4.7 Article

Dibromotrithiocarbonate iniferter for concurrent ATRP and RAFT polymerization. effect of monomer, catalyst, and chain transfer agent structure on the polymerization mechanism

期刊

MACROMOLECULES
卷 41, 期 13, 页码 4585-4596

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ma800539v

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An iniferter comprising atrithiocarbonate (TTC) moiety and two bromine chain ends was prepared and used to successfully conduct, independently or concurrently, atom transfer radical polymerization (ATRP) and reversible addition-fragmentation chain transfer (RAFT) polymerization. RAFT polymerization was carried out by self-initiation (styrene, (St)) or in the presence of a thermal initiator (acrylates) and yielded polymers with narrow molecular weight distribution (M-w/M-n <= 1.16 (St) and M-w/M-n <= 1.15 (acrylates)). Methyl methacrylate (MMA) polymerization under these conditions was poorly controlled. However, ATRP of MMA with the dibromotrithiocarbonate (DiBrTTC) iniferter was successful in the presence of copper catalysts formed with various nitrogen-based ligands. Polymers with narrow molecular weight distribution (M-w/M-n < 1.27) were obtained in every case. Depending on the ligand, polymerization proceeded only through the bromine chain ends or through both the bromine chain ends and the TTC moiety, providing the first example of an ATRP with a trithiocarbonate. ATRP and RAFT polymerization of St and n-butyl acrylate (nBA) were conducted concurrently using CuBr/ PMDETA as catalytic system. Polymers with broad molecular weight distribution (M-w/M-n approximate to 1.6) and polymodal size exclusion chromatography traces were obtained due to chain reshuffling through the TTC moiety. SEC analysis of the polymers after aminolysis or methanolysis showed that ATRP and RAFT occurred simultaneously, with good control, for each nBA and St (M-w/M-n < 1.3). Triblock, pentablock, or multiblock copolymers were prepared in two steps by appropriate selection of monomers and catalytic systems.

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

4.7
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