4.8 Article

Cu-Catalyzed Multicomponent Polymerization To Synthesize a Library of Poly(N-sulfonylamidines)

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY
卷 135, 期 10, 页码 3760-3763

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ja312592e

关键词

-

资金

  1. Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea
  2. Nano-Material Technology Development Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea
  3. BRL through the National Research Foundation of Korea
  4. National Research Foundation of Korea [2012M3A7B4049677, 2010-0019766, 2012R1A1A1014680] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We report a versatile Cu-catalyzed multicomponent polymerization (MCP) technique that enables the synthesis of high-molecular-weight, defect-free poly(N-sulfonylamidines) from monomers of diynes, sulfonyl azides, and diamines. Through a series of optimizations, we discovered that the addition of excess triethylamine and the use of N,N'-dimethylformamide as a solvent are key factors to ensure efficient MCP. Formation of cyclic polyamidines was a side reaction during polymerization, but it was readily controlled by using diynes or diamines with long or rigid moieties. In addition, this polymerization is highly selective for three-component reactions over click reactions. The combination of the above factors enables the synthesis of high-molecular-weight polymers, which was challenging in previous MCPs. All three kinds of monomers (diynes, sulfonyl azides, and diamines) are readily accessible and stable under the reaction conditions, with various monomers undergoing successful polymerization regardless of their steric and electronic properties. Thus, we synthesized various high-molecular-weight, defect-free polyamidines from a broad range of monomers while overcoming the limitations of previous MCPs, such as low conversion and defects in the polymer structures.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据