Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Cationic Chain-Growth Polymerization: Mechanism00:57

Cationic Chain-Growth Polymerization: Mechanism

The cationic polymerization mechanism consists of three steps: initiation, propagation, and termination. In the initiation step of the polymerization process, the π bond of a monomer gets protonated by the Lewis acid catalyst, which is formed from boron trifluoride and water. The protonation of the π bond generates a carbocation stabilized by the electron‐donating group. In the propagation step, the π bond of the second monomer acts as a nucleophile and attacks the generated carbocation,...
Anionic Chain-Growth Polymerization: Overview01:20

Anionic Chain-Growth Polymerization: Overview

The polymerization process that involves carbanion as an intermediate is called anionic polymerization. It is also a type of addition or chain-growth polymerization. Anionic polymerization gets initiated by a strong nucleophile such as an organolithium or a Grignard reagent. The most commonly used initiator for anionic polymerization is butyl lithium. Monomers involved in anionic polymerization must possess a vinyl group bonded to one or two electron-withdrawing groups. For instance,...
Anionic Chain-Growth Polymerization: Mechanism01:04

Anionic Chain-Growth Polymerization: Mechanism

The mechanism for anionic chain-growth polymerization involves initiation, propagation, and termination steps. In the initiation step, a nucleophilic anion, such as butyl lithium, initiates the polymerization process by attacking the π bond of the vinylic monomer. As a result, a carbanion, stabilized by the electron‐withdrawing group, is generated. The resulting carbanion acts as a Michael donor in the propagation step and attacks the second vinylic monomer, which acts as a Michael acceptor.
Polymers: Molecular Weight Distribution01:10

Polymers: Molecular Weight Distribution

For any given polymer, the weight average molecular weight (Mw) is higher than, if not equal to, the number average molecular weight (Mn). The only situation in which the weight average molecular weight and the number average molecular weight are equal is when a polymer consists only of chains with equal molecular weight. However, this never happens in a synthetic polymer, since it is difficult to control the polymerization process up to a molecular level with accuracy to a hundred percent.
Characteristics and Nomenclature of Copolymers01:24

Characteristics and Nomenclature of Copolymers

Copolymers are the products obtained from the polymerization of multiple monomer species. So, in a polymer chain itself, there can be multiple repeating units that come from different monomers. The process of synthesizing a polymer from different monomer species is called copolymerization. When two monomers are involved, the polymer is known as a bipolymer. Polymers with three and four monomers are termed terpolymers and quaterpolymers, respectively. Figure 1 depicts the copolymerization of...
Molecular Weight of Step-Growth Polymers01:08

Molecular Weight of Step-Growth Polymers

Step growth polymerization involves bi or multifunctional monomers. Bifunctional monomers react to form linear step growth polymers, whereas multifunctional monomers react to form non-linear or branched polymers.
As the step-growth polymerization involves step-wise condensation of monomers, the molecular weight also builds up eventually. Consequently, high molecular weight polymers are obtained at the late stages of the polymerization, where 99% of monomers have been consumed.
The extent of the...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Recent Trends in Manufacturing of Thermoplastic Sandwich Structures: A Review.

Materials (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same author

UV-Crosslinking Effects on the Physicochemical and Rheological Properties of Fish Collagen Ink for 3D Bioprinting.

Polymers·2026
Same author

Advances in Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymers.

Materials (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same author

Effect of PET Micro/Nanoplastics on Model Freshwater Zooplankton.

Polymers·2025
Same author

A Sustainable Microwave-Assisted Process for Chemical Recycling and the Reuse of Epoxy Resin Matrices.

Polymers·2025
Same author

Interaction of Micro- and Nanoplastics with Enzymes: The Case of Carbonic Anhydrase.

International journal of molecular sciences·2024

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 27, 2026

Solvent Bonding for Fabrication of PMMA and COP Microfluidic Devices
04:54

Solvent Bonding for Fabrication of PMMA and COP Microfluidic Devices

Published on: January 17, 2017

Mode I Debonding Characterisation in Polymer-Based Sandwich Structures: A Review of Experimental Methods.

Amal Alliyankal Vijayakumar1, Francesca Lionetto1, Alfonso Maffezzoli1

  • 1Department of Engineering for Innovation, University of Salento, Via per Monteroni, 73100 Lecce, Italy.

Polymers
|June 26, 2026
PubMed
Summary

This review assesses experimental methods for characterizing Mode I debonding in polymer sandwich structures. It highlights limitations of standard tests and suggests improved setups for accurate fracture toughness evaluation.

Keywords:
climbing drum peeldouble cantilever beaminterfacial failuremode I characterisationpolymer sandwich structuresingle cantilever beamskin/core debonding

More Related Videos

Fabrication of Large-area Free-standing Ultrathin Polymer Films
10:08

Fabrication of Large-area Free-standing Ultrathin Polymer Films

Published on: June 3, 2015

Covalent Attachment of Single Molecules for AFM-based Force Spectroscopy
10:37

Covalent Attachment of Single Molecules for AFM-based Force Spectroscopy

Published on: March 16, 2020

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 27, 2026

Solvent Bonding for Fabrication of PMMA and COP Microfluidic Devices
04:54

Solvent Bonding for Fabrication of PMMA and COP Microfluidic Devices

Published on: January 17, 2017

Fabrication of Large-area Free-standing Ultrathin Polymer Films
10:08

Fabrication of Large-area Free-standing Ultrathin Polymer Films

Published on: June 3, 2015

Covalent Attachment of Single Molecules for AFM-based Force Spectroscopy
10:37

Covalent Attachment of Single Molecules for AFM-based Force Spectroscopy

Published on: March 16, 2020

Area of Science:

  • Materials Science
  • Mechanical Engineering
  • Fracture Mechanics

Background:

  • Polymer sandwich structures offer lightweight advantages but are limited by interfacial failure, particularly Mode I skin/core debonding.
  • Understanding and accurately characterizing Mode I fracture toughness is crucial for enhancing the structural reliability of these materials.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To critically review and compare experimental methodologies for Mode I fracture characterization in polymer sandwich structures.
  • To evaluate the influence of geometric factors, processing conditions, and material properties on test outcomes.
  • To identify limitations of current standards and propose improvements for more reliable testing.

Main Methods:

  • Comprehensive assessment of established and alternative experimental setups: Double Cantilever Beam (DCB), Single Cantilever Beam (SCB), and Climbing Drum Peel (CDP) tests.
  • Analysis of ASTM D8637/D8637M standard and modified configurations (e.g., DCB-UBM, SCB-roller base).
  • Investigation into data reduction techniques including Modified Beam Theory (MBT), Area Method (AM), and Cohesive Zone Models (CZM).

Main Results:

  • Conventional DCB tests can induce mixed-mode effects; modified DCB-UBM achieves near-pure Mode I but is complex.
  • SCB with a roller base shows superior performance over standardized flexible-rod setups, especially for non-linear responses.
  • Reduced-dimension specimens under ASTM D8637/D8637M can provide comparable fracture toughness, offering design flexibility.
  • MBT and AM yield similar results for linear elastic behavior; CZM-based methods are effective for non-linear systems.

Conclusions:

  • Accurate Mode I characterization necessitates a holistic structure-property-processing framework, considering interfacial adhesion, material properties, defects, and environmental factors.
  • Optimized experimental setups, like SCB with a roller base, and appropriate data reduction methods are vital for reliable fracture toughness assessment.
  • Further development of testing methodologies is needed to address challenges and improve the accuracy and reliability for polymer sandwich structures.