Copolymerization model description

The various copolymerization models that appear in the literature (terminal, penultimate, complex dissociation, complex participation, etc.) should not be considered as alternative descriptions. They are approximations made through necessity to reduce complexity. They should, at best, be considered as a subset of some overall scheme for copolymerization. Any unified theory, if such is possible, would have to take into account all of the factors mentioned above. The models used to describe copolymerization reaction mechanisms arc normally chosen to be the simplest possible model capable of explaining a given set of experimental data. They do not necessarily provide, nor are they meant to be, a complete description of the mechanism. Much of the impetus for model development and drive for understanding of the mechanism of copolymerization conies from the need to predict composition and rates. Developments in models have followed the development and application of analytical techniques that demonstrate the inadequacy of an earlier model. 

In the first part of this chapter, the two most common copolymerization models will be discussed. Most importantly, this is done in order to show the models with consistent nomenclature. Furthermore, the two models are believed to provide physically the most realistic descriptions of copolymerization reactions. 

Tire simplest model for describing binary copolyinerization of two monomers, Ma and Mr, is the terminal model. The model has been applied to a vast number of systems and, in most cases, appears to give an adequate description of the overall copolymer composition at least for low conversions. The limitations of the terminal model generally only become obvious when attempting to describe the monomer sequence distribution or the polymerization kinetics. Even though the terminal model does not always provide an accurate description of the copolymerization process, it remains useful for making qualitative predictions, as a starting point for parameter estimation and it is simple to apply. 

This model provides a better description of the rate of copolymerization for some systems but has been criticized as having too many adjustable parameters.174... 

A detailed description of AA, BB, CC step-growth copolymerization with phase separation is an involved task. Generally, the system we are attempting to model is a polymerization which proceeds homogeneously until some critical point when phase separation occurs into what we will call hard and soft domains. Each chemical species present is assumed to distribute itself between the two phases at the instant of phase separation as dictated by equilibrium thermodynamics. The polymerization proceeds now in the separate domains, perhaps at differen-rates. The monomers continue to distribute themselves between the phases, according to thermodynamic dictates, insofar as the time scales of diffusion and reaction will allow. Newly-formed polymer goes to one or the other phase, also dictated by the thermodynamic preference of its built-in chain micro — architecture. 

Under current treatment of statistical method a set of the states of the Markovian stochastic process describing the ensemble of macromolecules with labeled units can be not only discrete but also continuous. So, for instance, when the description of the products of living anionic copolymerization is performed within the framework of a terminal model the role of the label characterizing the state of a monomeric unit is played by the moment when this unit forms in the course of a macroradical growth [25]. 

In addition to the above mentioned dynamic problems of copolymerization theory this review naturally dwells on more traditional statistical problems of calculation of instantaneous composition, parameters of copolymer molecular structure and composition distribution. The manner of presentation of the material based on the formalism of Markov s chains theory allows one to calculate in the uniform way all the above mentioned copolymer characteristics for the different kinetic models by means of elementary arithmetical operations. In Sect. 3 which is devoted to these problems, one can also find a number of original results concerning the statistical description of the copolymers produced through the complex radical mechanism. 

The majority of the above mentioned kinetic schemes were used for the description of the multicomponent copolymerization of three or more types m of monomers. The generalization of the scheme (2.1) for m = 3 was carried out by Alfred and Goldfinger [45] and for arbitrary m — by Walling and Briggs [46]. In this case the terminal model... 

In contrast to the above mentioned models, the similar statistical description of the products of the complex-radical copolymerization occurring through the scheme (2.5) has been carried out quite recently [37, 49, 55-60]. Within the framework of this Seiner-Litt model, both copolymer composition [37,49, 55-58] and fractions of the different triads and blocks of the monomer units in the macromolecules were calculated [57]. The probability approaches which were applied in these works, are regarded as being of limited applicability in contrast to the general statistical method [49, 59, 60], By means of the latter method, the sequence distribution and composition inhomogeneity of the copolymer were completely described [49, 60] and also thorough calculations of its microstructure with the account for the tactidty were carried out [59, 60]. 

The consistent kinetic analysis of the copolymerization with the simultaneous occurrence of the reactions (2.1) and (2.5) leads to the conclusion that the probabilities of the sequences of the monomer units M, and M2 in the macromolecules can not be described by a Markov chain of any finite order. Consequently, in this very case we deal with non-Markovian copolymers, the general theory for which is not yet available [6]. However, a comprehensive statistical description of the products of the complex-radical copolymerization within the framework of the Seiner-Litt model via the consideration of the certain auxiliary Markov chain was carried out [49, 59, 60]. 

When the copolymerization is carried out under real conditions, each researcher is to answer a question which kinetic model is preferable for the proper description of the experimental data. One should also know the validity of the model under consideration, the numerical values of its parameters, and the expected accuracy of the calculated copolymer characteristics predicted within the framework of this model. Modern experimental methods for analyzing the copolymer composition... 

When the above-mentioned independence of r, on composition is not the case, it is quite necessary to study different possibilities of the description of the copolymerization in a given system by means of more complicated models. For instance, to establish the applicability of the penultimate model for the copolymers produced at low conversions, one may use the following relations [275] ... 

The basic reaction scheme for free-radical bulk/solution styrene homopolymerization is described below. A complete description of copolymerization kinetics involving styrene is not given here however, the homopolymerization kinetic scheme can be easily extended to describe copolymerization using the pseudo-kinetic rate constant method [6]. Such practice has been used by many research groups [7-10] and has been used extensively for modelling of copolymerization involving styrene by Gao and Penlidis [11]. In this section, all rate constants are defined as chemically controlled, i.e. they are only a function of temperature. 

This model provides a better description of the rate of copolymerization for some systems but has been criticized as having too many adjustable paramelers. " Fukuda and coworkers have recently derived a model equivalent to the Russo-Munari model but where the implicit penultimate model is used to describe the propagation kinetics. 

To represent dispersion polymerization in conventional liquid media, several models have been reported in the literature, mainly focused on the particle formation and growth [33, 34] or on the reaction kinetics. Since our first aim is the reliable description of the reaction kinetics, we focus on the second type of models only. The model developed by Ahmed and Poehlein [35, 36], applied to the dispersion polymerization of styrene in ethanol, was probably the first one from which the polymerization rates in the two reaction loci have been calculated. A more comprehensive model was later reported by Saenz and Asua [37] for the dispersion copolymerization of styrene and butyl acrylate in ethanol-water medium. The particle growth as well as the entire MWD were predicted, once more evaluating the reaction rates in both phases and accounting for an irreversible radical mass transport from the continuous to the dispersed phase. Finally, a further model predicting conversion, particle number, and particle size distribution was proposed by Araujo and Pinto [38] for the dispersion polymerization of styrene in ethanol. 

This model for the copolymerization described by Eq. (3.17) is called the terminal model. The model needs four propagation steps to describe the rate of copolymerization, implying that only the last unit in the growing chain determines the reactivity. However, it is known in literature (9) that for a system like, e.g., styrene-methylmethacrylate, the expression for the propagation rate [Eq. (3.17)] is not sufficient to give a good description of the polymerization. Not only the last unit, but also the one before the last unit may influence the reactivity. This eflect is known as the penultimate ejfect. 

---