Jump to main content
US EPA
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Search
Search
Main menu
Environmental Topics
Laws & Regulations
About EPA
Health & Environmental Research Online (HERO)
Contact Us
Print
Feedback
Export to File
Search:
This record has one attached file:
Add More Files
Attach File(s):
Display Name for File*:
Save
Citation
Tags
HERO ID
6646824
Reference Type
Journal Article
Title
Emulsion polymerization of styrene using a reactive surfactant and its polymeric counterpart: Kinetic studies
Author(s)
Wang, X; Sudol, ED; El-Aasser, MS; ,
Year
2001
Is Peer Reviewed?
1
Journal
Macromolecules
ISSN:
0024-9297
EISSN:
1520-5835
Publisher
AMER CHEMICAL SOC
Location
WASHINGTON
Page Numbers
7715-7723
DOI
10.1021/ma0107298
Web of Science Id
WOS:000171705900026
Abstract
Emulsion polymerizations of styrene using the reactive surfactant sodium dodecyl allyl sulfosuccinate (TREM LF-40) and its polymeric counterpart, poly(TREM), were studied. The critical micelle concentrations (cmc) and the adsorption behaviors on polystyrene latex particles were determined. The polymerization kinetics obtained via reaction calorimetry showed that the emulsion polymerization of styrene using the reactive surfactant behaved similarly to those reported for the conventional surfactant sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) in that the rate of polymerization (R(p)) profiles showed the same three distinct regions: a rapid rise in rate, attributed to micellar nucleation (interval I); a moderate rise in rate to a maximum where droplets disappear, attributed to homogeneous nucleation (stage 2); and the decreasing rate period (interval III). However, with varying TREM LF-40 concentration (constant initiator concentration), R(p) was not found to be proportional to the first power of N(p) as reported for the SLS system, but 0.7 instead (i.e., R(p) proportional to N(p)(0.67)). In contrast, by varying the initiator concentration, the kinetics were found to have the same dependencies as the conventional surfactant (R(p) proportional to N(p)(1.0) proportional to [I](0.4)). These differences are attributed to the participation of the surfactant in the reaction. The kinetics using poly(TREM) differed from those of the reactive counterpart in several ways. The R(p) profiles indicated a longer homogeneous nucleation stage 2 in comparison to interval I. Larger (fewer) particles were produced for equivalent weights of the surfactants. This was expected. Although R(p) was found to be proportional to the first power of N(p), the dependencies on the surfactant and initiator concentrations varied depending on concentration of the component held constant (R(p) proportional to N(p)(1.0) proportional to [E](0.2-0.5) and R(p) proportional to N(p)(1.0) proportional to [I](0.4-0.8)). The lower dependencies on the surfactant concentration and higher dependencies on the initiator concentration are attributed to the ionic strength and the longer nucleation period.
Home
Learn about HERO
Using HERO
Search HERO
Projects in HERO
Risk Assessment
Transparency & Integrity