4.7 Article

Emulsion templating: Unexpected morphology of monodisperse macroporous polymers

Journal

JOURNAL OF COLLOID AND INTERFACE SCIENCE
Volume 582, Issue -, Pages 834-841

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcis.2020.08.106

Keywords

Emulsion templating; Macroporous polymers; Phase separation; Surfactant diffusion; Microfluidics

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study synthesized monodisperse macroporous polymers with non-spherical pores and layered pore walls through emulsion polymerization. The formation of this morphology was found to be caused by surfactant diffusion and phase separation during polymerization. The experiment results indicated that the diffusion of surfactant molecules during polymerization affected the shape of the pores and the thickness of the layers.
Hypothesis: We synthesised monodisperse macroporous polymers via polymerisation of water-in-monomer droplet emulsions and obtained non-spherical pores with layered pore walls. We hypothesise that this morphology is caused by surfactant diffusion and phase separation during polymerisation. Experiments: We varied the surfactant mass fraction of the emulsions and polymerised the templates with a water-soluble initiator. From the resulting macroporous polymers we determined the shape of the pores and thickness of the layers via scanning election microscopy. The response of the monomer/surfactant mixture to polymerisation was studied by a ternary phase diagram that simulated polymerisation. Findings: The emergence of non-spherical pores with layered pore walls is indeed caused by surfactant diffusion and phase separation. During polymerisation the surfactant molecules diffuse either to the water/monomer interface or deeper into the continuous monomer phase. The first process results in non-spherical pores, while the second process generates layered pore walls. (C) 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available