Peter Olsén1, Karin Odelius1, Helmut Keul2, Ann-Christine Albertsson1. 1. Department of Fibre and Polymer Technology, KTH Royal Institute of Technology , SE-100 44, Stockholm, Sweden. 2. DWI - Leibniz Institute for Interactive Materials and Institute of Technical and Macromolecular Chemistry, RWTH Aachen University , Forckenbeckstraße 50, D-52056 Aachen, Germany.
Abstract
The employment of a monomer-specific "on/off switch" was used to synthesize a nine-block copolymer with a predetermined molecular weight and narrow distribution (Đ = 1.26) in only 2.5 h. The monomers consisted of a six-membered cyclic carbonate (i.e., 2-allyloxymethyl-2-ethyl-trimethylene carbonate (AOMEC)) and ε-caprolactone (εCL), which were catalyzed by 1,5,7-triazabicyclo[4.4.0]-dec-5-ene (TBD). The dependence of polymerization rate with temperature was different for the two monomers. Under similar reaction conditions, the ratio of the apparent rate constant of AOMEC and εCL [kpapp(AOMEC)/kpapp(εCL)] changes from 400 at T = -40 °C to 50 at T = 30 °C and 10 at T = 100 °C. Therefore, by decreasing the copolymerization temperature from 30 °C to -40 °C, the conversion of εCL can be switched "off", and by increasing the temperature to 30 °C, the conversion of εCL can be switched "on" again. The addition of AOMEC at T = -40 °C results in the formation of a pure carbonate block. The cyclic addition of AOMEC to a solution of εCL along with a simultaneous temperature change leads to the formation of multiblock copolymers. This result provides a new straightforward synthetic route to degradable multiblock copolymers, yielding new interesting materials with endless structural possibilities.
The employment of a monomer-specific "on/off switch" was used to synthesize a nine-block copolymer with a predetermined molecular weight and narrow distribution (Đ = 1.26) in only 2.5 h. The monomers consisted of a six-membered cyclic carbonate (i.e., 2-allyloxymethyl-2-ethyl-trimethylene carbonate (AOMEC)) and ε-caprolactone (εCL), which were catalyzed by 1,5,7-triazabicyclo[4.4.0]-dec-5-ene (TBD). The dependence of polymerization rate with temperature was different for the two monomers. Under similar reaction conditions, the ratio of the apparent rate constant of AOMEC and εCL [kpapp(AOMEC)/kpapp(εCL)] changes from 400 at T = -40 °C to 50 at T = 30 °C and 10 at T = 100 °C. Therefore, by decreasing the copolymerization temperature from 30 °C to -40 °C, the conversion of εCL can be switched "off", and by increasing the temperature to 30 °C, the conversion of εCL can be switched "on" again. The addition of AOMEC at T = -40 °C results in the formation of a pure carbonate block. The cyclic addition of AOMEC to a solution of εCL along with a simultaneous temperature change leads to the formation of multiblock copolymers. This result provides a new straightforward synthetic route to degradable multiblock copolymers, yielding new interesting materials with endless structural possibilities.
Nature’s ability
to produce materials with exact structures
on all levels of order continues to allure and inspire every generation
of polymer chemist. It is safe to say that, to date, the scientific
community does not measure up to nature’s synthetic machinery.
Although, considerable efforts are made enlarging and refining the
macromolecular tool-box within the vison of macromolecular design
perfection.[1−4] From a polymer synthetic point of view, many of nature’s
polymers can be described as multiblock copolymers, where each block
is constituted of one or more repeating unit. However, synthetic control
for one unit additions is very demanding, but in principle, similar
polymeric behavior should be reachable by a block approach. This has
given rise to an ever increasing interest for multiblock copolymers
within the field of polymer science. Most activity regarding this
issue has been seen in the field of controlled radical polymerization,
since it enables the creation of multiblocks by sequential addition
scheme.[5,6] However, regarding ring-opening polymerization
of aliphatic polyesters, the same rules does not apply, and high conversion
is always accompanied by an increased probability for transesterification
reactions that reshuffles the polymer sequence.On the other
hand ring-opening polymerization of cyclic monomers
enables the formation of a variety of polymers with different functionality
and properties with major applications in the field of polymer technology.
Traditionally, the catalytic ring-opening polymerization of lactones
and cyclic carbonates was usually performed with metallic catalysts,
such as lithium, sodium and potassium alkoxides, aluminum alkoxides,
tin(IV) alkoxides, and tin(II) carboxylates, in combination with alcohols.
The obtained polyesters and polycarbonates are degradable and have
a large potential for application as biomaterials. However, the degradability
is often influenced by the residual metallic catalyst. Currently,
organocatalysts have been developed that are used along with alcohols
as initiators for the ring-opening polymerization of lactones and
cyclic carbonates. The employed catalytic system directly dictates
the rate of polymerization and control over the molecular weight and
dispersity as well as the structure and architecture of the final
polymer, enabling the preparation of tailor-made polymers for specific
applications.[7−10]Macromolecular design of polymers and copolymers adds an additional
layer of complexity that further facilitates control over material
properties, which have been realized in the synthesis of star-shaped[11,12] and branched[13,14] as well as, statistical, tapered,[15−17] and block copolymers.[18−21] The traditional approach for the synthesis of specific
di-, tri-, or multiblock copolymers includes sequential addition of
monomers to the initiator or coupling of reactive building blocks.
However, both procedures are synthetically plagued by drawbacks, such
as the sequential addition requiring a high conversion of the anteceding
monomer and coupling reactions typically exhibit high dispersity and
large amounts of unconverted building blocks.[22−25] However, if the monomer polymerizability
is altered via an external stimulus during polymerization, it should
be possible to overcome these shortcomings.Organocatalyzed
ring-opening polymerization has experienced an
upsurge of activity since the initial reports on the polymerization
of lactide with 4-dimethylaminopyridine (DMAP).[26,27] Today, numerous organocatalytic systems have been explored that
exhibit an array of different specificities toward selected monomers.[28−32] In particular, the difference in reactivity of cyclic carbonates
and cyclic esters (lactones) has been observed where the polymerization
is catalyzed by semiweak acids, which exhibit a higher reactivity
for esters,[32−35] in contrast to guanine adenine base-catalyzed systems.[34−37] Recently, this result has been pushed to the limit by sequentially
“switching” from an anionic to a cationic organocatalyzed
system, enabling specific monomer selectivity.[38,39]Over the years, we have worked extensively in the field of
degradable
polymers, and most of these polymers have been prepared by ring-opening
polymerization of lactones, lactides, and other functional monomers,[40−43] with great emphasis on a “cradle to grave” perspective,
from the kinetics of polymer formation to the kinetics of polymer
degradation.[44−46] In addition, we explored the synthesis of aliphatic
carbonate monomers via ring-closing depolymerization and its polymerization
behavior with different catalysts.[47−49]Therefore, we
envision that the difference in selectivity between
cyclic esters and cyclic carbonates induced by organic catalysts should
engender control, enabling the formation of functional multiblockcopolymers in a simultaneous addition scheme. Our aim is to elaborate
this conceptually, the creation of multiblock copolymers through a
monomer specific “on/off switch”. To elucidate this
approach, we focused our exploration around three different queries
as follows: (i) how is the macromolecular structure (i.e., block purity)
affected by the organic catalyst employed, (ii) how is this effect
dependent on temperature, and (iii) how does this translate into multiblockcopolymer design?
Experimental Section
Materials
ε-Caprolactone (εCL) (98%, Sigma-Aldrich,
Sweden) was dried over calcium hydride for at least 24 h and subsequently
distilled at reduced pressure under an inert gas atmosphere prior
to use. All of the other chemicals were used as received. These chemicals
included initiators (i.e., benzyl alcohol (≥99%, Sigma-Aldrich,
Sweden) and 2-naphthalene ethanol (98%, Sigma-Aldrich, Sweden)), catalysts
(i.e., 1,5,7-triazabicyclo[4.4.0]-dec-5-ene (TBD) (98%, Sigma-Aldrich,
Sweden)), and a phosphazene base P2-tBu
solution (P2-tBu, ∼2 M in THF,
Sigma-Aldrich, Sweden). In addition, sodium hydride (NaH) (60% dispersion
in mineral oil, Sigma-Aldrich, Sweden), diethyl carbonate (99%, Sigma-Aldrich,
Sweden), trimethylolpropane allyl ether (98%, Sigma-Aldrich, Sweden),
acetic acid (technical, Fisher Scientific, Germany), acetic acid anhydride
(ReagentPlus, ≥ 99%, Sigma-Aldrich, Sweden),
triethylamine (TEA) (≥99%, Sigma-Aldrich, Sweden), dichloromethane
(anhydrous, ≥ 99.8%, Sigma-Aldrich, Sweden) chloroform (HPLC
grade, Fisher Scientific, Germany), chloroform-d (99.8%,
with silver foil, Cambridge Isotope Laboratories), and methanol (general
purpose grade, Fischer Scientific, Germany) were used.
Synthesis of
AOMEC
The monomer synthesis was performed
via ring-closing depolymerization according to a previously reported
protocol,[47] except for a consecutive distillation
step with the addition of acetic anhydride (0.1 equiv to AOMEC) and
TEA (0.1 equiv to AOMEC) to ensure that any residual hydroxyl groups
are capped.
Copolymerization of 2-Allyloxmethy-2-ethyltrimethylene
Carbonate
(AOMEC) and ε-Caprolactone (εCL)
General experimental
methodology: All of the reaction vessels were dried in an oven at
150 °C for 48 h prior to use followed by flaming three times
under reduced pressure. In general, the desired amounts of monomers,
catalyst and initiator were added to a Schlenk round-bottom flask
under a nitrogen atmosphere in a glovebox (Mbraun MB 150-GI). After
addition, the flask was fitted with a rubber septum and placed in
an oil bath outside the glovebox (Mbraun MB 150-GI). All of the reactions
were stirred at a constant temperature that was maintained (±2
°C) using an IKAMAG RCT basic safety control magnetic stirrer.
Aliquots for investigation by 1H NMR and 13C
NMR spectroscopy as well as GPC were withdrawn at regular time intervals
using new, disposable syringes while the vessel was flushed with nitrogen
gas. Each sample was treated with acetic acid dissolved in DCM.
Copolymerization of AOMEC and εCL at 30 °C, Catalyzed
with TBD
The desired amounts of the monomers (i.e., AOMEC
(3 g, 15 mmol) and εCL (1.71 g, 15 mmol)) and the benzyl alcohol
initiator (0.016 g, 0.15 mmol) were added to a dried 25 mL Schlenk
round-bottom flask inside a glovebox. The copolymerization was performed
in a 2 M solution of dry DCM. The TBD (0.053 g, 0.38 mmol) was dissolved
in dry DCM (5 mL) inside a glovebox and injected into the reaction
mixture via a disposable syringe. All of the copolymerization experiments
were performed according to this specific procedure (Table 1).
Table 1
Copolymerization of AOMEC and εCL
at Different Temperatures Initiated by Benzyl Alcohol/TBD or P2-t-Bu
temperature [°C]
catalyst
[M]a:[I]:[Cat.]
solvent
concn [M]
–40
TBD
[200]:[1]:[2.5]
DCM
2
30
TBD
[200]:[1]:[2.5]
DCM
2
100
TBD
[200]:[1]:[2.5]
none
bulk
170
TBD
[200]:[1]:[2.5]
none
bulk
30
P2-t-Bu
[400]:[1]:[0.5]
DCM
2
[M], M = nAOMEC + nεCL, and nAOMEC/nεCL =
1.
[M], M = nAOMEC + nεCL, and nAOMEC/nεCL =
1.
TBD-Catalyzed Copolymerization
of AOMEC and εCL with Temperature
Variation
The polymerization was performed in a similar manner
as previously described with some minor modifications. Specifically,
the desired amounts of initiator (i.e., 2-naphthalene ethanol (0.051
g, 0.3 mmol)) and catalyst (i.e., TBD (0.62 g, 4.46 mmol)) were added
to a 50 mL Schlenk flask inside a glovebox. The reaction flask was
placed in a thermostatic oil bath set at 30 °C followed by the
addition of 29 mL of dry DCM. After 5 min, εCL (6.84 g, 60 mmol)
was added to the reaction mixture with a disposable syringe (1.8 M,
where n = nεCL + nTBD + nAOMEC). After
15 min (εCL had reached a conversion of approximately 7%), the
temperature was lowered to −40 °C and allowed to equilibrate
for 7.5 min. At this temperature, no further conversion of εCL
was observed. After the equilibration, AOMEC (2 g, 10 mmol) was added
to the reaction mixture using a disposable syringe. After near complete
conversion of AOMEC (7.5 min later), the reaction flask was again
placed in a thermostatic oil bath at 30 °C, and the same cycle
was repeated three consecutive times, resulting in a εCL conversion
of 14, 21, 28 and 35%. At each 7.5 min time interval, a sample was
withdrawn using a disposable syringe, treated with acetic acid dissolved
in DCM and analyzed by 1H and 13C NMR spectroscopy
as well as GPC. The k values was determined by plotting
the ln(M0/M) vs time, Supporting Information, Figures S1–S5.
Instruments
Nuclear
Magnetic Resonance (NMR)
The 1H
NMR (400.13 MHz) and 13C NMR (100.62 MHz) spectra were
recorded on a Bruker Avance 400 spectrometer at 298 K. For the measurements,
either ∼10 mg (1H NMR) or ∼100 mg (13C NMR) of the polymer was dissolved in 0.8 mL of CDCl3 in a sample tube with a diameter of 5 mm. The spectra were calibrated
using the residual proton of the solvent signal (i.e., 7.26 ppm (1H NMR) and 77.0 ppm (13C NMR)) for CHCl3.
Gel Permeation Chromatography (GPC)
GPC was used to
determine the number-average molecular weights (Mn) and dispersity (Đs) of the polymer
using a Verotech PL-GPC 50 Plus equipped with a PL-RI detector and
two MIXED-D columns that were 300 × 7.5 mm (Varian, Santa Clara).
The samples were injected with a PL-AS RT autosampler (Polymer Laboratories),
and chloroform was used as the mobile phase at a flow rate of 1 mL/min
at 30 °C with toluene as an internal standard. The calibration
was performed using polystyrene standards with a narrow molecular
weight distribution ranging from 160–371000 g/mol.
Results and Discussion
The search for new synthetic methodologies
that result in multiblockcopolymers with high control of block purity, predictable molecular
weight, and narrow distributions has lead us to explore the organocatalytic
copolymerization of lactones and cyclic carbonates. More specifically,
we studied the copolymerization behavior of AOMEC and εCL as
a function of (i) different organocatalysts with different reactivity
of the propagating chain end and (ii) different temperatures as well
as (iii) the translation of these results into the design of multiblockcopolymers.
Influence of the Reactivity of the Propagating Chain Ends and
Effect on the Selectivity toward AOMEC and εCL
The
reactivity of the two monomers and the propagating chain ends differs
substantially with the catalytic system employed, which dictates the
monomer sequence in the formed polymeric structure. This difference
is especially true in the AOMEC/εCL system. The polymerization
of AOMEC was first explored in the beginning of the 1990s. Herein,
it was found that, polymerization under anionic condition results
in a bimodal distribution: alongside a fraction of linear high molecular
weight polymers cyclic oligomers were also formed. The ratio of linear
polymers to cyclic oligomers strongly depends on the reaction conditions,
such as monomer concentration, solvent used, temperature and time.[50,51] However, when TBD was applied as a catalyst for the polymerization
of AOMEC, none of these effects were observed, and the only product
was a high molecular weight polymer.[47] Therefore,
to more deeply explore the influence of the nature of the propagating
chain end, two different nonmetallic catalysts with different effects
on the reactivity of the propagating chain were chosen (i.e., TBD
and a phosphazene base, P2-t-Bu). Time conversion
plots for the copolymerization of AOMEC and εCL with benzyl
alcohol (Bn–OH) as an initiator and TBD as a catalyst in a
methylene chloride solution at T = 30 °C clearly
indicate that AOMEC polymerizes much faster than εCL (Supporting Information, Figure S8, left). The
apparent rate constant for AOMEC was ca. 50 times higher than the
apparent rate constant for εCL (Table 2). The linear relationship between Mn and conversion and the low dispersity confirm the controlled course
of the reaction. When the same reaction conditions for the P2-t-Bu catalyst, an immeasurably high polymerization rate
was observed. Therefore, we reduced the catalyst loading by a factor
of 2.5 (nP2-tBu/nBuOH = 1) to determine the kinetic parameters. Even at
this low catalyst loading, a high rate of polymerization was observed
(kpapp(AOMEC) = 101.9 s–1, kpapp(εCL)
= 21.5 s–1, (Table 2, Supporting Information Figures S5 and S9). The
rate of polymerization reflects the influence of TBD and P2-t-Bu on the reactivity of the propagating chain end during
homopolymerization and copolymerization of AOMEC and εCL.
Table 2
Apparent Rate Constant (kpapp) at Different Temperatures for AOMEC and
εCL during Copolymerization Initiated by Benzyl Alcohol/TBD
or P2-t-Bu
temperature [°C]
catalyst
[M]a:[I]:[Cat.]
kpapp(AOMEC)b [s–1]
kpapp(εCL)b [s–1]
–40
TBD
[200]:[1]:[2.5]
25
0.064
30
TBD
[200]:[1]:[2.5]
17.1
0.35
100
TBD
[200]:[1]:[2.5]
630
65.4
170
TBD
[200]:[1]:[2.5]
190
102
30
P2-t-Bu
[400]:[1]:[0.5]
101.9
21.5
[M], M = nAOMEC + nεCL, and nAOMEC/nεCL = 1.
For determination
of kpapp values see Supporting
Information figure S1–S5.
[M], M = nAOMEC + nεCL, and nAOMEC/nεCL = 1.For determination
of kpapp values see Supporting
Information figure S1–S5.Besides the high rate of polymerization the P2-t-Bu-catalyzed system produced an oligomeric fraction during
polymer
formation, which is similar to that previously observed for the anionic
polymerization of AOMEC (Supporting Information, Figure S6, S7).[50] This result is believed
to be due to the effect of a higher concentration of solvent separated
ion pairs (sip) originating from the ability of the phosphazene base
to solvate the active chain end, which leads to a polymerization with
more anionic character.[52] This behavior
is also reflected in the immense difference in the polymerization
rate between the two systems (i.e., ∼ 6 times higher for AOMEC
and ∼60 times higher for εCL) (Table 2, Supporting Information, Figures
S2 and S5). In addition, the high rate of polymerization for the P2-t-Bu-catalyzed copolymerization resulted in a higher dispersity
(compare Supporting Information, Figures
S8 and S9). On the basis of these results, TBD was chosen as the catalyst
for the preparation of multiblock copolymers in our new synthetic
strategy.
Effect of Temperature on the Copolymerization of AOMEC and εCL
with TBD as the Catalyst and Its Effect on the Block Structure
In a previous study of the anionic ring-opening copolymerization
of 2,2-dimethyl trimethylene carbonate and εCL, the carbonate
was reported to polymerize much faster.[53] The same result was obtained for AOMEC and εCL using TBD/benzyl
alcohol as the initiating system (Figure 1).
However, the temperature dependence of the conversion of the two monomers
and its effect on the polymer microstructure (i.e., the monomer selectivity)
has not been previously explored. Therefore, the monomer conversions
were evaluated as a function of temperature and its effect on the
microstructure were qualitatively evaluated (Scheme 1). In addition, the synthetic prerequisites for the formation
of pure block copolymers were determined. It is important to note
that the polymer microstructure is not determined solely by the difference
in polymerization rate. More specifically, due to the low ceiling
temperature (Tc = 190 °C), the conversion
of AOMEC will reach a plateau that is temperature dependent. Therefore,
the block purity will be highly influenced by the equilibrium monomer
concentration. In addition, transesterification may lead to reshuffling
of the monomer sequence.
Figure 1
Dependence of the conversion on the time
for the copolymerization
of AOMEC (nAOMEC/nBn–OH = 100) and εCL (nεCL/nBn–OH = 100). Solution polymerizations
at −40 (top left) and +30 °C (top right) were performed
in dry DCM (2 M to nAOMEC + nεCL). At 100 (bottom left) and 170 °C (bottom
right), the polymerizations were performed in bulk. All of the polymerizations
were conducted with TBD (nTBD/nBn–OH = 2.5) as the catalyst.
Scheme 1
Synthetic Outline for the Copolymerization
of AOMEC (nAOMEC/nBn–OH = 100)
and εCL (n/nBn–OH = 100) with TBD (nTBD/nBn–OH = 2.5) as a Catalyst
The most obvious difference in the copolymerization behavior
of
AOMEC and εCL at different temperatures was the dependence of kpapp on the temperature (Table 2 and Figure 1). The lactone
monomer (i.e., εCL) follows the more logical trend where an
increase in kpapp was observed
with increasing temperature. However, AOMEC exhibits a more “wavy”
pattern (Table 2), which may be a proximity
effect to the equilibrium monomer concentration of AOMEC. At −40
°C, the conversion of AOMEC as a function of time is linear up
to a conversion of 95%., whereas at 30 °C the deviation from
linearity occurs already at 80% conversion. This behavior is expected
to become more prominent at higher temperatures (i.e., 100 and 170
°C) (Figures 1 (bottom left) and (bottom
right)) even though the trend is not obvious due to the high polymerization
rates. In addition the difference in polymerization setup, i.e. solution
at −40 and 30 °C versus bulk 100 and 170 °C could
influence the rate of polymerization.Dependence of the conversion on the time
for the copolymerization
of AOMEC (nAOMEC/nBn–OH = 100) and εCL (nεCL/nBn–OH = 100). Solution polymerizations
at −40 (top left) and +30 °C (top right) were performed
in dry DCM (2 M to nAOMEC + nεCL). At 100 (bottom left) and 170 °C (bottom
right), the polymerizations were performed in bulk. All of the polymerizations
were conducted with TBD (nTBD/nBn–OH = 2.5) as the catalyst.At all of the selected temperatures, the copolymerization
of AOMEC
and εCL proceeded in a controlled manner with a linear increase
in the molecular weight with conversion (Figure 2). However, at higher temperatures, an increase in dispersity was
observed, which is similar to the results observed for polymerizations
performed with Sn(Oct)2/ROH as an initiating system..[54] The reason for these increased
dispersity values remains unclear but it may be due to the higher
rates of the transesterification reactions at higher temperature or
the proximity to the ceiling temperature (Tc). On the basis of these studies, at lower temperatures, the difference
in the polymerization rate is larger, and side reactions are absent.
Therefore, “block-like” structures are obtained using
our new synthetic approach.
Figure 2
Mn and Đ evolution
as a function of conversion for the copolymerization of AOMEC (nAOMEC/nBn–OH = 100) and εCL (nεCL/nBn–OH = 100). Solution polymerizations
at −40 (top left) and +30 °C (top right) were performed
in dry DCM (2 M to nAOMEC + nεCL). At 100 (bottom left) and 170 °C (bottom
right), the polymerizations were performed in bulk. All of the polymerizations
were conducted using TBD (nTBD/nBn–OH = 2.5) as the catalyst.
Mn and Đ evolution
as a function of conversion for the copolymerization of AOMEC (nAOMEC/nBn–OH = 100) and εCL (nεCL/nBn–OH = 100). Solution polymerizations
at −40 (top left) and +30 °C (top right) were performed
in dry DCM (2 M to nAOMEC + nεCL). At 100 (bottom left) and 170 °C (bottom
right), the polymerizations were performed in bulk. All of the polymerizations
were conducted using TBD (nTBD/nBn–OH = 2.5) as the catalyst.The large difference in reactivity between AOMEC
and εCL
at low temperatures can be used to prepare diblock copolymers by simultaneous
addition of the two monomers (Table 2 and Figure 3). To emphasize this difference, the kpapp ratio of these monomers was plotted as
a function of temperature (Figure 5, left).
At −40 °C, kpapp (AOMEC) was as much as 400 times larger than kpapp (εCL). In contrast, at T = 170 °C, the kpapp (AOMEC)/kpapp (AOMEC) ratio was only ∼2.
The reason for this behavior may be the lower activation energy of
1,3-dioxan-2-ones compared to εCL in TBD-catalyzed ring-opening
polymerization. The different temperature dependences of the rate
constants for the copolymerization of 2–2-dimethyl trimethylene
carbonate and εCL with Al based initiators have been previously
reported.[53,55,56] The preference
for one monomer over the other should translate to a more “block-like”
structure of the copolymer. However, this may not be the case due
to possible side reactions, especially transesterification reactions.
Figure 3
Quotient
of the rate constants during the copolymerization of AOMEC
(nAOMEC/nBn–OH = 100) and εCL (nεCL/nBn–OH = 100) with TBD (nTBD/nBn–OH = 2.5) as
the catalyst (left) and its influence on the block purity shown in
the 13C NMR (right). For letter notation, see Scheme 2.
Figure 5
1H NMR of the copolymer obtained from in situ-polymerization
with variation of temperature (left) block purity at the end of each
cycle obtained from 13C NMR analysis (right).
Quotient
of the rate constants during the copolymerization of AOMEC
(nAOMEC/nBn–OH = 100) and εCL (nεCL/nBn–OH = 100) with TBD (nTBD/nBn–OH = 2.5) as
the catalyst (left) and its influence on the block purity shown in
the 13C NMR (right). For letter notation, see Scheme 2.
Scheme 2
Outline of the Different
Diads Formed during the Copolymerization
of AOMEC (nAOMEC/nBn–OH = 100) and εCL (nεCL/nBn–OH = 100) Using TBD (nTBD/nBn–OH = 2.5) as the Catalyst Arising from the Racemic Nature of AOMEC
To gain insight into this issue, 13C NMR spectroscopy
was used to validate the microstructural features of the copolymer
in relationship to the kpapp ratio of the respective monomers at different temperatures (Figure 3, right).[57,58] However, the chiral
center of the ring-opened AOMEC monomer leads to a complicated 13C NMR spectrum arising from the formation of different diasteromeric
sequences (Scheme 2). By analyzing the CH2–O resonance signal of εCL in different environments
(i.e., monomer sequence εCL-εCL and the two sequences
εCL-AOMEC), the purity of the block copolymer was determined
(Scheme 2 and Figure 3, right). At T = −40 °C, a single resonance
line (a) was observed. As the temperature increased, an additional
signal (A) appears, and the intensity of this signal increased as
the temperature increased. Therefore, when the temperature increases,
the concentration of εCL-AOMEC sequences increases. The same
is true for resonance lines c and d, where their intensity increases
as the temperature increases. The microstructure of the copolymers
of 2,2-dimethyl trimethylene carbonate and εCL prepared with
different types of initiators has been determined. However, in this
case, no enatiomeric center was present. Therefore, all of the diads
were assigned, and quantitative analysis was performed.[53]In summary, by changing the temperature
from +30 to −40
°C, an on/off response toward ring-opening polymerization of
εCL was observed. In a mixture of AOMEC and εCL, only
AOMEC is converted at this temperature. To obtain a multiblockcopolymer,
a solution of εCL must be polymerized for a certain time at
30 °C and then cooled to −40 °C, and AOMEC should
be added at this temperature followed by polymerization prior to heating
to 30 °C again.
Multiblock Copolymer Synthesis by Polymerization
of AOMEC and
εCL at T = +30 °C and T = −40 °C
Variation in the temperature for the in situ polymerization of AOMEC and εCL was used to
prepare multiblock copolymers. The formation of a 9-block copolymer
was performed in only 2.5 h (Figures 4 and 5). The TBD-catalyzed
copolymerization of AOMEC and εCL results in moderately high
dispersity (approximately 1.5). However, the dispersity is strongly
dependent on the conversion of εCL (Figure 2, top right). Therefore, copolymers with lower dispersity
can be prepared when the total conversion of εCL remains low
(Figure 4, right). This low conversion can
be easily accomplished because the polymerization kinetics of εCL
compared to AOMEC exhibit an on/off response during the transition
from T = +30 to T = −40 °C
where AOMEC exhibits a high polymerization rate (Figure 4 and Table 2). The polymerization of
εCL was conducted in a 15 min window at 30 °C, enabling
good control of the block length and dispersity. The reaction conditions
were adjusted to obtain 10 repeating units for each PεCL block
and 15 repeating units for each PAOMEC block (Figure 4).
Figure 4
Repeating unit (X) of AOMEC and εCL
as a function of time (left); Mn and Đ evolution (right), in situ variation
in temperature between T = −40 °C and T = 30 °C during the copolymerization of AOMEC and
εCL.
Repeating unit (X) of AOMEC and εCL
as a function of time (left); Mn and Đ evolution (right), in situ variation
in temperature between T = −40 °C and T = 30 °C during the copolymerization of AOMEC and
εCL.The block purity was determined
at the end of each cycle, where
one cycle consists of 30 min in which the temperature is changed from T = +30 to T = −40 °C and back
to T = +30 °C. The high purity of the blocks
was confirmed by the 13C NMR spectra obtained at the end
of each cycle, and the 13C NMR spectra displayed only peaks
associated with a pure block structure (Figure 5(right) and Scheme 2), which is clearly shown
at the end of cycle 5 and represents the purified polymer. Therefore,
no monomeric residues were present to obscure the spectra. The 1H NMR spectrum obtained from the purified product revealed
all of the resonance peaks corresponding to the two repeating units
(Figure 5(left)). The theoretical calculated
and experimentally determined monomeric ratios for the copolymers
where in good agreement with each other (i.e., (nεCL/nAOMEC)theoretical = 0.53, ((nεCL/nAOMEC)experimental = 0,58), and the small discrepancy
may originate from the purification of the AOMEC monomer. During the
monomer synthesis prior to polymerization, opened oligomers may exist
due to ring-closing depolymerization. Therefore, a consecutive end-capping
reaction with acetic anhydride was performed prior to the additional
distillation step. Although these end-capped oligomers are inert during
polymerization, they will still affect the molar ratio of the added
monomer in each cycle in the multiblock synthesis. In addition, an
increase in the molecular weight was observed by GPC at each AOMEC
addition cycle. In terms of dispersity, only a small increase was
observed at a prolonged reaction time. The dispersity is consistent
with what is commonly obtained in TBD-catalyzed ROP.[59]1H NMR of the copolymer obtained from in situ-polymerization
with variation of temperature (left) block purity at the end of each
cycle obtained from 13C NMR analysis (right).On the basis of these results, a new conceptual
approach for the
formation of multiblock copolymers via an in situ on/off kinetic response has been developed. Through careful evaluation
of the kinetic behavior during copolymerization, the polymer architecture
can be tailored where the length of each block can be predetermined
based on the amount of AOMEC added at −40 °C and the length
of temperature window for εCL at 30 °C. We assume that
this methodology is valid not only for the allyl functional carbonate
monomer AOMEC but also for all six-membered ring carbonate monomers
that exhibit similar polymerization kinetics. In other words, macromolecular
design via a kinetic on/off response of the monomers enables a straightforward
approach for the preparation of multiblock polyester/polycarbonate
copolymers.
Conclusions
The implementation of
an in situ monomer-specific “on/off
switch” for the ring-opening polymerization of functional carbonate
monomers (i.e., AOMEC and εCL) catalyzed by an organic catalyst
(i.e., TBD) enabled the synthesis of a pure nine-block copolymer in
only 2.5 h. The “on/off switch” was achieved via modulation
of the temperature during polymerization from +30 to −40 °C.
This transition resulted in a monomer-specific kinetic response (i.e.,
an on/off switch) for polymerization of εCL and retardation
of the AOMEC polymerization. This feature enabled the construction
of a multiblockcopolymer with a low dispersity (D = 1.26) and high control over the molecular weight and block length
where each PAOMEC block was formed at T = −40
°C and each PεCL block was formed at T = 30 °C.The behavior was derived from the evaluation
of the polymerization
behavior of AOMEC and εCL at different temperatures. This evaluation
revealed an immense difference in the copolymerization kinetics at
different temperatures that was connected to the purity of the blocks.
The rate of polymerization is 400 times higher for AOMEC compared
to εCL at −40 °C, and at 100 °C, this rate
was only 10 times higher. Thus, there is immense potential in every
catalytic system that could be realized through careful investigation
of that system’s kinetic behavior.
Authors: Fredrik Nederberg; Eric F. Connor; Michael Möller; Thierry Glauser; James L. Hedrick Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2001-07-16 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Fredrik Nederberg; Bas G G Lohmeijer; Frank Leibfarth; Russell C Pratt; Jeongsoo Choi; Andrew P Dove; Robert M Waymouth; James L Hedrick Journal: Biomacromolecules Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 6.988
Authors: Ilsiya M Davletbaeva; Oleg O Sazonov; Ilgiz M Dzhabbarov; Ilnaz I Zaripov; Ruslan S Davletbaev; Alla V Mikhailova Journal: Polymers (Basel) Date: 2022-06-30 Impact factor: 4.967
Authors: Arron C Deacy; Georgina L Gregory; Gregory S Sulley; Thomas T D Chen; Charlotte K Williams Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2021-06-30 Impact factor: 15.419