C O M M U N I C A T I O N S
Scheme 2. Synthesis of Hyperbranched Polymers with Controlled
Degree of Branching from 0 to 100%
solutions into methanol. The results are summarized in Figure S6
and Table S1 (see SI). A 100% HBP is produced in an equimolar
ratio of [TFSA]/[7], whereas a linear polymer (DB ) 0%) is
obtained by using TFSA as a solvent. Moreover, HBPs with a DB
of any percent between 0 and 100% are formed by changing the
ratio of [TFSA]/[7].
A linear relationship between the molar ratio of [TFSA]/[1] and
DB of HBPs was observed when the molar ratio of [TFSA]/[1]
was adjusted from 1 to 6. We expect that a linear polymer (DB )
0) would be obtained when the molar ratio of [TFSA]/[1] is over
8.6 by extrapolation of the fitted straight line. However, the polymer
precipitated during the polymerization with [TFSA]/[1] ) 8.6,
because of low solubility of the linear polymer in CHCl3. Therefore,
only TFSA, which showed better solubility than CHCl3, was used
as a solvent.
Figure 1. 1H NMR spectra of HBPs with various DBs.
obtained were confirmed by FT-IR (Figure S7-S9 in the SI) and
13C NMR spectroscopy (Figure S12-S14 in the SI).
In conclusion, we demonstrated the first synthesis of a linear
polymer, HBPs with various DBs, and 100% HBP by self-
polycondensation of 7 in proper molar ratios of [TFSA]/[7]. These
polymerizations relied on the change of the rate determination steps
in the mono- and diarylation of 2,2,2-trifluoroacetophenone by
changing the molar ratios of [TFSA]/[7]. These new findings will
promote the synthesis of various series of HBPs with controlled
DBs and their application to functional materials.
The structures of these HBPs were characterized by FT-IR and
NMR spectroscopy. The FT-IR spectra of HBPs (Figures S7 and
S8 in the SI) showed characteristic absorptions at 1712 cm-1 due
to the stretching of the CdO group of terminal units. A very weak
absorption due to the CdO group of terminal units is observed for
1
the linear polymer (Figure S9 in the SI). The H NMR spectra of
Acknowledgment. Y.S. thanks Yoshida Scholarship Foundation
the 100% HBP and the linear polymer together with those of 7
(terminal unit), 3 (dendritic unit), and 4 (linear unit) are presented
in Figure S10 (see SI). The doublet peak for the o-phenyl proton
(7g) next to the trifluoroacetyl group is observed at 8.1 ppm for 7,
and the characteristic methoxy protons (3a and 4d) for 3 and 4
appear at 3.8 and 3.3 ppm (Figures S10c and S10b), respectively.
In the 100% HBP, the o-phenyl protons (HBP1a) are observed at
8.1 ppm, and the signal corresponding to the methoxy protons (4d)
for the linear unit cannot be found at 3.3 ppm (Figure S10d). On
the other hand, a linear polymer exhibits characteristic methoxy
protons (LP1d) at 3.3 ppm, and a very small peak assignable to
the end trifluoroacetyl group is observed at 8.1 ppm (Figure S10e).
1H NMR spectra of HBPs with various DBs were shown in
Figure 1. The DB of HBPs was determined by the ratio of the
o-phenyl proton (HBP2a) at 8.1 ppm for the terminal unit and the
methoxy protons (HBP2b) at 3.3 ppm for the linear unit. The DB
of HBPs decreases by increasing the molar ratio of [TFSA]/[7], as
expected from the results of the model reactions (Figure S5 in the
SI).
The observed number-average molecular weights (Mn’s), weight-
average molecular weights (Mw’s), and polydispersities of the
polymers determined by SEC using polystyrene standards were in
the range of 11 000-24 000 g/mol, 26 000-189 000 g/mol, and
1.8-10.2, respectively (Table S1 and Figure S11 in the SI). The
Mw and radius of gyration (Rg) of the 100% HBP were measured
by static laser light scattering (SLS) to obtain values of 301 500
g/mol and 13 nm, respectively. The Mw value determined from SEC
(71 400 g/mol for the 100% HBP) was much smaller than that from
SLS.18 This discrepancy is usually observed for hyperbranched
polymers, due to their highly branched and compact structures
compared to linear counterparts.19 The structures of polymers
for the fundamental support.
Supporting Information Available: Full experimental details,
elemental analysis, IR and NMR spectral data. This material is available
References
(1) Jikei, M.; Kakimoto, M. Prog. Polym. Sci. 2001, 26, 1233–1285.
(2) Kim, Y. H. J. Polym. Sci., Part A: Polym. Chem. 1998, 36, 1685–1698.
(3) Gao, C.; Yan, D. Prog. Polym. Sci. 2004, 29, 183–275.
(4) Voit, B. J. Polym. Sci., Part A: Polym. Chem. 2005, 43, 2679–2699.
(5) Voit, B.; Lederer, A. Chem. ReV. 2009, 109, 5924–5973.
(6) Hawker, C. J.; Lee, R.; Fre´chet, J. M. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1991, 113,
4583–4588.
(7) Maier, G.; Zech, C.; Voit, B.; Komber, H. Macromol. Chem. Phys. 1998,
199, 2655–2664.
(8) Smet, M.; Schacht, E. H.; Dehaen, W. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2002, 41,
4547–4550.
(9) Fu, Y.; Vandendriessche, A.; Dehaen, W.; Smet, M. Macromolecules 2006,
39, 5183–5186.
(10) Fu, Y.; Oosterwijck, C. V.; Vandendriessche, A.; Kowalczuk-Bleja, A.;
Zhang, X.; Dworak, A.; Dehaen, W.; Smet, M. Macromolecules 2008, 41,
2388–2393.
(11) Kono, S.; Sinananwanich, W.; Shibasaki, Y.; Ando, S.; Ueda, M. Polym.
J. 2007, 39, 1150–1156.
(12) Sinananwanich, W.; Ueda, M. J. Polym. Sci., Part A: Polym. Chem. 2008,
46, 2689–2700.
(13) Sinananwanich, W.; Higashihara, T.; Ueda, M. Macromolecules 2009, 42,
994–1001.
(14) Sinananwanich, W.; Segawa, Y.; Higashihara, T.; Ueda, M. Macromolecules
2009, 42, 8718–8724.
(15) Segawa, Y.; Sinananwanich, W.; Higashihara, T.; Ueda, M. Macromolecules
2008, 41, 8309–8311.
(16) Holter, D.; Frey, H. Acta Polym. 1997, 48, 298–309.
(17) Olah, G. A. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl. 1993, 32, 767–788.
(18) Weimer, M. W.; Fre´chet, J. M. J.; Gitsov, I. J. Polym. Sci., Part A: Polym.
Chem. 1998, 36, 955–970.
(19) Peleshanko, S.; Gunawidjaja, R.; Petrash, S.; Tsukruk, V. V. Macromol-
ecules 2006, 39, 4756–4766.
JA105213R
9
J. AM. CHEM. SOC. VOL. 132, NO. 32, 2010 11001