Polymerization-induced self-assembly (PISA) is a powerful platform technology for the rational and efficient synthesis of a wide range of block copolymer nano-objects (e.g., spheres, worms or vesicles) in various media. In situ small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS) studies of reversible addition-fragmentation chain transfer (RAFT) dispersion polymerization have previously provided detailed structural information during self-assembly (see M. J. Derry et al., Chem. Sci. 2016 , 7 , 5078 - 5090 ). However, conducting the analogous in situ SAXS studies during RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerizations poses a formidable technical challenge because the inherently heterogeneous nature of such PISA formulations requires efficient stirring to generate sufficiently small monomer droplets. In the present study, the RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization of 2-methoxyethyl methacrylate (MOEMA) has been explored for the first time. Chain extension of a relatively short non-ionic poly(glycerol monomethacrylate) (PGMA) precursor block leads to the formation of sterically-stabilized PGMA-PMOEMA spheres, worms or vesicles, depending on the precise reaction conditions. Construction of a suitable phase diagram enables each of these three morphologies to be reproducibly targeted at copolymer concentrations ranging from 10 to 30% w/w solids. High MOEMA conversions are achieved within 2 h at 70 °C, which makes this new PISA formulation well-suited for in situ SAXS studies using a new reaction cell. This bespoke cell enables efficient stirring and hence allows in situ monitoring during RAFT emulsion polymerization for the first time. For example, the onset of micellization and subsequent evolution in particle size can be studied when preparing PGMA29-PMOEMA30 spheres at 10% w/w solids. When targeting PGMA29-PMOEMA70 vesicles under the same conditions, both the micellar nucleation event and the subsequent evolution in the diblock copolymer morphology from spheres to worms to vesicles are observed. These new insights significantly enhance our understanding of the PISA mechanism during RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization.
Polymerization-induced self-assembly (PISA) is a powerful platform technology for the rational and efficient synthesis of a wide range of block copolymer nano-objects (e.g., spheres, worms or vesicles) in various media. In situ small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS) studies of reversible addition-fragmentation chain transfer (RAFT) dispersion polymerization have previously provided detailed structural information during self-assembly (see M. J. Derry et al., Chem. Sci. 2016 , 7 , 5078 - 5090 ). However, conducting the analogous in situ SAXS studies during RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerizations poses a formidable technical challenge because the inherently heterogeneous nature of such PISA formulations requires efficient stirring to generate sufficiently small monomer droplets. In the present study, the RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization of 2-methoxyethyl methacrylate (MOEMA) has been explored for the first time. Chain extension of a relatively short non-ionic poly(glycerol monomethacrylate) (PGMA) precursor block leads to the formation of sterically-stabilized PGMA-PMOEMA spheres, worms or vesicles, depending on the precise reaction conditions. Construction of a suitable phase diagram enables each of these three morphologies to be reproducibly targeted at copolymer concentrations ranging from 10 to 30% w/w solids. High MOEMA conversions are achieved within 2 h at 70 °C, which makes this new PISA formulation well-suited for in situ SAXS studies using a new reaction cell. This bespoke cell enables efficient stirring and hence allows in situ monitoring during RAFT emulsion polymerization for the first time. For example, the onset of micellization and subsequent evolution in particle size can be studied when preparing PGMA29-PMOEMA30 spheres at 10% w/w solids. When targeting PGMA29-PMOEMA70 vesicles under the same conditions, both the micellar nucleation event and the subsequent evolution in the diblock copolymer morphology from spheres to worms to vesicles are observed. These new insights significantly enhance our understanding of the PISA mechanism during RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization.
Emulsion polymerization
is a remarkably efficient and environmentally-friendly process that
is applicable to many water-immiscible vinyl monomers, including styrene,
methacrylates, acrylates, vinyl acetate, vinyl chloride etc.[1,2] It is employed on a global scale by many chemical companies to prepare
tens of millions of tons of copolymer latexes every year. Such particles
are widely used for paints, coatings, varnishes, adhesives, as additives
for concrete and as the mobile phase for various immunodiagnostic
assays.[3] It is well-known that microcompartmentalization
facilitates fast polymerization kinetics for such heterogeneous formulations,
which enables the efficient formation of high molecular weight polymer
chains in a highly convenient low-viscosity latex form.[3−8]The inherently heterogeneous nature of emulsion polymerization
makes reliable sampling of such reactions somewhat problematic. Moreover,
it is essential that such formulations are efficiently stirred to
ensure that micrometer-sized monomer droplets are generated, otherwise
there is insufficient interfacial area between this water-immiscible
reagent and the aqueous continuous phase to enable the polymerization
to proceed. The kinetics of emulsion polymerization have been monitored in situ using 1H nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR)
spectroscopy coupled with a flow cell[9] or
by utilizing Raman[10] or near-IR spectroscopy.[11] However, such techniques do not provide any
information regarding the evolution in particle morphology during
the polymerization.Over the past decade or so, there has been
considerable interest in conducting aqueous emulsion polymerizations
using pseudo-living radical polymerization.[12−16] In particular, reversible addition–fragmentation
chain transfer (RAFT) polymerization enables the controlled polymerization
of a wide range of functional monomers to form well-defined amphiphilic
diblock copolymers.[17−20] In principle, this surfactant-free approach should enable access
to nanoparticles with various copolymer morphologies using a technique
known as polymerization-induced self-assembly (PISA).[21] However, in practice there are many literature examples
of RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization formulations that only produce
kinetically-trapped spheres.[22−34] Exceptions to this restrictive paradigm usually involve the use
of statistical copolymers as the water-soluble precursor block to
form spheres, worms/fibers or vesicles.[35−43] However, the use of ionizable monomers in such examples means that
the copolymer morphology also depends on parameters such as the stabilizer
block composition,[35−38] solution pH[35,37,39] and salt concentration.[35,36]In contrast,
it is well-known that RAFT aqueous dispersion polymerization of 2-hydroxypropyl
methacrylate (HPMA), which has an aqueous solubility of 100 g dm–3 at 70 °C, invariably allows convenient access
to spheres, worms or vesicles provided that a sufficiently short non-ionic
steric stabilizer block is utilized.[44,45] In view of
such observations, we hypothesized that the aqueous solubility of
the vinyl monomer might be an important parameter when attempting
to prepare worms or vesicles via RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization.
This is because the mass transport of sparingly soluble monomers from
the emulsion droplets to the growing diblock copolymer nanoparticles
is expected to be rather limited on the time scale of the polymerization.
This retarded rate of diffusion reduces the extent of solvation of
the growing hydrophobic polymer chains by the unreacted monomer, which
is believed to be important for achieving the desired evolution in
copolymer morphology during PISA.[21,45] In this context,
it is widely recognized that other parameters such as the chemical
structure[35−39,41,42] and copolymer architecture[40−42] of the steric stabilizer can
also play a decisive role in avoiding the formation of kinetically-trapped
spheres. Nevertheless, Cockram et al.[46] investigated the RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization of 4-hydroxybutyl
methacrylate (HBMA), which has an aqueous solubility of 20 g dm–3 at 70 °C. A new non-spherical “monkey
nut” morphology was obtained for this PISA formulation when
using a partially ionizedpoly(methacrylic acid) stabilizer block
at pH 5.[46] This encouraging result led
us to evaluate glycidyl methacrylate (GlyMA), which has a comparable
aqueous solubility of 24–25 g dm–3 at 80
°C.[47] Initially, only kinetically-trapped
spheres were obtained when using a non-ionic poly(glycerol monomethacrylate)
(PGMA) stabilizer.[32] However, reducing
the mean degree of polymerization (DP) of this hydrophilic block to
just 25 enabled the synthesis of well-defined worms.[48] In the present study, we introduce 2-methoxyethyl methacrylate
(MOEMA) as a third example of a methacrylic monomer exhibiting moderate
aqueous solubility (19.6 g dm–3 at 70 °C) that
again enables the restrictive paradigm of kinetically-trapped spheres
to be avoided without recourse to statistical copolymer and/or ionizable
stabilizer blocks. As far as we are aware, the RAFT aqueous emulsion
polymerization of MOEMA has not yet been reported.Recently,
we reported the in situ study of a PISA formulation
using small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS).[49] This is a powerful characterization technique that can provide precise
structural information over multiple length scales.[50,51] Indeed, in situ SAXS studies of various types of
polymerizations have been reported in the literature.[49,52,53] For example, this technique has
provided compelling evidence for a recently postulated vesicle growth
mechanism during PISA, which places an unexpected constraint on the
thermodynamic stability of the vesicle phase.[52] However, these prior experiments involved RAFT dispersion polymerization.
Such homogeneous formulations require no mechanical agitation, so
these PISA syntheses can be conducted within glass capillaries (∼125
μL) that are well-suited for in situ SAXS studies.
In contrast, efficient stirring is usually essential to generate sufficiently
small monomer droplets to ensure efficient mass transport in the case
of RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization.[36,46] This makes in situ SAXS studies much more problematic
for such heterogeneous formulations. In an attempt to overcome this
technical problem, Paulis et al. developed a thermostated cell for in situ monitoring of the miniemulsion terpolymerization
of methyl methacrylate (MMA), n-butyl acrylate and
stearyl acrylate using conventional free radical polymerization in
the presence of an organically modified clay.[54] However, this work focused on monitoring changes in the interlayer
distance between clay platelets during the polymerization, rather
than examining the nucleation and particle growth events. As far as
we are aware, there are no other reports of in situ SAXS studies conducted during any type of heterogeneous polymerization.Herein we introduce a bespoke stirrable reaction cell (Figure ) to conduct the
first in situ SAXS studies during RAFT aqueous emulsion
polymerization.[55] We focus on using MOEMA
because the relatively high aqueous solubility of this monomer allows
the evolution of diblock copolymer nanoparticle morphology from spheres
to vesicles via worms when using a non-ionic PGMA stabilizer block
(Figure ). Systematic
variation of the copolymer concentration and the mean target DP of
the PMOEMA block enables construction of a phase diagram (or morphology
map) for a series of PGMA29-PMOEMA diblock copolymer nano-objects. Moreover, the volumetric capacity
of this new reaction cell is sufficiently large (2.0 mL) to enable
postmortem analysis of the final nanoparticle dispersion by transmission
electron microscopy (TEM), 1H NMR spectroscopy, dynamic
light scattering (DLS) and gel permeation chromatography (GPC). Such
detailed studies enhance our understanding of the true nature of these
heterogeneous polymerizations.[52]
Figure 1
Schematic representation
of a cross-section of the bespoke stirrable reaction cell used for in situ SAXS experiments performed during RAFT aqueous emulsion
polymerization of MOEMA at 70 °C. The volume of reaction solution
within this cell is approximately 2.0 mL, which provides sufficient
diblock copolymer (∼200 mg) for postmortem analysis using multiple
characterization techniques (see main text for further details).
Figure 2
Synthesis of PGMA29-PMOEMA diblock copolymer nano-objects via RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization
of MOEMA using a water-soluble PGMA29 precursor block at
70 °C, where y ranges from 30 to 110. Phase
diagram constructed for PGMA29-PMOEMA diblock copolymer nano-objects synthesized via RAFT aqueous
emulsion polymerization of MOEMA at copolymer concentrations ranging
from 10 to 30% w/w. Representative TEM images recorded for: (a) PGMA29-PMOEMA36 spheres prepared at 30% w/w; (b) PGMA29-PMOEMA45 worms prepared at 20% w/w; (c) a PGMA29-PMOEMA58 mixed phase comprising worms, jellyfish
and vesicles prepared at 10% w/w; (d) PGMA29-PMOEMA78 vesicles prepared at 10% w/w; (e) a PGMA29-PMOEMA85 mixed phase (comprising spheres, worms and vesicles) prepared
at 30% w/w; (f) PGMA29-PMOEMA95 vesicles prepared
at 20% w/w.
Schematic representation
of a cross-section of the bespoke stirrable reaction cell used for in situ SAXS experiments performed during RAFT aqueous emulsion
polymerization of MOEMA at 70 °C. The volume of reaction solution
within this cell is approximately 2.0 mL, which provides sufficient
diblock copolymer (∼200 mg) for postmortem analysis using multiple
characterization techniques (see main text for further details).Synthesis of PGMA29-PMOEMA diblock copolymer nano-objects via RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization
of MOEMA using a water-soluble PGMA29 precursor block at
70 °C, where y ranges from 30 to 110. Phase
diagram constructed for PGMA29-PMOEMA diblock copolymer nano-objects synthesized via RAFT aqueous
emulsion polymerization of MOEMA at copolymer concentrations ranging
from 10 to 30% w/w. Representative TEM images recorded for: (a) PGMA29-PMOEMA36 spheres prepared at 30% w/w; (b) PGMA29-PMOEMA45 worms prepared at 20% w/w; (c) a PGMA29-PMOEMA58 mixed phase comprising worms, jellyfish
and vesicles prepared at 10% w/w; (d) PGMA29-PMOEMA78 vesicles prepared at 10% w/w; (e) a PGMA29-PMOEMA85 mixed phase (comprising spheres, worms and vesicles) prepared
at 30% w/w; (f) PGMA29-PMOEMA95 vesicles prepared
at 20% w/w.
Results and Discussion
The importance
of efficient stirring during RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization
is well-known in the PISA literature.[36,56] In the absence
of any stirring, little or no polymerization occurs because there
is simply insufficient interfacial area between the water-immiscible
monomer phase and the water-soluble initiator located in the aqueous
continuous phase.A PGMA macromolecular chain transfer agent
(macro-CTA) with a mean degree of polymerization (DP) of 29 was synthesized
via RAFT ethanolic solution polymerization of GMA at 70 °C, as
previously described.[32,44] This PGMA29 macro-CTA
(Mn = 9600 g mol–1; Đ = 1.12)[57] was then chain-extended
via RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization of MOEMA at 70 °C in
mildly acidic aqueous solution using 4,4′-azobis(4-cyanovaleric
acid) (ACVA) as a well-known water-soluble radical initiator;[27,30,35−39,46,56,58] see reaction scheme in Figure . The mean target
DP of the core-forming PMOEMA block was systematically varied between
30 and 110 while the copolymer concentration was adjusted between
10 and 30% w/w. For well-stirred reaction mixtures, the PGMA macro-CTA
acts as an emulsifier: laser diffraction and optical microscopy studies
indicated the formation of polydisperse MOEMA monomer droplets with
a volume-average diameter of around 14 μm at 20 °C (data
not shown). On heating to 70 °C, high MOEMA conversions (≥97%)
were achieved for all PISA syntheses, as confirmed by 1H NMR spectroscopy studies (Table S1).
GPC studies indicated monomodal curves and relatively narrow molecular
weight distributions (Đ ≤ 1.17) for
all diblock copolymers synthesized at copolymer concentrations of
10, 15 or 20% w/w (Figure S1 and Table S1). For diblock copolymers prepared at
30% w/w, somewhat higher dispersities (1.11 ≤ Đ ≤ 1.49) were observed owing to the appearance of a high molecular
weight peak (Figure S1b). The origin of
this feature is not currently known but it appears to be associated
with mixed phase copolymer morphologies. As expected, a linear evolution
in molecular weight with increasing PMOEMA DP was observed (Figure S2). PGMA29-PMOEMA diblock copolymer nano-objects were analyzed by
DLS and TEM in order to construct a phase diagram (Figure ). Spherical nanoparticles
were obtained when targeting relatively short PMOEMA DPs (y = 30–41)
(Figure a). A pure
worm phase spans the whole range of copolymer concentrations and is
relatively narrow (less than 10 MOEMA units for any given reaction
concentration) (Figure b). Similar observations have been reported for other aqueous PISA
formulations.[44,59,60]Vesicles can be obtained at all copolymer concentrations investigated,
but shorter hydrophobic PMOEMA blocks are required to access this
morphology if such PISA syntheses are conducted at lower concentrations.
For example, PGMA29-PMOEMA70 at 10% w/w corresponds
to a pure vesicle phase (Figure d), whereas the same composition at 30% w/w only produces
a mixed phase comprising spheres, worms and vesicles. As previously
discussed, it is usually fairly straightforward to produce pure worms
or vesicles via RAFT aqueous dispersion polymerization.[44] In contrast, the precise design rules for RAFT
aqueous emulsion polymerization are still being elucidated. Here,
we demonstrate that well-defined spheres, worms or vesicles can be
obtained by selecting a suitable monomer (e.g., MOEMA) that is mainly
water-immiscible but nevertheless exhibits appreciable aqueous solubility
at the reaction temperature of 70 °C. Similar findings have been
recently reported when using HBMA[46] or
GlyMA,[48] although the full range of copolymer
morphologies were not observed in these prior studies. In contrast,
other research groups have reported the formation of non-spherical
morphologies when polymerizing sparingly soluble monomers such as
styrene.[35−42] However, these prior PISA syntheses involve using statistical copolymer
precursors as the stabilizer block. Notwithstanding these important
contributions to the literature, we believe that, for at least some
formulations, the aqueous monomer solubility can be an important parameter
for understanding the scope and limitations of RAFT aqueous emulsion
polymerization.Two formulations were selected in order to assess
the kinetics of the RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization of MOEMA
at 10% w/w solids (Figure ): PGMA29-PMOEMA30 spheres and PGMA29-PMOEMA70 vesicles. In each case a MOEMA conversion
of more than 95% was achieved within 2 h at 70 °C. The kinetic
data for the synthesis of the PGMA29-PMOEMA30 spheres were acquired via in situ1H
NMR studies, using a set-up recently reported for a RAFT dispersion
polymerization formulation in non-polar media.[61] In contrast, the kinetic data obtained for the PGMA29-PMOEMA70 diblock copolymer vesicles were obtained
by withdrawing small aliquots periodically from the reaction mixture,
quenching the polymerization in each case and then utilizing ex situ1H NMR spectroscopy to determine the
intermediate monomer conversion.
Figure 3
Kinetic studies of the RAFT aqueous emulsion
polymerization of MOEMA at 70 °C targeting (a) PGMA29-PMOEMA30 diblock copolymer spheres at 10% w/w and (b)
PGMA29-PMOEMA70 diblock copolymer vesicles at
10% w/w. Conversion vs time curves are indicated by blue diamonds
and corresponding semilogarithmic plots are shown as red squares.
MOEMA conversions were calculated either from (a) in situ1H NMR studies performed in D2O or (b) ex situ1H NMR spectra recorded for quenched
aliquots of the reaction solution diluted in d6-DMSO. See experimental section in the Supporting Information for further details.
Kinetic studies of the RAFT aqueous emulsion
polymerization of MOEMA at 70 °C targeting (a) PGMA29-PMOEMA30 diblock copolymer spheres at 10% w/w and (b)
PGMA29-PMOEMA70 diblock copolymer vesicles at
10% w/w. Conversion vs time curves are indicated by blue diamonds
and corresponding semilogarithmic plots are shown as red squares.
MOEMA conversions were calculated either from (a) in situ1H NMR studies performed in D2O or (b) ex situ1H NMR spectra recorded for quenched
aliquots of the reaction solution diluted in d6-DMSO. See experimental section in the Supporting Information for further details.For the synthesis of PGMA29-PMOEMA30 spheres, a 4-fold rate enhancement was observed after 35 min, which
corresponds to approximately 55% conversion and a theoretical DP of
17 (Figure a). This
is attributed to micellar nucleation of the growing diblock copolymer
chains. Similar rate acceleration effects have been reported for RAFT
aqueous dispersion polymerization[45,62] and also other
RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization formulations.[25] Comparable observations were also made during the synthesis
of PGMA29-PMOEMA70 vesicles (Figure b). Thus, a 2.5-fold increase
in the rate of polymerization occurred at around 32 min; this corresponds
to 20% conversion and the critical PMOEMA DP required for micellar
nucleation is 14. However, in this case a further 2-fold rate enhancement
was observed at 65 min (61% conversion). The PMOEMA DP is calculated
to be 43 for this higher conversion, which is consistent with the
diblock copolymer composition required to form worms as indicated
in the phase diagram (Figure ). This suggests that the second rate enhancement is most
likely associated with a sphere-to-worm transition. A similar increase
in the rate of polymerization was reported by Charleux and co-workers
for the RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization of MMA, which led to
kinetically-trapped spheres.[39] However,
the same group observed a retardation effect during the RAFT aqueous
emulsion polymerization of styrene,[38] which
was attributed to the reduced number of particles per unit volume
associated with the sphere-to-worm transition. In this context, it
is perhaps worth noting that similar two-stage rate enhancements have
been observed for RAFT dispersion polymerizations conducted in non-polar
media,[61,63] so this phenomenon is not necessarily a
consequence of the heterogeneous nature of RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization.
Such subtle changes in polymerization kinetics during PISA are not
properly understood and clearly warrant further studies.
SAXS Analysis
of PGMA29-PMOEMA Nano-Objects
SAXS patterns were recorded for 1.0% w/w aqueous dispersions of
four examples of PGMA29-PMOEMA nano-objects synthesized at 10% w/w, see Figure and Table S2.
The y values targeted were 38, 43, 70 and 84. According
to the phase diagram shown in Figure , such diblock compositions should correspond to spheres,
worms, vesicles and vesicles, respectively.
Figure 4
TEM images obtained for
(a) PGMA29-PMOEMA38 spheres, (b) PGMA29-PMOEMA43 worms, (c) relatively large PGMA29-PMOEMA70 vesicles and (d) relatively small PGMA29-PMOEMA84 vesicles. (e) Corresponding SAXS patterns recorded
at 1.0% w/w for the same four copolymer dispersions, which were each
originally prepared at 10% w/w. Black solid lines show the data fits
obtained for each SAXS pattern using an appropriate spherical micelle,
worm-like micelle or vesicle model. Each low q gradient
is consistent with the TEM images.
TEM images obtained for
(a) PGMA29-PMOEMA38 spheres, (b) PGMA29-PMOEMA43 worms, (c) relatively large PGMA29-PMOEMA70 vesicles and (d) relatively small PGMA29-PMOEMA84 vesicles. (e) Corresponding SAXS patterns recorded
at 1.0% w/w for the same four copolymer dispersions, which were each
originally prepared at 10% w/w. Black solid lines show the data fits
obtained for each SAXS pattern using an appropriate spherical micelle,
worm-like micelle or vesicle model. Each low q gradient
is consistent with the TEM images.The radially integrated patterns obtained for these four PGMA29-PMOEMA dispersions are plotted
as the X-ray scattering intensity, I(q), vs the scattering vector, q. It is well-known
that the gradient in the low q region of a SAXS pattern
can be used to assign the predominant copolymer morphology.[64] Spherical micelles exhibit a low q gradient of zero, rigid rods (for which worm-like micelles are a
reasonable approximation) have a gradient of −1, and a gradient
close to −2 indicates the presence of relatively flat bilayers
(or vesicles with thin membranes). Inspecting Figure , the SAXS pattern for PGMA29-PMOEMA38 can be satisfactorily fitted using a spherical micelle model[65] (Figure a,e), which indicated a sphere volume-average diameter (Ds) of 19 nm. This is consistent with the z-average diameter (D) of 26 nm obtained from DLS studies. As expected, the SAXS
pattern recorded for PGMA29-PMOEMA43 could be
fitted using a worm-like micelle model[62] (Figure b,e), which
reported a worm cross-sectional volume-average diameter (Dw) of 16 nm. Patterns obtained for PGMA29-PMOEMA70 and PGMA29-PMOEMA84 were each satisfactorily
fitted using a vesicle model[66] (Figure c,e and Figure d,e, respectively)
with vesicle volume-average diameters (Dv) of 144 and 49 nm, respectively. As expected, the corresponding D indicated by DLS were somewhat
larger at 178 and 51 nm, respectively. It is perhaps worth emphasizing
that the PGMA29-PMOEMA84 vesicles are unusually
small. Based on TEM analysis alone, these nanoparticles were initially
incorrectly assigned as spheres, not least because there was little
or no evidence for vesicle deformation under the ultrahigh vacuum
conditions required for electron microscopy. In retrospect, the lack
of collapse on drying is not unexpected for such relatively small
vesicles, for which the mean thickness of the hydrophobic part of
the membrane (Tm) of approximately 9.3
nm indicated by SAXS analysis is comparable to that of the overall
vesicle radius of ∼25 nm.Like the PGMA29-PMOEMA84 vesicles synthesized at 10% w/w, morphology assignments
also proved to be somewhat problematic for PGMA29-PMOEMA89 synthesized at 10% w/w solids, PGMA29-PMOEMA95 and PGMA29-PMOEMA100 prepared at 20%
w/w solids, and PGMA29-PMOEMA110 prepared at
30% w/w solids. Initially, TEM images were tentatively interpreted
as spheres in each case. However, there was also some evidence for
vesicular morphologies by TEM, with at least some of the dried nano-objects
exhibiting somewhat darker central areas (see Figure S3). Indeed, the corresponding SAXS patterns could
be satisfactorily fitted using a vesicle model (see Figure S4 and Table S2), whereas
attempted data fits using a spherical micelle model were unsuccessful
(see Figure S5). The mean vesicle dimensions
determined by SAXS, TEM and DLS are summarized in Table S3. These vesicles are relatively small (Dv = 50–91 nm by SAXS), which most likely explains
why they resist collapse under ultrahigh vacuum conditions and hence
were originally judged to be spheres in our initial TEM studies.
In Situ SAXS Studies During RAFT Aqueous Emulsion Polymerization
Using the Bespoke Stirrable Cell
The bespoke stirrable reaction
cell (Figure ) is
machined from aluminum: it allows efficient magnetic stirring of the
reaction solution and controlled heating by means of a water jacket
connected to a circulating water bath. Moreover, this cell can be
hermetically sealed, enabling air-sensitive polymerizations to be
conducted under an inert atmosphere. Thus, it is particularly useful
for conducting RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerizations, which are inherently
heterogeneous in nature. Reaction solution volumes of ∼2.0
mL were utilized, which provides sufficient material to enable postmortem
characterization of the resulting diblock copolymer nanoparticles
after the in situ SAXS experiments. This offers an
important advantage compared to the ∼125 μL glass capillaries
used by Derry et al. for their in situ SAXS studies
of RAFT dispersion polymerization.[49] Given
the relatively fast kinetics (Figure ), a synchrotron X-ray source is essential to achieve
the high temporal resolution required for in situ SAXS studies of the RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization of MOEMA
at 70 °C. This enables acquisition of many SAXS patterns even
within the relatively short reaction time scale of 80–120 min.To evaluate the feasibility of conducting the RAFT aqueous emulsion
polymerization of MOEMA using the stirrable reaction cell, two PGMA29-PMOEMA formulations were targeted
where the final morphology was either spheres or vesicles, respectively.
In the former case, a progressive increase in particle diameter was
anticipated after micellar nucleation. In the latter case, the in situ evolution in copolymer morphology from spheres to
worms to vesicles should be observed.[62] Data were collected until no further change in the scattering pattern
was observed, which was taken to indicate the end of the polymerization.
It is emphasized that, as far as we are aware, these experiments represent
the first in situ SAXS studies attempted for any
aqueous emulsion polymerization formulation.
PGMA29-PMOEMA30 Spheres
PGMA29-PMOEMA30 synthesized
at 10% w/w yielded well-defined spherical nano-objects in laboratory-based
experiments (Figure ). Therefore, this PISA formulation was selected for in situ experiments. The postmortem characterization of this aqueous dispersion
of PGMA29-PMOEMA30 nanoparticles is summarized
in Table S4 and Figure S6. GPC analysis
of PGMA29-PMOEMA30 diblock copolymer chains
prepared in the equivalent laboratory-based synthesis indicated very
similar molecular weight data compared to that obtained after the in situ SAXS experiment (Mn =
10 500 and Đ = 1.21 vs Mn = 10 600 g mol–1 and Đ = 1.21, respectively). TEM images recorded for both
dispersions confirmed the formation of a well-defined spherical morphology
in each case (Figure ). DLS studies (see Table S4) indicated
a D of 19 nm (PDI =
0.09) for the laboratory-based synthesis of PGMA29-PMOEMA30 spheres, whereas the nanoparticles obtained after the in situ SAXS experiment using the same PISA formulation
had an almost identical D of 18 nm (PDI = 0.10).
Figure 5
Representative TEM images recorded for the dried
PGMA29-PMOEMA30 spheres prepared via RAFT aqueous
emulsion polymerization of MOEMA at 10% w/w: (a) after in
situ SAXS experiments using the stirrable reaction cell shown
in Figure and (b)
after a laboratory-based synthesis using precisely the same PISA formulation.
Representative TEM images recorded for the dried
PGMA29-PMOEMA30 spheres prepared via RAFT aqueous
emulsion polymerization of MOEMA at 10% w/w: (a) after in
situ SAXS experiments using the stirrable reaction cell shown
in Figure and (b)
after a laboratory-based synthesis using precisely the same PISA formulation.SAXS patterns were collected every 5 min for 90
min (Figure a). Two
aspects of this RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization were used to
compare the progress of the polymerization during the in situ SAXS experiments with the kinetic data obtained from the laboratory-based
synthesis. These features were: (i) the characteristic time required
for the onset of micellar nucleation and (ii) the time at which the
MOEMA polymerization was judged to have reached completion. Initially,
the growing PMOEMA chains remained fully soluble in the reaction mixture
and the rate of the ensuing RAFT solution polymerization was relatively
slow.[62] However, once this block had become
sufficiently hydrophobic to induce micellar nucleation, a significant
rate enhancement was observed.[37,45] This phenomenon is
readily apparent in the kinetic data obtained for the laboratory-based
synthesis (Figure a).
Figure 6
SAXS patterns recorded during the RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization
of MOEMA targeting PGMA29-PMOEMA30 at 10% w/w
solids using the stirrable reaction cell (Figure ). (a) Patterns recorded every 5 min from
0 to 90 min. (b) Patterns recorded every 1 min from 0 to 20 min and
(c) a plot of I(q) at q = 0.025 Å–1 vs time. The onset of micellar
nucleation is indicated by an arrow. Patterns are offset by an arbitrary
factor to aid clarity in panels a and b.
SAXS patterns recorded during the RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization
of MOEMA targeting PGMA29-PMOEMA30 at 10% w/w
solids using the stirrable reaction cell (Figure ). (a) Patterns recorded every 5 min from
0 to 90 min. (b) Patterns recorded every 1 min from 0 to 20 min and
(c) a plot of I(q) at q = 0.025 Å–1 vs time. The onset of micellar
nucleation is indicated by an arrow. Patterns are offset by an arbitrary
factor to aid clarity in panels a and b.To recap, micellar nucleation occurred at ∼35 min (Figure a), which corresponded
to a MOEMA conversion of 55% and a critical DP of 17 for the structure-directing
PMOEMA block. In situ NMR experiments indicated that
a MOEMA conversion of 99% was achieved within 90 min at 70 °C
for this PISA formulation. In the literature, visual inspection has
been used to identify the onset of micellar nucleation for RAFT aqueous
dispersion polymerizations because there is an associated increase
in turbidity for such initially homogeneous PISA formulations.[62] However, in the case of RAFT aqueous emulsion
polymerization, the inherently heterogeneous nature of the reaction
mixture precludes this approach (i.e., the initial aqueous monomer
emulsion is already highly turbid). Fortunately, SAXS can readily
distinguish between molecularly dissolved copolymer chains and the
formation of nascent micelles, since the latter species lead to more
intense X-ray scattering at low q (Guinier regime).
To determine the onset of micellization during the in situ SAXS experiment, the scattering intensity, I(q), at an arbitrary q value of 0.025 Å–1 was plotted as a function of time for the first 20
min of the polymerization (Figure c). The increase in scattering intensity observed after
9–10 min indicates the formation of larger scattering objects
and hence corresponds to micelle formation. One of the reviewers of
this manuscript suggested that we calculate the Porod invariant (Q)[67,68] for our SAXS data and plot this
parameter against time. This alternative approach yielded essentially
the same time for the micellar nucleation event (data not shown).
It is noteworthy that the onset of micellar nucleation occurs on a
somewhat shorter time scale for this in situ SAXS
experiment compared to the equivalent laboratory-based PISA synthesis.
This is not unexpected, as a significant rate enhancement was observed
for the RAFT dispersion polymerization of benzyl methacrylate in mineral
oil.[49] The faster rate of polymerization
in the presence of the high-energy X-rays was attributed to the ionizing
nature of such radiation, which can generate an additional radical
flux.[69,70]The MOEMA polymerization was judged
to have reached completion within 90 min, because no discernible change
in the scattering pattern was observed after this time point. This
was supported by postmortem analysis of the quenched reaction mixture
by 1H NMR spectroscopy, which indicated a final MOEMA conversion
of 98%. Such kinetics are comparable to those observed for laboratory-based
syntheses, although the nucleation event occurs earlier during the in situ SAXS studies. Micelle formation is indicated by
the appearance of a local minimum at q = 0.091 Å–1. This distinctive signature is first observed after
15 min and enables estimation of the mean core radius (Rs) of the nascent spherical micelles using the well-known
relationship, d = 4.49/q, where d is a real-space distance corresponding to Rs. During the MOEMA polymerization, the local minimum
gradually shifts to lower q at longer reaction times,
indicating the expected progressive increase in nanoparticle radius
(Figure S7).[49] A sphere radius, Rs, of 8.3 nm was calculated
from the final SAXS pattern, corresponding to a mean sphere diameter, Ds, of 16.6 nm; this is comparable to the postmortem z-average diameter of 18 nm indicated by DLS studies. After
the MOEMA polymerization was complete, a SAXS pattern was also recorded
for a 1.0% w/w aqueous dispersion of spheres after a 10-fold dilution
of the final reaction solution. This approach enabled a satisfactory
data fit to be obtained using the spherical micelle model without
requiring any prior knowledge of the structure factor that is associated
with interparticle interactions (Figure S8a and Table S5). A Ds value of 18.8 nm was determined from this data fit. By incorporating
an appropriate structure factor, the final scattering pattern recorded
for the undiluted 10% w/w aqueous dispersion could also be fitted
to a spherical micelle model, giving a comparable Ds value of 19.1 nm (Figure S8b and Table S5).
PGMA29-PMOEMA70 Vesicles
For a RAFT dispersion polymerization,
targeting a suitably asymmetric diblock copolymer composition under
appropriate conditions normally leads to the consecutive formation
of spheres, worms and ultimately vesicles during the course of the
reaction.[49,62] To investigate whether the stirrable reaction
cell allowed access to such higher order copolymer morphologies, the
RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization of MOEMA was conducted targeting
PGMA29-PMOEMA70 at a copolymer concentration
of 10% w/w. According to the phase diagram (Figure ), this PISA formulation should produce vesicles
as the final copolymer morphology at full MOEMA conversion. Postmortem
GPC characterization of the PGMA29-PMOEMA70 diblock
copolymer chains indicated Mn values of
16 100 and 16 600 g mol–1 for the in situ SAXS experiment and corresponding laboratory-based synthesis, respectively,
with relatively low dispersities (Đ < 1.15)
being obtained in each case (Table S4 and Figure S9). Representative TEM images for these PGMA29-PMOEMA70 diblock copolymer nano-objects are shown in Figure .
Figure 7
Representative TEM images
recorded for the dried PGMA29-PMOEMA70 diblock
copolymer nano-objects obtained by RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization
of MOEMA at 10% w/w: (a) using the stirrable reaction cell shown in Figure and (b) via the
corresponding laboratory-based synthesis.
Representative TEM images
recorded for the dried PGMA29-PMOEMA70 diblock
copolymer nano-objects obtained by RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization
of MOEMA at 10% w/w: (a) using the stirrable reaction cell shown in Figure and (b) via the
corresponding laboratory-based synthesis.A predominantly vesicular morphology is clearly present in both cases,
but some short worms and spheres are also discernible for the MOEMA
polymerization conducted in the stirrable reaction cell (Figure a). DLS studies indicated
that somewhat smaller vesicles were obtained during the in
situ SAXS experiment compared to those produced in the laboratory-based
synthesis (D were 124
and 178 nm, respectively), with relatively narrow size distributions
(PDI ≤ 0.08) being obtained in each case. This size difference
is consistent with the minor populations of short worms and spheres
observed by TEM.It is not currently clear whether this subtle
difference in copolymer morphology is the result of a difference in
mechanical agitation efficiency or perhaps the rate enhancement induced
by X-ray irradiation. SAXS patterns were recorded regularly during
the MOEMA polymerization at 70 °C, with no further change in
such data being discernible after 90 min (Figure ). Assuming that the polymerization was complete
on this time scale, this suggests a modest rate enhancement compared
to that observed for the corresponding laboratory-based synthesis,
which required 2 h at 70 °C to achieve more than 95% conversion.
A local minimum at q = 0.065 Å–1 became evident after around 15 min, suggesting that the transformation
from dissolved copolymer chains to nascent spherical micelles occurred
within this time frame. Close inspection of scattering patterns recorded
at 1 min intervals within the first 15 min indicated that micellar
nucleation appears to occur between 6 and 8 min (Figure c). As observed for the PGMA29-PMOEMA30 spheres, micellar nucleation clearly
occurs on a significantly shorter time scale than the 32 min indicated
by 1H NMR analysis of the equivalent laboratory-based experiment
(Figure b). As discussed
above, a similar rate enhancement has been reported for the in situ dispersion polymerization of benzyl methacrylate
in mineral oil[49] by Derry and co-workers,
who attributed this phenomenon to the additional radical flux generated
by the high-energy X-rays.[69,70] A plot of I(q) at an arbitrary q value of
0.025 Å–1 vs time indicated that the onset
of micellar nucleation actually occurs at a reaction time of approximately
6 min (Figure d).
The expected evolution in copolymer morphology from spheres to worms
to vesicles at longer polymerization times was confirmed by the change
in gradient at low q (for 0.005 ≤ q ≤ 0.015 Å–1) (Figure b). The initial gradient is
close to zero, as expected for spherical micelles. This gradient becomes
significantly more negative after 27 min, at which the mean PMOEMA
DP is estimated to be 37. According to the phase diagram (Figure ), this DP corresponds
to the onset of the sphere-to-worm transition. Furthermore, the plot
of I(q) at q =
0.01 Å–1 vs time (Figure b) indicates a sharp increase in the scattering
intensity between 25 and 30 min, further supporting such a morphological
transition. For the time period from 27 to 53 min, the low q gradient is close to −1, which indicates the presence
of linear worms. The monotonic increase in I(q) during this period suggests the growth of initially short
worms to form longer worms via 1D fusion with multiple spheres. The
low q gradient becomes approximately −2 after
70 min, which indicates the formation of vesicles. At the end of the
polymerization (∼90 min) the scattering intensity becomes constant
and the gradient tends to −2.4. Approximately the same gradient
(−2.3) was observed over the same q range
(0.005 ≤ q ≤ 0.015 Å–1) for the final diblock copolymer vesicles after dilution to 1.0%
w/w (Figure S10). Thus, this more negative
gradient indicates the formation of relatively thick-walled vesicles
at the end of the reaction. The final scattering pattern acquired
for the in situ synthesis conducted at 10% w/w was
also fitted to a vesicle model using a restricted q range of 0.005–0.14 Å–1 to avoid any
influence of the structure factor (Figure S11 and Table S5).[49] This approach gave a Dv of 115 nm, which
is consistent with the D value of 124 nm reported by DLS.
Figure 8
SAXS patterns recorded during the PISA
synthesis of PGMA29-PMOEMA70 via RAFT aqueous
emulsion polymerization of MOEMA at 10% w/w solids using the stirrable
reaction cell (Figure ). (a) Patterns recorded every 5 min from 0 to 120 min. (b) The corresponding
plot of I(q) at q = 0.01 Å–1 and the gradient at low q (0.005 ≤ q ≤ 0.015 Å–1) vs time. (c) Patterns recorded each minute from
0 to 15 min. (d) The corresponding plot of I(q) at q = 0.025 Å–1 vs time. The onset of micellar nucleation at 5–6 min is indicated
by an arrow. Patterns are offset by an arbitrary factor to aid clarity
in panels a and c.
SAXS patterns recorded during the PISA
synthesis of PGMA29-PMOEMA70 via RAFT aqueous
emulsion polymerization of MOEMA at 10% w/w solids using the stirrable
reaction cell (Figure ). (a) Patterns recorded every 5 min from 0 to 120 min. (b) The corresponding
plot of I(q) at q = 0.01 Å–1 and the gradient at low q (0.005 ≤ q ≤ 0.015 Å–1) vs time. (c) Patterns recorded each minute from
0 to 15 min. (d) The corresponding plot of I(q) at q = 0.025 Å–1 vs time. The onset of micellar nucleation at 5–6 min is indicated
by an arrow. Patterns are offset by an arbitrary factor to aid clarity
in panels a and c.Depending on the precise
time interval, the local minima observed in these SAXS patterns (for
which q values range from 0.074 to 0.040 Å–1) can provide approximate dimensions for the spheres,
worms and vesicles. More specifically, real-space distances corresponding
to the sphere core diameter (Ds), worm
cross-sectional diameter, (Dw), or the
overall vesicle membrane thickness (Tv) were calculated (Figure S12). After
micellar nucleation, Ds increased monotonically
from 12.2 to 16.5 nm as the MOEMA polymerization progressed. Subsequently,
during the sphere-to-worm transition, the Dw initially dropped slightly to 15.1 nm as multiple spheres fuse to
form short worms, then increased monotonically up to 18.6 nm. Following
the worm-to-vesicle transition, Tv is
around 15.3 nm, which suggests some degree of interdigitation by the
hydrophobic PMOEMA chains within the vesicle membrane. It should be
recognized that the above data is best used as a relative guide to
changes in the nano-object dimensions during the MOEMA polymerization.
Nevertheless, fitting the SAXS pattern obtained for the pure vesicles
at full monomer conversion using the appropriate scattering model
indicated essentially the same volume-average membrane thickness (Tm + 4Rg = 15.3 nm),
where Tm is the thickness of the hydrophobic
part of the membrane alone, once the radius of gyration of the stabilizer
chains is taken into account. In principle, if a higher PMOEMA DP
was targeted the Tv should increase further
with increasing monomer conversion[52] but
in this particular case the target core-forming block DP was only
just sufficient to form vesicles (see phase diagram in Figure ).Finally, we examined
whether the stirrable reaction cell could provide sufficient mechanical
agitation to enable the RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization of a
sparingly soluble monomer using a closely related PGMA48 macro-CTA.[30] Accordingly, 2,2,2-trifluoroethyl
methacrylate (TFEMA; aqueous solubility ∼2.9 g dm–3 at 25 °C)[71] was utilized instead
of MOEMA. This PISA synthesis was conducted at 10% w/w solids and
proceeded to 99% conversion within 170 min at 70 °C (see Figure S13 in the Supporting Information). Postmortem
TEM studies confirmed the formation of well-defined kinetically-trapped
spheres, while DLS analysis indicated an intensity-average diameter
of 60 nm (PDI = 0.08). The in situ SAXS data indicated
an upturn in scattering intensity after approximately 1 h and a gradual
evolution in particle size over the course of the polymerization (final
PTFEMA core diameter, Ds = 47 nm). This
experiment is important because it suggests that the new stirrable
reaction cell should allow in situ SAXS studies of
the RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization of most water-immiscible
vinyl monomers, regardless of their aqueous solubility.
Conclusions
In summary, the RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization of 2-methoxyethyl
methacrylate (MOEMA) at 70 °C using a water-soluble poly(glycerol
monomethacrylate) (PGMA) macromolecular chain transfer agent can produce
diblock copolymer worms and vesicles as well as spherical nanoparticles.
Systematic variation of the diblock copolymer composition and the
copolymer concentration enabled construction of a phase diagram, which
is essential for reproducible targeting of each of these three morphologies.
A bespoke reaction cell provides sufficient mechanical agitation to
form micrometer-sized monomer droplets and hence enables the first in situ SAXS studies to be conducted for any RAFT aqueous
emulsion polymerization. Moreover, this new cell has a reaction volume
of ∼2.0 mL, which is sufficient to allow postmortem analysis
of the final diblock copolymer nano-objects using 1H NMR
spectroscopy, DLS and TEM, as well as GPC analysis of the diblock
copolymer chains.A modest rate enhancement was observed during
these in situ SAXS experiments compared to the equivalent
laboratory-based syntheses. This kinetic effect is attributed to the
ionizing nature of the high-energy X-ray radiation and is much less
than that previously reported for RAFT dispersion polymerizations
conducted in mineral oil using capillary cells.[48] Analysis of the in situ SAXS patterns
indicated that a significant increase in the rate of polymerization
occurs immediately after micellar nucleation, which suggests the formation
of monomer-swollen nascent micelles. This is consistent with the rate
enhancement observed by 1H NMR spectroscopy studies. It
is believed that the relatively high aqueous solubility of MOEMA leads
to enhanced PMOEMA chain mobility within the growing monomer-swollen
nanoparticle cores at intermediate conversion. Such core solvation
is most likely important for the observed evolution in copolymer morphology
under certain conditions. Thus, provided that the water-soluble PGMA
steric stabilizer block is relatively short (DP = 29), sphere–sphere
fusion occurs efficiently on the time scale of the polymerization,
which enables the formation of well-defined worms or vesicles as well
as spheres. Determination of the low q gradient during
these in situ SAXS studies has enabled the direct
observation of the in situ evolution in diblock copolymer
morphology from spheres to worms to vesicles during RAFT aqueous emulsion
polymerization for the first time. This is important, because such
PISA formulations are applicable to a much wider range of vinyl monomers
than RAFT aqueous dispersion polymerization.[45] Moreover, such worms may be useful as new aqueous thickeners[21] while the vesicles may offer potential applications
for microencapsulation[21] or as opacifiers.[41]In preliminary experiments, we have recently
confirmed that the same experimental set-up also enables in
situ studies of (i) the RAFT aqueous emulsion polymerization
of sparingly soluble monomers such as 2,2,2-trifluoroethyl methacrylate,[30] (ii) charge-stabilized latexes via conventional
aqueous emulsion polymerization[72] and (iii)
the formation of colloidal polymer/silica nanocomposite particles.[73] Thus, this new approach is of broader significance
and can be expected to provide important new insights regarding the
evolution of structure for various heterogeneous colloidal soft matter
systems in the future.
Authors: Jennifer A Balmer; Oleksandr O Mykhaylyk; Steven P Armes; J Patrick A Fairclough; Anthony J Ryan; Jeremie Gummel; Martin W Murray; Kenneth A Murray; Neal S J Williams Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2010-12-20 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Nicholas J Warren; Oleksandr O Mykhaylyk; Anthony J Ryan; Mark Williams; Tristan Doussineau; Philippe Dugourd; Rodolphe Antoine; Giuseppe Portale; Steven P Armes Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2015-01-27 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Saul J Hunter; Nicholas J W Penfold; Elizabeth R Jones; Thomas Zinn; Oleksandr O Mykhaylyk; Steven P Armes Journal: Macromolecules Date: 2022-04-17 Impact factor: 6.057