Glass transition temperature of methyl methacrylate
Transcription
Glass transition temperature of methyl methacrylate
Polymer International Polym Int 49:377±381 (2000) Glass transition temperature of methyl methacrylate–ethyl a-benzoyloxymethylacrylate copolymers M Ferna´ndez-Garcı´a, R Cuervo-Rodriguez and EL Madruga* Instituto de Ciencia y Tecnologı´a de Polı´meros (CSIC), Juan de la Cierva 3, 28006-Madrid, Spain Abstract: Poly(ethyl a-benzoyloxymethylacrylate) (EBMA) and copolymers of methyl methacrylate (MMA) with EBMA have been prepared by free radical polymerization. Monomer precursors of ethyl a-benzoyloxymethylacrylate have likewise been polymerized. Glass transition temperatures (Tg) of homo and copolymers have been determined by differential scanning calorimetry. The Johnston equation, which considers the in¯uence of monomeric unit distribution on the copolymer glass transition temperature, has been used to explain the Tg behaviour. Tg12 has been calculated by the application of the Johnston equation, which gave a value markedly lower than the average value expected from the additive contribution of the Tg of the corresponding homopolymers. # 2000 Society of Chemical Industry Keywords: glass transition temperatures; poly(ethyl a-benzoyloxymethylacrylate); poly(methyl methacrylate); poly(ethyl methacrylate); methyl methacrylate±ethyl a-benzoyloxymethylacrylate copolymers INTRODUCTION It is well known that polymer properties are controlled by molecular properties such as molecular weight, molecular weight distribution, chemical composition and stereochemical distribution of copolymer chain, and degree of crosslinking, which in turn are a re¯ection of the kinetic history of the reactions that occurred during its formation. The glass transition temperature of a polymer, representing the molecular mobility of the polymer chains, is an important phenomenon that in¯uences its material properties and potential applications. Various structural characteristics (eg chain stiffness and intermolecular forces) in¯uence the glass transition temperature. The mobility of polymer chains depends on the possibility of rotation around the backbone carbon±carbon bonds. This itself is determined by the structure of the monomer units. Taking into account that the monomer disposition in a copolymer chain is determined by kinetic events it is indispensable to consider not only intermolecular microstructure (average and cumulative chemical composition) but also intramolecular microstructure (sequence distribution), because these parameters play an important role in the understanding of the relations between molecular structure and properties. In this study, the determination of the glass transition temperature of different homopolymers is performed, taking into account the nature of the lateral group in the chain. Moreover, methyl methacrylate± ethyl a-benzoyloxymethylacrylate copolymers are ana- lysed considering their dependency on the inter- and intramolecular structure of the copolymer chain. EXPERIMENTAL Materials The synthesis and puri®cation of ethyl a-benzoyloxymethylacrylate (EBMA) have been described elsewhere.1 Commercial methyl methacrylate (MMA) and ethyl methacrylate (EMA) were puri®ed by conventional procedures.2 2,2'-Azobisisobutyronitrile (AIBN) was puri®ed by successive crystallizations from methanol. Benzene (Merck) for analysis was used without further puri®cation. Polymerization Copolymers were prepared by free radical polymerization of mixtures of both monomers with different compositions, in benzene at 50 °C. The concentration of initiator was 5 10ÿ3 mol lÿ1 in all cases, and the total monomer concentration was 2 mol lÿ1. Copolymerization experimental details and microstructural characterization have been reported previously.1,3 Homopolymerization of monomers was performed under the same experimental conditions as copolymerization. Glass transition temperature Glass transition temperatures were measured using a Perkin Elmer DSC/TA7DX, PC series differential * Correspondence to: EL Madruga, Instituto de Ciencia y Tecnologı´a de Polı´meros (CSIC), Juan de la Cierva 3, 28006-Madrid, Spain Contract/grant sponsor: Comisio´n Interministerial de Ciencia y Technologı´a (CICYT); contract/grant number: MAT97-682 (Received 17 May 1999; revised version received 12 November 1999; accepted 29 November 1999) # 2000 Society of Chemical Industry. Polym Int 0959±8103/2000/$17.50 377 M FernaÂndez-GarcõÂa, R Cuervo-Rodriguez, EL Madruga Table 1. Glass transition temperature of homopolymers Polymer Tg(K) PMMA PEMA PEBMA PEHMAa 396.6 353.6 409.8 371.4 a DPn Ref 11. scanning calorimeter with a water circulating system for temperatures over ambient, and a Perkin Elmer DSC-2 Data Station 3700 with an intracooler for subambient conditions. The temperature scale is calibrated from the melting point of high purity chemicals (lauric and stearic acids and indium). Samples (about 10 mg) weighed to 0.002 mg with an electronic autobalance (Perkin Elmer AD4) were scanned at 10 deg minÿ1 under dry nitrogen (20 cm3 minÿ1). The actual value for the glass transition temperature Tg was estimated as the temperature at the midpoint of the line drawn between the temperature of intersection of the initial tangent with the tangent drawn through the point of in¯ection of the trace and the temperature of intersection of the tangent drawn through the point of in¯ection with the ®nal tangent. The current value is the average for several measurements realized for each composition. The values determined according to this criterion may apparently be higher than those obtained following other procedures. In our case, this is also due in part to the heating rate employed (10 deg minÿ1). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Methyl methacrylate (MMA) was copolymerized with ethyl a-benzoyloxymethylacrylate (EBMA) in benzene solutions at 50 °C, using AIBN as an initiator and different monomer mixtures with a molar fraction of MMA in the feed fMMA ranging from 0.099 to 0.897. Applying the Mayo±Lewis terminal model to copolymer compositions obtained by 1H NMR, the reactivity ratios were calculated1 and found to be rMMA = 1.342 and rEBMA = 0.320, respectively. Furthermore, the overall copolymerization rate coef®cients were measured from dilatometry, their values ranging from 1.37 10ÿ4 l1/2 molÿ1/2 sÿ1 for fMMA = 0.897 to 3.05 10ÿ4 l1/2 molÿ1/2 sÿ1 for fMMA = 0.099. The overall copolymerization rate coef®cient K, mentioned above is de®ned as4 K kp 1=2 kt 2fkd 1=2 where f and kd are the values of initiator ef®ciency and the initiator decomposition rate constant, respectively. The average values of propagation and termination rate constants, which are functions of the monomer 378 molar fraction in the feed, are quoted as kp and kt, respectively. The instantaneous number-average degree of polymerization for a copolymer obtained either in the presence or absence of solvent may, in general, be formally expressed in a way similar to that for homopolymerization5,6 kp M kt 2fkd 1=2 I 1=2 1=2 where [I] and [M] = [M1][M2] are the initiator and the overall monomer concentration in the feed. From the parameters de®ned above and consideration of the values obtained for the overall copolymerization rate coef®cient, we must conclude that the molecular weight of the copolymer is large enough not to in¯uence the Tg values. Homopolymerizations were performed under the same conditions as copolymerization. Ethyl methacrylate (EMA) was introduced to elucidate the side-group effect on molecular mobility. The glass transition temperature, Tg, de®nes the principal transition of amorphous polymeric materials and is associated with the onset of long range segmental motion of the polymer backbone. Many factors in¯uence the value of Tg, but one of the most important is molecular ¯exibility, which is affected by the type of substituents. However, the variation of magnitude of this effect depends largely on the nature of the side chain with respect to the main chain.7±10 To determine the effect of substituents on molecular ¯exibility one has to determine the glass transition temperatures of related polymers. Tgs for PMMA, PEMA, PEBMA have been measured and their values are shown in Table 1 along with the value previously reported11 for poly(ethyl aTable 2. Glass transition temperatures of EBMA–MMA copolymers obtained in benzene solution at 50°C fMMA a FMMA b Tg(K) 1 0.897 0.801 0.729 0.684 0.642 0.550 0.454 0.365 0.321 0.278 0.204 0.099 0.000 ± 0.917 0.871 0.797 0.759 0.748 0.701 0.613 0.527 0.519 0.418 0.391 0.242 ± 396.6 399.5 400.8 399.0 398.7 400.6 399.6 397.6 395.2 395.9 398.2 399.2 400.8 409.8 a Molar fraction of MMA in the feed. Molar fraction of MMA in the copolymer chain. b Polym Int 49:377±381 (2000) Glass transition temperatures of MMA±EBMA copolymers Scheme 1. Monomer structures. hydroxymethacrylate), PEHMA (see Scheme 1 for monomer formulae). As expected, the Tgs for poly(n-alkyl methacrylate)s decrease as the chain length of the ester alkyl group increases. The temperature increment found between PMMA and PEMA is 43 K. This is in agreement with the well established criterion that increasing the length of a ¯exible alkyl side chain brings a monotonic decrease in the value of Tg in a series of vinyl polymeric homologues.12 The substitution of a hydrogen atom in the EMA amethyl group for a benzoyloxy group produces an increase the Tg of about 56 K. The rigid and bulky benzoyloxy group does not facilitate molecular rotation, and as a consequence the Tg is raised. Several authors have proposed correlations between the chemical structure and Tg.13 Their methods are usually based on the assumption that the structural groups in the repeating units provide weight additive contributions to the Tg. It is worth noting that the introduction of a methylene group in the ester group of PMMA acts as a ¯exible spacer and produces a decrease in Tg of 43 K, while the substitution of hydrogen atom in the amethyl group for a benzoyloxy group produces an increase of 56 K. As a consequence, the Tg of PMMA is only 13 K lower than that of PEBMA. Similar behaviour is observed when the Tg of PMMA is compared with that of PEHMA,11 which is the homopolymer of the EBMA precursor monomer. When one hydrogen atom in the PEMA a-methyl group is changed for a hydroxyl group, producing PEHMA, an increase in Tg of about 18 K is observed. This is not only because the a-hydroxyl group is bigger than a hydrogen atom, but because of the intra±inter molecular interactions between hydroxyl groups. These interactions produced by hydrogen bond hinder the chain movements, increasing the stiffness. Consequently, the difference between PMMA and PEHMA is 25 K, corresponding to a 43 K decrease because of methylene group incorporation and an 18 K increase due to the hydroxyl group. From those results it can be seen that the Tg of PEBMA and PEHMA can be approximated by the proper choice of structural groups, in other words by choosing an additive contribution of the latter. The Polym Int 49:377±381 (2000) difference in Tgs between PEHMA and PEBMA (the a-hydroxyl group is changed for a a-benzoyloxy group) is approximately 39 K. In this case, the introduction of a relatively long chain does not provide greater ¯exibility because the aromatic ring is bulky. The physical properties of a copolymer are fundamentally determined by its Tg. Originally, copolymer Tgs were described by simple additive relations,14,15 based on free volume theories15±17 or thermodynamic theories,14 which did not take into consideration the sequence distribution of the monomer units and the effect of their compatibility on steric and energetic interactions. The free volume theory developed by Fox and Flory16 suggests that the glass transition occurs when the free or unoccupied volume of the material reaches a constant value and does not decrease further as the material is cooled below its Tg. A thermodynamic theory, proposed by Gibbs and DiMarzio14 is based on the change of material con®gurational entropy as a function of temperature. At equilibrium, it postulates that the con®gurational entropy Sc equals zero at the glass transition. However, these linear relationships often failed to predict accurate glass transition temperature of copolymers, because they neglected the effects of the chemical nature and organization of the monomers on the mobility of a polymer chain.18 Several models were therefore proposed18±20 that differentiated between homo (M1±M1, M2±M2) and heterolinkages (M1±M2 or M2±M1), recognizing the signi®cant effect of monomer arrangement on Tg, so that both negative and positive deviations from linearity could be predicted. The relations proposed by Barton,19 Uematsu and Honda,21 Hirooka and co-workers,22 Furukawa23 and Suzuki et al 24 may be considered as extensions of the Gibbs±DiMarzio14 relation, whereas the approach by Johnston18 is based on the Fox±Flory equation.16 A third relation, developed by Couchman and Karasz,20 is based on mixed-system entropy and was also able to predict composition-dependent Tgs for a variety of systems. Among all of these, those derived by Johnston, Barton or Couchman which correlate Tg to the dyad distribution in the instantaneous copolymer molecules, exhibit better agreement with experimental Tgs.25,26 In this work we are going to use the Johnston equation, which is 379 M FernaÂndez-GarcõÂa, R Cuervo-Rodriguez, EL Madruga Figure 2. Glass transition temperature of MMA–EBMA copolymers as a function of methyl methacrylate weight molar fraction in the copolymer chains. Figure 1. Plots of the glass transition temperature of MMA–EBMA copolymers according to the linearized expression of Johnston.18 based on the free volume concept and the inter± intramolecular composition of the copolymer. The description of Johnston's model is as follows. The Johnston equation18 assumes that M1M1, M1M2 or M2M1 and M2M2 dyads have their own Tg, with the overall Tg of a copolymer described by the following expression: 1 w1 P11 w2 P22 w1 P12 w2 P21 Tg Tg11 Tg22 Tg12 1 in which w1 and w2 are the weight fractions of monomeric units in the main chain, and P11, P12, P21 and P22 are the probabilities of having various linkages which can be calculated considering the Mayo±Lewis terminal model by using the monomer feed composition and the monomer reactivity ratios.27 Tg11 and Tg22 are the glass transitions of the respective homopolymers, and Tg12 is the supposed glass transition for the alternating sequence M1M2 or M2M1. To apply the Johnston theory, it is necessary to determine the glass transition temperature Tg12 of a strictly alternating copolymer. In this case, Tg12 for MMA±EBMA copolymers is unknown, but can be calculated from our own experimental values: Tg of PMMA, Tg of PEBMA (Tg11 and Tg22, respectively) and Tgs of a copolymers series of varied compositions obtained at low conversion. A linearized form of eqn (1) is used to determine Tg12. As can be observed in Fig 1, the experimental data produce a very good straight line with the Tg12 value 396.6 K. It is important to note that, within experimental accuracy, Tg12 (MMA±EBMA or EBMA±MMA link) has the same value as Tg11 (MMA±MMA link). Considering the Tg12 value found and according to the Johnston equation, the curve of which shows it Fig 2 is drawn showing the relation between Tg and methyl methacrylate weight molar fraction wMMA in the copolymer. As can be observed, when wMMA is lower 380 than 0.15 Tg decreases markedly, then decreases slowly until wMMA approaches 0.45, and from there the variation is practically nil. This can be explained as the in¯uence of the copolymer microstructure on Tg. From the monomer feed composition, monomer reactivity ratio values and using Bernoulli's statistic, it is easy to calculate the formation probabilities of M1M1, M2M2 and M1M2 or M2M1 dyads as a function of monomer molar fraction in the feed. Knowing this, it is simple to determine the dyad molar fraction as a function of the weight fraction of the monomer unit. In Fig 3 are represented the calculated dyad molar fractions for this system. As can be observed, at wMMA values lower than 0.15 the EBMA±EBMA (22) dyad concentration is higher than 50%, which means that the contribution of Tg22 to the overall copolymer Tg is predominant. For wMMA between 0.15 and 0.45, the sum of MMA±MMA (11), MMA±EBMA (12) and EBMA±MMA (21) monotonically increases with respect to EBMA±EBMA, and the overall copolymer Tg decreases moderately. For wMMA values higher than 0.45, the EBMA±EBMA dyad is lower than 10% and, Figure 3. Dyad molar fractions versus methyl methacrylate weight molar fraction in MMA–EBMA copolymer chains. Polym Int 49:377±381 (2000) Glass transition temperatures of MMA±EBMA copolymers within experimental error, its contribution to the overall copolymer Tg vanishes. In contrast, Hirooka and co-workers,22 observed that the Tg for dyads (Tg12) calculated from the Tgs of a series of copolymers of varied composition, did not always correspond with that of the chemically synthesized alternating copolymer. This deviation depends on the type of Tg±composition relationship of the statistical copolymer. The Tg of a pure alternating copolymer should be higher, lower or similar to the Tg estimated from the Tg±sequence distribution when the Tg±composition curve for the statistical copolymer is convex, concave or linear, respectively. Tonelli28 used conformational entropy as a characterizing parameter for polymer intramolecular chain ¯exibility. Deviations positive, negative or no deviation from bulk additive, namely Tg12, estimated from Tg± sequence distribution behaviour are produced when the conformational entropy for a given copolymer chain is, respectively, lower than, higher than or similar to the weighed sum of entropies calculated for the constituent homopolymer chains. Moreover, the Tg of the polymer is related to the chain ¯exibility and this parameter is, to a large extent, a re¯ection of the rotational barrier about the bond linking two monomer units. Depending on the rotational barrier of the heterolink bond being similar to, higher or lower than the averaged rotational barrier of the homolink bond, the copolymer Tg±composition behaviour will be linear, or show positive or negative deviations from linearity.29 Hirooka and co-workers22 proposed that the difference between the average Tg (Tg Tg11 Tg22 =2) and the supposed Tg12 of an alternating copolymer may be regarded as a measure of the heterolink stiffness. In this work, Tg is 403.2 K whereas a lower value of Tg12 (396.6 K) is obtained using the Johnston equation. This indicates that this system has a heterolink stiffness lower than that of the average homopolymer links and, consequently, a negative deviation from linearity in the Tg±composition plot observed in Fig 2 is expected. The cause of this behaviour is not clear, because the chain ¯exibility depends not only on the rotation barrier but also on the chain packing, side-chain stiffness, dipole interactions, etc. Taking into account all these features and the small differences between the Tg of the homopolymers, good agreement between experimental and theoretical values is found, indicating that the Johnston equation and the terminal model of Mayo and Lewis through reactivity ratios may be used to describe the dependence between the experimental glass transition temperature of MMA±EBMA copolymers and their sequence distribution. CONCLUSIONS It has been found that the differences between the glass transition temperature of the a-substituted acrylate homopolymers studied in this work with Polym Int 49:377±381 (2000) respect to the Tg of PMMA could be explained through the additive contribution of the lateral substituent. The Tg of the homopolymer, inter and intramolecular structure, together with the Johnston equation, allow the experimental variations of the Tg of MMA± EBMA copolymers to be described. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This research has been supported by the ComisioÂn Interministerial de Ciencia y TecnologõÂa (CICYT), MAT97-682. The authors would like to thank Professor Dr FernaÂndez-MartõÂn from the Instituto del Frio (CSIC, Madrid) for his advice and for allowing us to use the equipment at his Institute. REFERENCES 1 Cuervo-RodrõÂguez R, FernaÂndez-Monreal MC, FernaÂndezGarcõÂa M and Madruga EL, Macromol Rapid Commun 16:503 (1995). 2 Stickler M, Makromol Chem Macromol Symp 10/11:17 (1987). 3 Cuervo-RodrõÂguez R, FernaÂndez-Monreal MC, FernaÂndezGarcõÂa M and Madruga EL, J Polym Sci Polym Chem 35:3483 (1997). 4 Fukuda T, Ma YD, Kubo K and Takada A, Polym J 21:1003 (1989). 5 Hamielec AE, MacGregor JF and Penlidis A, Makromol Chem Macromol Symp 10/11:521 (1987). 6 Gao J and Penlidis A, J Macromol Sci Rev Macromol Chem Phys 38:651 (1998). 7 Halden RA, Schell WJ and Shima R, J Macromol Sci B-1:759 (1967). 8 Hoff EAW, Robinson DW and Willbourn AH, J Polym Sci 18:161 (1955). 9 Rogers SS and Mandelkern L, J Phys Chem 61:985 (1957). 10 Bandrup J and Immergut EH, Polymer Handbook, 2nd edn. Wiley-Interscience, New York (1975). 11 FernaÂndez-GarcõÂa M, Madruga EL, Cuervo-RodrõÂguez R and FernaÂndez-Monreal MC, Polymer 35:4474 (1994). 12 Reimschussel HK, J Polym Sci Polym Chem Ed 17:2447 (1979). 13 Van Krevelen DW, Properties of Polymers, 3rd edn, Elsevier, New York (1990). 14 Gibbs JH and DiMarzio EA, J Polym Sci Part A, 1:1417 (1963). 15 Fox TG, Bull Am Phys Soc 1:123 (1956). 16 Fox TG and Flory PJ, J Appl Phys 21:581 (1950). 17 Gordon M and Taylor JS, J Appl Chem USSR 2:492 (1952). 18 Johnston NW, J Macromol Sci Rev Macromol Chem C 14:215 (1976). 19 Barton JM, J Polym Sci C 30:573 (1970). 20 Couchman PR and Karasz FR, Macromolecules 11:117 (1978). 21 Uematsu I and Honda K, Rep Prog Polym Phys Jpn 8:111 (1975). 22 (a) Hirooka M, Jabunchi H, Iseky J and Nakai Y, J Polym Sci A1 6:1381 (1968); (b) Hirooka M and Kato T, J Polym Sci Polym Lett 12:31 (1974). 23 Furukawa J, J Polym Sci Polym Symp 51:105 (1975). 24 Suzuki H, Kimura N and Nishio Y, J Therm Anal 46:1011 (1996) and references cited therein. 25 Fernandez-Garcia M, Gonzalez-Lopez MMC, Barrales-Rienda JM, Madruga EL and Arias C, J Polym Sci Polym Phys 32:1191 (1994). 26 Guillot J and Emilie B, Makromol Chem Rapid Commun 12:117 (1991). 27 Harwood HJ and Ritchey WM, J Polym Sci B 2:601 (1964). 28 Tonelli A, Macromolecules 10:716 (1977). 29 McEven IJ and Johnston AF, in Alternating Copolymers, Ed by Cowie JM, Plenum Press, New York (1985). 381