Evan H. Kreth - Student Research and Creativity Forum

Page 1

Establishing the Flory-Fox Equation for Polymethyl Methacrylate (PMMA) using Differential Scanning Calorimetry (DSC) and Determining Relative Tacticity using Quantitative Proton Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (qHMNR)

Dr. Ronald P. D’Amelia and Evan H. Kreth Chemistry Department, Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY 11549-0151

Introduction

Polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA), best recognized by its trade names of Perspex, Lucite, and Plexiglass, is a transparent and rigid thermoplastic. It commonly serves as a substitute for glass due to its lightweight, shatterproof, and scratch-resistant properties.

Results

Glass transition temperature (Tg), termed the “melting point of amorphous materials” is the temperature at which an amorphous polymer changes from a hard, glassy state to a soft, rubbery one. As the number-average molecular weight (Mn) of the amorphous polymer increases, its Tg also increases but ultimately levels off at a maximum value labeled Tg∞. The Flory-Fox equation relates these parameters for amorphous polymers and is given below.

The Tg of a binary mixture of amorphous polymers changes with the weight percent of the components of the binary mixture. This relationship is described by the Fox equation shown below, where w indicates the weight percent of each amorphous polymer.

Proton nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (HNMR) serves as a fundamental tool in determining the structure, and therefore identity, of organic compounds. When applied quantitatively (qHNMR), it can also be used to determine relative concentrations of compounds in solution, and the stereochemistry associated with polymers, or tacticity.

Research Goals

1. To establish the Flory-Fox Equation, and associated values of Tg∞ and K, for the examined polymer, polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA).

2. To verify the Fox equation with various binary mixtures of PMMA of different numberaverage molecular weights.

3. To evaluate the effectiveness of quantitative proton Nuclear Magnetic Resonance spectroscopy (qHNMR) as a method for determining relative tacticity in PMMA.

Experimental

Polymethyl Methacrylate(PMMA)

Seventeen, predominantly syndiotactic PMMA samples of various molecular weights were used to establish the Flory-Fox equation and its linear plot (Figures 4 and 5). These samples were sourced fromAgilent Technologies and all boasted low polydispersity indices (Table 1). The PMMA samples utilized in the binary mixtures (Table 2 and Figure 7) were sourced from Scientific Polymer Products and did not contain any high degree of tacticity.

Differential ScanningCalorimetry(DSC)

Each PMMA sample was packed into a standard aluminum pan and the lid was left laying on top of the sample, unpressed. These samples were analyzed using a Perkin Elmer Pyris 1 DSC with nitrogen serving as the purge gas flowing at 20 mL/min. Each thermogram was obtained at a rate of 10°C per minute and each glass transition temperature was calculated using the “Tg” option found in the Pyris DSC software package. Selected thermograms for various PMMA samples are shown in Figure 6. An indium metal standard was used to calibrate the temperature and enthalpy measurements of the DSC.

Hot Melt Blend Technique

In order to achieve uniform binary mixtures or blends, used in Table 2 and Figure 7, a hot melt blend technique was adopted. This technique involved utilizing a hot plate to heat both PMMA samples until they were fluid, and mechanically mixing them until a homogeneous blend was obtained. The PMMA blend was then cooled rapidly and placed into a standard aluminum pan for thermal analysis, where a single Tg was observed, confirming the validity of the technique.

Nuclear MagneticResonance Spectroscopy (NMR)

The proton NMR spectra were obtained using a 400 MHz JEOL model ECS-400 NMR spectrometer. The PMMA samples were dissolved in deuterated chloroform (CDCl3) at concentrations ranging from 25-30 mg/mL. The JEOLDelta NMR software version 6.0.0 (Windows) was used to analyze the individual spectra. Atypical NMR spectrum for a 50:50 binary mixture of isotactic to syndiotactic PMMA is shown in Figure 9. The corresponding chemical shifts for the hydrogens in isotactic and syndiotactic PMMA are shown in Table 4.

Conclusions

1. The Flory-Fox equation for PMMA was evaluated to be: Tg = 135°C – 1.4 x 105 °C gmol-1/Mn.

2. Tg∞ and K were evaluated to be 135°C and 1.4 x 105 °C gmol-1 respectively for predominantly syndiotactic PMMA.

3. The Fox equation, 1/Tg = w1/Tg1 + w2/Tg2, was verified for various binary mixtures of PMMA.

4. HNMR can be used to differentiate between primarily isotactic or syndiotactic PMMA samples.

5. Peak integrations of the methylene or methyl hydrogens in qHNMR spectra of PMMA can be used to determine relative isotacticity or syndiotacticity in PMMA samples.

References

[1] D’Amelia, R.P.; Khanyan, B. An Experimental Review: Evaluation of the Flory-Fox Equation for the Relationship of Glass Transition Temperature (Tg) vs Molar Mass of Polystyrene Using Differential Scanning Calorimetry (DSC). JPBPC 2022, 10 (1), 10-17.

[2] Fox Jr., T. G.; Flory, P. J. Second-Order Transition Temperatures and Related Properties of Polystyrene. I. Influence of Molecular Weight. Journal of Applied Physics 1950, 21 (6), 581-591. [3] Ober, C.K. Polymer tacticity in simulated NMR spectra. Journal of Chem. Ed. 1989, 66 (8), 645.

printed by www.postersession.com
Support
We acknowledge the support from a Hofstra HCLAS Faculty Research & Development Grant.
esults
R
Temperature
Figure 4: Flory-Fox Plot of Glass Transition (Tg) vs. Peak MolecularWeight (Mp) Figure 5: Linear Plot of Glass Transition Temperature (Tg) vs. Reciprocal Peak MolecularWeight (1/Mp) Figure 6: DSC Thermograms of the Glass Transitions For Several Peak MolecularWeight (Mp) of PMMA Figure 7: Glass Transition Temperatures (Tg) forBinary Mixtures of DifferentMolecularWeight (Mw) PMMA
Mw Mn Mp (g/mol) Onset Tg (°C) Half-CpTg (°C) End Tg (°C) 1.08 3,040 89.034 91.658 94.478 1.11 4,600 100.569 103.342 106.450 1.10 6,940 110.486 113.773 117.060 1.04 9,590 121.961 125.275 128.812 1.04 13,630 125.854 129.289 132.712 1.04 20,520 129.956 132.771 135.802 1.03 32,340 130.973 134.439 137.774 1.02 46,900 131.879 135.039 138.490 Mw Mn Mp (g/mol) Onset Tg (°C) Half-CpTg (°C) End Tg (°C) 1.02 72,800 133.571 136.478 139.669 1.02 98,550 133.651 135.721 138.791 1.10 156,200 134.656 137.792 141.160 1.04 210,000 133.450 137.330 141.409 1.04 260,900 133.049 134.878 138.021 1.04 538,500 134.266 137.668 141.099 1.03 766,000 133.171 134.499 138.033 1.02 1,020,000 132.788 133.723 137.214 Figure 9: qHNMR Spectrum for50:50 Isotactic to Syndiotactic Binary Mixture
Isotactic Syndiotactic Hydrogens Chemical Shift(ppm) Hydrogens Chemical Shift(ppm) Methyl 1.263 Methyl 0.913 1.078 More Shielded Methylene 1.558 1.595 Methylene 1.873 Less Shielded Methylene 2.177 2.213 Ester 3.656 Ester 3.656
Table 1: Glass Transition Temperatures (Tg) of Various Peak MolecularWeight (Mp)PMMA of PMMA Table 4: Corresponding Chemical Shifts in qHNMR of Isotactic and Syndiotactic PMMA Figure 2: Isotactic PMMA Table 2: Glass Transition Temperatures (Tg) forBinary Mixtures of DifferentMolecularWeight (Mw) PMMA
Proportion of Mw = 15,000 Proportion of Mw = 35,000 Measured Onset Tg (°C) Theoretical Onset Tg (°C) 1.00 0.00 82.625 82.625 0.80 0.20 87.866 86.001 0.60 0.40 93.368 89.549 0.40 0.60 94.248 93.528 0.20 0.80 98.647 97.955 0.00 1.00 102.675 102.675 Proportion of Mw = 15,000 Proportion of Mw = 75,000 Measured Onset Tg (°C) Theoretical Onset Tg (°C) 1.00 0.00 83.063 83.063 0.80 0.20 86.662 85.039 0.60 0.40 88.639 87.034 0.40 0.60 89.708 89.179 0.20 0.80 93.085 91.321 0.00 1.00 93.686 93.686
Figure 8: Percent Isotactic PMMAin Binary Mixtures by Gravimetric Analysis and qHNMR of Various Hydrogens Figure 3: Syndiotactic PMMA Figure 1: Structure of PMMAMonomer

Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.
Evan H. Kreth - Student Research and Creativity Forum by Hofstra University - Issuu