4.6 Article

Thicker is Better? Synthesis and Evaluation of Well-Defined Polymer Brushes with Controllable Catalytic Loadings

期刊

CHEMISTRY-A EUROPEAN JOURNAL
卷 18, 期 50, 页码 16226-16233

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/chem.201202531

关键词

palladium; polymers; silicon; supported catalysts; surface chemistry

资金

  1. Communaute Francaise de Belgique [ARC 06-11/339]
  2. Belgian Federal Science Policy [IAP-PAI P6/27]
  3. FRS-FNRS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Polymer brushes (PBs) have been used as supports for the immobilization of palladium complexes on silicon surfaces. The polymers were grown by surface-initiated atom-transfer radical polymerization (SI-ATRP) and postdecorated with dipyridylamine (dpa) ligands. The pendant dpa units were in turn complexed with [Pd(OAc)2] to afford hybrid catalytic surfaces. A series of catalytic samples of various thicknesses (ca. 20160 nm) and associated palladium loadings (ca. 1045 nmol?cm-2) were obtained by adjusting the SI-ATRP reaction time and characterized by ellipsometry, X-ray reflectivity, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, and inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS). ICP-MS revealed a near-linear relationship between thickness of the polymer brush and palladium content, which confirmed the robustness of the preparation and postmodification sequence presented herein, rendering possible the creation of functional architectures with predefined catalytic potential. The activities of the catalytic PBs were determined by systematically exploring a full range of substrate-to-catalyst ratios in a model palladium(0)-catalyzed reaction. Quantitative transformations were observed for loadings down to 0.03 mol?% and a maximum turnover number (TON) of around 3500 was established for the system. Comparison of the catalytic performances evidenced a singular influence of the thickness on conversions and TONs. The limited recyclability of the hairy catalysts has been attributed to palladium leaching.

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

4.6
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