Copolymerization, anionic butadiene-isoprene reactivity

AlkyUithium compounds are primarily used as initiators for polymerizations of styrenes and dienes (52). These initiators are too reactive for alkyl methacrylates and vinylpyridines. / -ButyUithium [109-72-8] is used commercially to initiate anionic homopolymerization and copolymerization of butadiene, isoprene, and styrene with linear and branched stmctures. Because of the high degree of association (hexameric), -butyIUthium-initiated polymerizations are often effected at elevated temperatures (>50° C) to increase the rate of initiation relative to propagation and thus to obtain polymers with narrower molecular weight distributions (53). Hydrocarbon solutions of this initiator are quite stable at room temperature for extended periods of time the rate of decomposition per month is 0.06% at 20°C (39). 

Copolymerization of styrene with diolefins provides further support that monomer coordinates with the cationic site prior to addition. Korotkov (218) showed that in homopolymerizations styrene is more reactive than butadiene, but in copolymerization the butadiene reacted first at its homopolymerization rate and when it was exhausted the styrene reacted at its homopolymerization rate. This interesting result has been duplicated by Kuntz (245) and analogous results have been obtained by Spirin and coworkers (237) for the styrene-isoprene system. Presumably, the diene complexes more strongly than styrene with the lithium and excludes styrene from the site. That the complex occurs at a cationic site, rather than at the anion or the metal-carbon bond, is indicated by the fact that dienes form more stable complexes than styrene with Lewis acids (246). It should be emphasized that selective monomer coordination is not the only factor influencing reactivities in copolymerizations. Of greatest importance are the relative reactivities of the different polymer anions. The more resonance-stabilized anion is more readily formed and is less reactive for polymerizing the co-monomer. 

An examination of reported reactivity ratios (Table 6) shows that the behaviour rj > 1, r2 1 or vice versa is a common feature of anionic copolymerization. Only in copolymerizations involving the monomers 1,1-diphenylethylene and stilbene, which cannot homopolymerize, do we find <1, r2 <1 [212—215], and hence the alternating tendency so characteristic of many free radical initiated copolymerizations. Normally one monomer is much more reactive to either type of active centre in the order acrylonitrile > methylmethacrylate > styrene > butadiene > isoprene. This is the order of electron affinities of the monomers as measured polarographically in polar solvents [216, 217]. In other words, the reactivity correlates well with the overall thermodynamic stability of the product. Variations of reactivity ratio occur with different solvents and counter-ions but the gross order is predictable. 

Selective solvation has been proved in many cases [233-235]. On the other hand, the behaviour r, 1, Y2 1 is a common feature of anionic copolymerization. One monomer is usually much more reactive to either type of active centre in the order acrylonitrile > methyl methacrylate > styrene > butadiene > isoprene, in agreement with its electron affinity [235]. 

The possibilities inherent in the anionic copolymerization of butadiene and styrene by means of organolithium initiators, as might have been expected, have led to many new developments. The first of these would naturally be the synthesis of a butadiene-styrene copolymer to match (or improve upon) emulsion-prepared SBR, in view of the superior molecular weight control possible in anionic polymerization. The copolymerization behavior of butadiene (or isoprene) and styrene is shown in Table 2.15 (Ohlinger and Bandermann, 1980 Morton and Huang, 1979 Ells, 1963 Hill et al., 1983 Spirin et al., 1962). As indicated earlier, unlike the free radical type of polymerization, these anionic systems show a marked sensitivity of the reactivity ratios to solvent type (a similar effect is noted for different alkali metal counterions). Thus, in nonpolar solvents, butadiene (or isoprene) is preferentially polymerized initially, to the virtual exclusion of the styrene, while the reverse is true in polar solvents. This has been ascribed (Morton, 1983) to the profound effect of solvation on the structure of the carbon-lithium bond, which becomes much more ionic in such media, as discussed previously. The resulting polymer formed by copolymerization in hydrocarbon media is described as a tapered block copolymer it consists of a block of polybutadiene with little incorporated styrene comonomer followed by a segment with both butadiene and styrene and then a block of polystyrene. The structure is schematically represented below ... 

Electron-withdrawing substituents in anionic polymerizations enhance electron density at the double bonds or stabilize the carbanions by resonance. Anionic copolymerizations in many respects behave similarly to the cationic ones. For some comonomer pairs steric effects give rise to a tendency to altemate. The reactivities of the monomers in copolymerizations and the compositions of the resultant copolymers are subject to solvent polarity and to the effects of the counterions. The two, just as in cationic polymerizations, cannot be considered independently from each other. This, again, is due to the tightness of the ion pairs and to the amount of solvation. Furthermore, only monomers that possess similar polarity can be copolymerized by an anionic mechanism. Thus, for instance, styrene derivatives copolymerize with each other. Styrene, however, is unable to add to a methyl methacrylate anion, though it copolymerizes with butadiene and isoprene. In copolymerizations initiated by w-butyllithium in toluene and in tetrahydrofuran at-78 °C, the following order of reactivity with methyl methacrylate anions was observed. In toluene the order is diphenylmethyl methacrylate > benzyl methacrylate > methyl methacrylate > ethyl methacrylate > a-methylbenzyl methacrylate > isopropyl methacrylate > t-butyl methacrylate > trityl methacrylate > a,a -dimethyl-benzyl methacrylate. In tetrahydrofuran the order changes to trityl methacrylate > benzyl methacrylate > methyl methacrylate > diphenylmethyl methacrylate > ethyl methacrylate > a-methylbenzyl methacrylate > isopropyl methacrylate > a,a -dimethylbenzyl methacrylate > t-butyl methacrylate. 

It was anticipated that the copolymerization of substituted 1,1-dipheny-lethylenes with dienes such as butadiene and isoprene would be complicated by the very unfavorable monomer reactivity ratio for the addition of poly(-dienyl)lithium compounds to 1,1-diphenylethylene [133, 134]. Yuki and Oka-moto [133, 134] calculated values of ri=54 and ri=29 in hydrocarbon solutions for the copolymerization of 1,1-diphenylethylene (M2) with butadiene (Mi) and isoprene (Mi), respectively. Although the corresponding values in THE are ri(butadiene)=0.13 and ri(isoprene)=0.12, this would not be an acceptable solution since THE is known to form polymers with high 1,2-microstructures [3]. Anionic copolymerizations of butadiene (Mi) with excess l-(4-dimethyla-mino-phenyl)-l-phenylethylene (M2) were conducted in benzene at room temperature for 24-48 h using scc-butyllithium as initiator [189]. Anisole, triethy-lamine and ferf-butyl methyl ether were added in ratios of [B]/[RLi]=60, 20, 30, respectively, to promote copolymerization and minimize 1,2-enchainment in the polybutadiene units. Narrow molecular weight distribution copolymers with Mn=14xl0 to 32x10 (Mw/Mn=1.02-1.03) and 8, 12, and 30 amine... 

The reactivities of substituted monomers are different from those of the unsubstituted ones. For example, in crosspropagation an electron donating methyl group introduced to the C = C bond of a vinyl monomer makes it less reactive in anionic copolymerization, while it increases its reactivity in a cationic process. Thus, in THF at 25 °C the reactivity of isoprene towards polystyrene anion is lower by about a factor of 2 than that of butadiene (only one end of this bivalent monomer is affected),... 

The distinction between the rates of homo- and copolymerization apparently is misapprehended by some workers. For example, a recent review 141) discusses the results of McGrath 142) who reported butadiene to be more reactive in polymerization in hexane than isoprene, whether with respect to lithium polybutadiene or polyisoprene, although the homopropagation of lithium polyisoprene in hexane was found to be faster than of polybutadiene. The miscomprehension led to the erroneous statement14l) McGrath 142) results regarding the rate constants for butadiene and isoprene place in clear perspective the bizarre assertion 140) that butadiene will be twice as reactive as isoprene (in anionic co-polymerization). 

Tapered Block Copolymers. The alkyllithium-initiated copolymerizations of styrene with dienes, especially isoprene and butadiene, have been extensively investigated and illustrate the important aspects of anionic copolymerization. As shown in Table 15, monomer reactivity ratios for dienes copolymerizing with styrene in hydrocarbon solution range from approximately 8 to 17, while the corresponding monomer reactivity ratios for styrene vary from 0.04 to 0.25. Thus, butadiene and isoprene are preferentially incorporated into the copolymer initially. This type of copolymer composition is described as either a tapered block copolymer or a graded block copolymer. The monomer sequence distribution can be described by the structures below ... 

In the present case, no matter what kind of catalytic system was chosen, the butadiene content in the copolymer is always greater than that in the feed. Values of the reactivity ratios (and their product) found with different catalysts are listed in table 20. Generally, if the reactivity ratio of Bd is greater than that of isoprene, the copolymerization process is assumed to be by a coordination anionic mechanism. Thus, rare earth coordination catalysts again exhibit a coordination-anionic mechanism in the polymerization of diene. 

The living anionic polymers of protected functional methacrylate monomers herein introduced are very similar in reactivity and stability to those of MMA. Accordingly, these living polymers can initiate the polymerization of MMA, tBMA, and other protected functional methacrylate monomers, resulting in block copolymers with tailored chain structures. Complete aossover block copolymerizations among these methacrylate monomers are possible. Furthermore, living anionic polymers of styrene, a-methylstyrene, isoprene, and 1,3-butadiene initiate the polymerization of protected functional methacrylate monomers to afford well-defined AB diblock copolymers. In order to avoid ester carbonyl attack by the chain-end anions, the living anionic polymers should be end-capped with 1,1-diphenylethylene... 

A further distinguishing feature of ionic copolymerizations is the strong dependence of reactivity ratios upon the nature of the solvent and the counter-ion (and hence the initiator). These effects can be dramatic and can lead to a reversing of the order of relative monomer reactivities (cf. reactivity ratios for anionic copolymerization of styrene with butadiene and isoprene in different solvents). 

---