Linear solvation energy relationship and evaluation of mutual miscibility of polymers using inverse gas chromatography data

Huang, Jan‐Chan

doi:10.1002/app.35252

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The first method was based on the broadly used linear free energy relationship (LFER) approach. 6,8,9,[15][16][17] In this method, the free sorption energy was divided into a few components, each of which characterized the free energy of one of the intermolecular interactions and could be referred to as the product of the surface properties coefficient and the characterized probe properties descriptor. The latter descriptors were tabulated.…”

Section: Calculationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surface polarity of porous polymers at different coverages

Gus’kov

Ganieva

Kudasheva

2016

J of Applied Polymer Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At different surface coverages (θs), the dispersion component (ΔFdisp) and specific components (induction and orientation interactions; ΔFio and donor‐acceptor interactions; ΔFda) of the sorption free energy and the polarities were calculated for three porous polymers: the microporous styrene–divinylbenzene copolymer Dowex L‐285, the microporous hypercrosslinked polystyrene MN‐200, and the macroporous styrene–divinylbenzene copolymer Polysorb‐1. Two methods were used to calculate ΔFdisp, ΔFio and ΔFda: the linear free energy relationship method and the Dong polarization method. For styrene–divinylbenzene sorbents, ΔFdisp decreased with θ, whereas ΔFio and ΔFda increased; this caused the polarity to rise. This phenomenon was caused by the sorbat–sorbat lateral interactions on the polymer's surface; these were stronger for polar molecules. In the case of hypercrosslinked polystyrene, ΔFdisp and ΔFio varied equally, and the polarity was almost constant. This trend could be explained by the absorption of the molecules into the bulk of the polymer; this prevented lateral interactions. We concluded that the lateral interactions were a function of the porous polymer's surface properties. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2016, 133, 44146.

show abstract

Section: Calculationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surface polarity of porous polymers at different coverages

Gus’kov

Ganieva

Kudasheva

2016

J of Applied Polymer Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several articles (Li et al, 2012;Tuinier and Krooshof, 2012;Huang, 2012;Papadopoulou and Panyiotou, 2012;Ikeda and Zhong, 2012;Diez et al, 2011;Yazici et al, 2011;Ozdemir and Guener, 2007;Gusler and Cohen, 1994;Errede, 1992) have recently been published that have addressed a range of thermodynamic properties to evaluate polymer-solvent interaction coefficients. These articles have evaluated polymer-solvent interaction coefficients using such thermodynamic properties as inverse gas chromatography, osmotic pressure measurements or solvent swelling, vapour pressure lowering, etc.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of the similarities and differences between five different polymer-solvent interaction coefficients

Sudduth

2013

Pigment &Amp; Resin Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -This paper attempted to show the potential relationship between five different interaction coefficients relating solvents and polymers. This review addressed primarily a comparison between the polymer-solvent interaction coefficients obtained from two different types of models. These two primary polymer-solvent interaction coefficients included the Flory-Huggins interaction coefficient developed from thermodynamic colligative properties and the polymer-solvent Sudduth interaction coefficient obtained from the generalized viscosity equation. The other three interaction coefficients included Hildebrand solubility parameter and the interaction coefficients or constants for the Huggins and Kraemers models that are normally generated from viscosity measurements. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach -These five different interaction coefficients were compared from theoretical considerations as well as on the basis of available experimental data. Findings -Remarkably the polymer-solvent interaction coefficients for both Flory-Huggins interaction coefficient and the Sudduth interaction coefficient were found to be dimensionless and approximately of the same value. In addition, when both interaction coefficients are negative then both describe solvents. In addition, both interaction coefficients describe a plasticizer when they are in the range of 0 to 1 2 . Finally both interaction coefficients describe a non-solvent or a suspension when both are greater than 1. The Hildebrand solubility parameter was found to be directly related to the FloryHuggins interaction coefficient. The viscosity constants for the Huggins and Kraemers models were found to be included as subsets of the Sudduth generalized viscosity model. Research limitations/implications -The strong apparent relationship between these five different interaction coefficients to predict the interaction between polymers and solvents is strongly indicated based on the results from this study. However, approximately half of these interaction coefficients have been derived to be evaluated from colligative properties and half were derived to be evaluated from viscosity measurements. Practical implications -In general, it is much easier to obtain viscosity measurements compared to the evaluation of the colligative properties. Therefore, if a direct relationship can be shown between these five different interaction coefficients, then it would appear to be much easier to evaluate polymer-solvent interactions from the interaction coefficients obtained from viscosity measurements. Originality/value -This is the first time that these five interaction coefficients have been compared in such a way that shows their direct relationship even though half of these interaction coefficients have been derived to be evaluated from colligative properties and half were derived to be evaluated from viscosity measurements.

show abstract

Group estimation method for parameters of Flory–Orwoll–Vrij equation and free volume effects in polymer–solvent interaction parameters

Huang

2016

Fluid Phase Equilibria

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Linear solvation energy relationship and evaluation of mutual miscibility of polymers using inverse gas chromatography data

Cited by 3 publications

References 17 publications

Surface polarity of porous polymers at different coverages

Surface polarity of porous polymers at different coverages

A review of the similarities and differences between five different polymer-solvent interaction coefficients

Group estimation method for parameters of Flory–Orwoll–Vrij equation and free volume effects in polymer–solvent interaction parameters

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About