Using Triethylborane to Manipulate Reactivity Ratios in Epoxide-Anhydride Copolymerization: Application to the Synthesis of Polyethers with Degradable Ester Functions
KAUST DepartmentPhysical Science and Engineering (PSE) Division
Chemical Science Program
Office of the President
KAUST Grant NumberBAS/1/1374-01-01
Permanent link to this recordhttp://hdl.handle.net/10754/674970
MetadataShow full item record
AbstractThe anionic ring-opening copolymerization (ROCOP) of epoxides, namely of ethylene oxide (EO), with anhydrides (AH) generally produces strictly alternating copolymers. With triethylborane (TEB)-assisted ROCOP of EO with AH, statistical copolymers of high molar mass including ether and ester units could be obtained. In the presence of TEB, the reactivity ratio of EO (rEO), which is normally equal to 0 in its absence, could be progressively raised to values lower than 1 or higher than 1. Conditions were even found to obtain rEO equal or close to 1. Samples of P(EO-co-ester) with minimal compositional drift could be synthesized; upon basic degradation of their ester linkages, these samples afforded poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO) diol samples of narrow molar mass distribution. In other cases where rEO were lower or higher than 1, the PEO diol samples eventually isolated after degradation exhibited a broader distribution of molar masses because of the compositional drift of initial P(EO-co-ester) samples.
CitationChidara, V. K., Gnanou, Y., & Feng, X. (2022). Using Triethylborane to Manipulate Reactivity Ratios in Epoxide-Anhydride Copolymerization: Application to the Synthesis of Polyethers with Degradable Ester Functions. Molecules, 27(2), 466. doi:10.3390/molecules27020466
SponsorsThis research was funded by KAUST under baseline funding (BAS/1/1374-01-01).
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.