Systematic polymer names

CAS states (2) that specific polymers are named on the basis of the monomers from which they are formed and/or on the basis of their structure, as represented by an SRU. Since original documents do not always provide sufficient structural information to allow generation of the SRU name, the method most frequently used for describing polymeric substances is by citation of the component monomers. A few commercial polymers, each of which accounts for a large number of index entries, are indexed only at the SRU-based systematic polymer name. Systematic (SRU) nomenclature for polymers has been adopted from the system developed by the Committee on Nomenclature of the Division of Polymer Chemistry of the American Chemical Society (ACS) (14). Note the lUPAC recommendations (PureAppl. Chem. 48,373-385 (1976)) are in full agreement with CAS practice. Names derived by this system, in addition to monomer-based entries, are cited for polymers whose structural repeating imits are well-documented or can confidently be assumed. 

The first publication of the lUPAC in the area of macromolecular nomenclature was in 1952 by the Sub-commission on Nomenclature of the then lUPAC Commission on Macromolecules, which drew on the talents of such remarkable individuals as J. J. Hermans, M. L. Huggins, O. Kratky, and H. F. Mark. That report [1] was a landmark in that, for the first time, it systematized the naming of macromolecules and certain symbols and terms commonly used in polymer science. It introduced the use of parentheses in source-based polymer names when the monomer from which the polymer is derived consists of more than one word, a practice that is now widely followed, and it recommended an entirely new way of naming polymers based on their structure that included the suffix amer , a recommendation that has been almost totally ignored. After ten years, the Sub-commission issued its second report [2], which dealt with the then-burgeoning field of stereoregular polymers. A revision [3] of definitions in the original report appeared four years later. In 1968, a summary report [4] of the activities of the Subcommission was published. 

Other names are retained for referring to unsubstituted compounds only. Compounds derived from them by substitution must be named systematically. The names are retained because of their wide use in biochemical and in polymer nomenclature. A few examples are given here. 

Consequently, the fractionation of heterogeneous polymers by the method of fractional precipitation mostly effects sharp, quantitative separations. Although, as a rule, chemically dissimilar polymers cannot be combined in one solvent since they will mutually precipitate each other, starch affords an example of the few exceptions to this rule, as its aqueous solutions actually contain two chemically dissimilar polymers, namely, amylose and amylopectin. Nevertheless, until 1950, there were no reports of any systematic studies on the effects caused by the gradual addition, to aqueous, starch dispersions, of water-soluble substances possessing non-solvent character for whole starch. Likewise, no work seems to have been done on establishing the relative difference in solubility between amylose and amylopectin in binary solvent mixtures. ... 

Table 2 contains examples of common or semi-systematic names of copolymers. The systematic names of comonomers may also be used thus, the polyacrylonitrUe-fofoc/r-polybutadiene-fofoc/ -polystyrene polymer in Table 2 may also be named poly(prop-2-enenitrUe)-fofoc/r-polybuta-l,3-diene-fofocA -poly(ethenylbenzene). lUPAC does not require alphabetized names of comonomers within a polymer name many names are thus possible for some copolymers. 

Unfortunately, at present, the naming of polymers is not uniform. The International Union for Pure and Applied Chemistry (lUPAC) has established some systematic rules for the naming of polymers, but they are not used by everyone. For some polymers, there are common or trade names that are used almost exclusively, instead of the more systematic lUPAC names. The lack of rigor and uniformity in naming polymers may occasionally give rise to confusions in this book, different types of names are used as long as there is no ambiguity in the identification of the polymer. 

In this section the older common names, rather than the systematic names, are frequently used for organic compounds, as they have largely been retained in polymer names. 

The lUPAC has specific guidelines for the nomenclature of polymers. However, these names are quite frequently discarded for common names and even principal trade names. Even though there is currently no completely systematic polymer nomenclature, there are some widely accepted guidelines that are used to identify individual polymers. 

AFS has been used in the investigation of conductivity in polymers, namely PANI and its derivatives (POEA and POMA). The degree of protonation and the conductivity vary within the PANI class, which is attributed to differences in conformation of the polymer chains and packing in a film. The mechanisms of charge conduction are still not completely understood, precisely because of the diversity of factors affecting conductivity. It is, nevertheless, widely accepted that in the PANI structure the doped molecules are not uniformly distributed, but rather agglomerated into conducting islands. In a systematic... 

The present work is the next step where we have undertaken a systematic study of the perturbed BZ system with an alcoholic and a nonalcoholic polymer, namely polyethylene glycol with different molecular weights and polyethyleneglycol dimethyletiier (MPEG), respectively. The dynamical behaviour of the BZ system has been monitored by means of CO2 evolution rate and spectrophotometric measurements. Moreover, for the sake of comparison we have also performed spectrophotometric measurements in the presence of etiiylene glycol. 

Polymer naming and terminology became largely systematized and, following the lUPAC practice in other fields of chemistry, a compendium of polymer nomenclature recommendations was published in 1991 (30). 

When SRUs are bridged only by metals, systematic polymer nomenclature is not used instead, the substance is indexed either at the monomeric salt name or by coordination nomenclature, with a modification phrase, in either case, such as homopolymer or pol5mier with... (2). 

The first attempt to formulate a systematic nomenclature for polymers was based on the smallest repeating stmctural unit it was pubHshed in 1952 by a Subcommission on Nomenclature of the lUPAC Commission on Macromolecules (95). The report covered not only the naming of polymers, but also symbology and definitions of terms. However, these nomenclature recommendations did not receive widespread acceptance. Further progress was slow, with a report on steric regularity in high polymers pubHshed in 1962 and updated in 1966 (96). 

Because the rules for organic nomenclature determine the priority of naming different carbon chains from their relative lengths, the systematic names for type AABB polyamides depend on the relative length of the carbon chains between the amide nitrogens and the two carbonyl functions of the polymer for aUphatic nylon-Ayy, when x < the lUPAC name is poly[imino-R imino(l2y-dioxo-R )]. When x > then the name is... 

The lUPAC systematic name for poly(vinyl acetate) is poly-(l-acetoxy-ethylene) and that for poly(vinyl alcohol) is poly-(l-hydroxyethylene). As with other common polymers the lUPAC names are not in general use. 

Ethylene oxide, the simplest epoxide, is an intermediate in the manufacture of both ethylene glycol, used for automobile antifreeze, and polyester polymers. More than 4 million tons of ethylene oxide is produced each year in the United States by air oxidation of ethylene over a silver oxide catalyst at 300 °C. This process is not useful for other epoxides, however, and is of little value in the laboratory. Note that the name ethylene oxide is not a systematic one because the -ene ending implies the presence of a double bond in the molecule. The name is frequently used, however, because ethylene oxide is derived pom ethylene by addition of an oxygen atom. Other simple epoxides are named similarly. The systematic name for ethylene oxide is 1,2-epoxyethane. 

Like poly(ethylene), there are formal problems with the nomenclature of this polymer, since its lUPAC name, poly(propene), is also rarely if ever used hy polymer chemists. Since, in practice, no ambiguity is associated with the non-systematic name, this is the one that is generally used, as it will he throughout this hook. 

This author is perfectly aware that he could add very little to the work done by these workers if an attempt was made to focus on intramolecular catalysis phenomena or on the relevance to cyclisation of available models of chain conformation and chain dynamics instead, the aim will be the presentation of a general treatment of the subject, namely, one that includes the cyclisation of very short chains as well as that of very long chains of, say, 100 atoms or more. With a subject as vast as this, an encyclopaedic review would be a hopeless task. Therefore, the subject will be treated in a systematic and critical way, with more concentration on reaction series with regular and wide variations in structure, rather than on scattered examples. The aim will be to show that the field of intramolecular reactions is a mature area in which the merging of concepts from both physical organic chemistry and polymer chemistry leads to a unified treatment of cyclisation rates and equilibria in terms of a few simple generalisations and theories. 

However, deviations from the parabolic profile become progressively important as the length of the polymers N or the grafting density pa decreases. In a systematic derivation of the mean-field theory for Gaussian brushes [52] it was shown that the mean-field theory is characterized by a single parameter, namely the stretching parameter fi. In the limit p oo, the difference between the classical approximation and the mean-field theory vanishes, and one obtains the parabolic density profile. For finite /3 the full mean-field the-... 

---