2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2005.02.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Critically evaluated termination rate coefficients for free-radical polymerization: Experimental methods

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

2
156
2

Year Published

2007
2007
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

4
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 136 publications
(160 citation statements)
references
References 104 publications
2
156
2
Order By: Relevance
“…1, where 〈k t 〉 is the chain-length averaged termination rate coefficient and 〈k p 〉 is the chainlength averaged propagation rate coefficient for the given system. The use of a systemdependent 〈k t 〉 instead of an (incorrect) single chain-length independent value of k t in this equation seems to be generally accepted now, [1,2] but as we have shown previously and will elaborate upon in this paper, in certain cases the use of 〈k p 〉 instead of the long-chain k p value is also required. [3][4][5] [M] [I] …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…1, where 〈k t 〉 is the chain-length averaged termination rate coefficient and 〈k p 〉 is the chainlength averaged propagation rate coefficient for the given system. The use of a systemdependent 〈k t 〉 instead of an (incorrect) single chain-length independent value of k t in this equation seems to be generally accepted now, [1,2] but as we have shown previously and will elaborate upon in this paper, in certain cases the use of 〈k p 〉 instead of the long-chain k p value is also required. [3][4][5] [M] [I] …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…The reason for this is not just the greater difficulty of measuring termination rate coefficients, [17] but even more so is the sheer complexity of these systems compared with those in which backbiting does not occur. To wit, in acrylate polymerizations there are three different termination reactions contributing to the overall termination rate: SPR homotermination, rate coefficient k t s,s ; MCR homotermination, k t t,t ; and SPR-MCR cross-termination, k t s,t…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is the general consideration that this method is held to be the best available method for probing CLDT, [17] because it directly measures radical concentration, as opposed to doing so indirectly via conversion-time measurements. It also has specific advantages over the RAFTbased methods, namely: SP PLP EPR does not rely on increasing conversion to effect change in chain length, but instead can deliver k t i,i at a constant conversion; and in SP PLP EPR there is not the complicating possibility of a contribution to the overall rate of termination in cases where cross-termination between the RAFT intermediate and propagating radicals occurs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1, where 〈k t 〉 is the chain-length averaged termination rate coefficient and 〈k p 〉 is the chainlength averaged propagation rate coefficient for the given system. The use of a systemdependent 〈k t 〉 instead of an (incorrect) single chain-length independent value of k t in this equation seems to be generally accepted now, [1,2] but as we have shown previously and will elaborate upon in this paper, in certain cases the use of 〈k p 〉 instead of the long-chain k p value is also required. [3][4][5] [M]…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 91%