2013
DOI: 10.1007/s11012-013-9724-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A review of adhesion mechanisms of mushroom-shaped microstructured adhesives

Abstract: Very recently, both experimental and theoretical investigations have shown that micro-structured surfaces covered with mushroom shaped micropillars present strongly enhanced adhesive properties if compared to standard flat surfaces made of the same material. However, different geometries lead to different adhesive performance, and finding the optimal solution has become of utmost importance. In this review we summarize the main detachment mechanisms of flat-topped and mushroom-topped soft micro pillars and sho… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
18
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
(82 reference statements)
1
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Moreover, we investigated the thickness effect of the adhesive layer ( h a ) (Figure S5, Supporting Information for details). The uniform stress distribution at adhered interface was maximized at ≈7 of thickness ratio (TR ∼ h a /d ), which is similar to previous studies using the array of microstructures . If the adhesive layer ( h a ) is too thin, localized stresses are concentrated on the center of the adhesive, and thus the adhesive detaches easily.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 84%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Moreover, we investigated the thickness effect of the adhesive layer ( h a ) (Figure S5, Supporting Information for details). The uniform stress distribution at adhered interface was maximized at ≈7 of thickness ratio (TR ∼ h a /d ), which is similar to previous studies using the array of microstructures . If the adhesive layer ( h a ) is too thin, localized stresses are concentrated on the center of the adhesive, and thus the adhesive detaches easily.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 84%
“…Interestingly, the stress profile of the SIA was mainly distributed in the central region of the patch (black line in Figure d) because the stress was delivered throughout the elongated male interlocked structures, enabling them to achieve enhanced adhesion strength. In the soft PDMS‐based patch, however, the localized stresses were concentrated on the edges of the patch (red line), resulting in relatively easy detachment via crack propagation . Additionally, we compared the experimental data with the stress profiles of various diameters of buried microstructures (10, 30, and 100 µm) as shown in Figure a,b and Figure S4 in the Supporting Information.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For this scenario we obtain ≈ 200 nm, which is comparable with the upper bound for the width of a bundle, DB  100 nm. Therefore we conclude that B ⁄ ≤ 1, and, consequently, we determine that the pull-off process follows the decohesion mechanism (Carbone & Pierro, 2013), whereby:…”
Section: Accepted Manuscriptmentioning
confidence: 71%
“…Nowadays, viscoelastic materials are widely utilized in several engineering applications, such as seals [1] and adhesives/biomimetic adhesives [2][3][4][5]. Moreover, they are object of recent research investigations, for example: (i) rolling contacts [6][7][8], (ii) sliding contacts [9][10][11][12], (iii) crack propagation [13][14][15], (iv) viscoelastic dewetting transition [16].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%