## Appendix A Derivation of the Isoconversional Equation  
The derivation is taken from [19; 20; 21; 22; 23; 25; 27]. In these sources other isoconversional methods are mentioned that are approximate solutions and do not require the extensive aid of computer programs for the calculations. However, the method presented here was mainly laid out by [PERSON] and it is the most precise. Comparisons of the results yielded by the different isoconversional methods are given e.g., in [29].  
The development of the degree of cure describes how chemicals react and Equation (1) is the basic fundament of reaction kinetics (and not just for curing reactions):The index \(\alpha\) for \(E_{\alpha}\) and \(A_{\alpha}\) shall indicate that we assume that these two parameters are dependent on the degree of cure. Otherwise these are considered as constant (e.g., with respect to the temperature).  
For easier understanding we will here derive Equation (4) by considering temperature ramps with a constant heating rate \(\beta\). However, the equations are valid for any kind of temperature program. If the heating rate is constant, the derivation over time can be expressed as a derivation over temperature. This changes the left hand side of Equation (1) while the right hand side stays the same:  
\[\frac{\mathrm{d}\alpha}{\mathrm{d}t}=\beta\frac{\mathrm{d}\alpha}{\mathrm{d}T }=A_{\alpha}\cdot\mathrm{e}^{-E_{\alpha}/(RT)}\cdot f(\alpha) \tag{10}\]  
Rearranging the terms and integration of Equation (10) leads to:  
\[\int\limits_{0}^{\alpha}\frac{\mathrm{d}\alpha}{f(\alpha)}=\frac{A_{\alpha}}{ \beta}\int\limits_{T_{0}}^{T_{\alpha}}\mathrm{e}^{-E_{\alpha}/(RT)}\mathrm{d}T \tag{11}\]  
For a given degree of cure \(\alpha\) this integral is constant and not dependent on the temperature program. Hence, we get:  
\[\frac{A_{\alpha}}{\beta_{1}}\int\limits_{T_{0}}^{T_{\alpha,1}}\mathrm{e}^{-E_{ \alpha}/(RT)}\mathrm{d}T=\frac{A_{\alpha}}{\beta_{2}}\int\limits_{T_{0}}^{T_{ \alpha,2}}\mathrm{e}^{-E_{\alpha}/(RT)}\mathrm{d}T=\cdots=\frac{A_{\alpha}}{ \beta_{n}}\int\limits_{T_{0}}^{T_{\alpha,n}}\mathrm{e}^{-E_{\alpha}/(RT)} \mathrm{d}T \tag{12}\]  
In Equation (12) the kinetic model \(f(\alpha)\) does not appear any longer.  
Integration from \(T_{0}\) to the temperature at which the given degree of cure is reached will introduce a systematic error, which can be avoided by stepwise integration by changing the limits of the integral as done in Equation (5):  
Equation (12) can be rewritten and equals the double sum in Equation (4)  
To illustrate the last step consider the following. Equation (12) means that \([J(E_{\alpha},T_{\alpha,i})\beta_{j}]/[J(E_{\alpha},T_{\alpha,j})\beta_{i}]=1\). Assuming three experiments with heating rates \(\beta_{1},\ \beta_{2},\ \beta_{3}\) the double sum in Equation (4) is then simply adding up the number one for each possible permutation in the above relationship:  
\[\left(\frac{J(E_{\alpha}  
water condensation inside the chamber during the sample placement could be minimized. After the 10 min isothermal at 278 K the sample was heated with a constant heating rate to 423 K and held at this temperature for 30 min. The latter to allow the sample to cure to 100%. At this point the (dynamic) cure-cycle ends.  
Afterwards the sample was cooled down to 293 K and held at this temperature for 20 min. Then exactly the same procedure as above was performed again (without taking the sample out) to collect the baseline-data during the post-cycle. Table 2 shows the details for each experiment.