4.6 Article

Surface-initiated ring-opening polymerization from cellulose model surfaces monitored by a Quartz Crystal Microbalance

期刊

SOFT MATTER
卷 8, 期 2, 页码 512-517

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c1sm06121f

关键词

-

资金

  1. Swedish Research Council Formas
  2. Biofibre Materials Centre Innovation (BiMaC Innovation)
  3. Swedish Centre for Biomimetic Fibre Engineering (BioMime)
  4. Wallenberg Wood Science Center (WWSC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Polymer surface-grafting is an excellent method to modify the properties of a surface. However, surface-initiated polymerization is still relatively poorly understood due to the lack of appropriate characterization methods and tools to monitor the polymerizations. Herein, we report the in situ, surface-initiated ring-opening polymerization (SI-ROP) investigated in real time by the Quartz Crystal Microbalance (QCM) technique. The polymerization was performed from a cellulose model surface and the polymerization was initiated directly from the available hydroxyl groups on the cellulose. The cyclic monomer 3-caprolactone and an organic catalyst, 1,5,7-triazabicyclo[4.4.0]dec-5-ene (TBD), were used, and the reaction was performed in bulk at room temperature. Since a free polymer was formed in bulk in parallel to the grafting from the surface, the reaction was performed in three cycles with rinsing steps in between to measure only the effect of the surface grafting. The change in frequency showed that the grafted amount of polymer increased after each cycle indicating that most of the chain ends remained active. After polymer grafting, the cellulose model surface showed a more hydrophobic character, and the surface roughness of the cellulose model surface was reduced. This study clearly shows that QCM is a viable method to monitor SI-ROP in situ from cellulose surfaces. We believe this is an important step towards a deeper understanding of how to tailor the interface between polymer-modified cellulose and a polymer matrix in biocomposites.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据