALK]

I doubt that Boeing would lack the technical expertise or incentive to follow through - or licence their technology to someone else. They are experts in the laser field - and remember that most great leaps forward have traditionally come from military- or NASA-developed technologies.

http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/ic/leos/index.html