C O M M U N I C A T I O N S
Table 1. Catalytic Polymerization with Silica-Supported CGC/BARF Catalystsa
Ti loading
(mmol/g of cat)
temp
(°C)
polymerization
time (min)
alkyl
aluminum
activity
(kg of PE/mol of Ti‚h)
Tm
(°C)
M
w
entry
catalyst
Al:Ti
(polymer)
PDI
3.1
1.9
2.8
ND
2.5
broad
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 - patterned
8 - patterned
9 - control
10 - control
10 - control
11 - control
11 - control
0.38
0.38
1.6b
0.17
0.17
0.53
0.53
25
25
25
25
25
25
25
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
400
400
400
400
400
400
400
TMA
TIBA
TIBA
TMA
TIBA
TMA
TIBA
28.7
24.8
19.8
4.2
5.1
2.7
134.1
133.8
132.8
131.5
132.6
133.5
133.1
660 000
1 000 000
470 000
ND
620 000
500 000
1 000 000
1.5
a TMA ) trimethylaluminum; TIBA ) triisobutylaluminum. b Homogeneous catalyst.
Scheme 2
it may limit unwanted interactions of the complex with the oxide
surface. Addition of a preformed complex to silica (control 10)
likely results in the formation of multiple types of metal sites.6
The patterning protocol developed may prevent such surface-metal
interactions (silanols are capped), allowing for a more well-defined,
active material. Continuing work is focusing on a full molecular
level characterization of the new supported species to fully elucidate
the cause of the promising catalytic results.
In summary, a new, general patterning methodology that can be
utilized to create organometallic catalysts on a silica surface that
may be site-isolated is reported here. Ti-CGC-inspired sites are
prepared on this support and are demonstrated to be more active
than covalently tethered catalysts prepared via traditional techniques.
The isolated aminosilica scaffold is a versatile support for metal
complex immobilization and may allow for the preparation of a
wide array of single-site immobilized organometallic catalysts.
The immobilized Ti-CGC5 precatalyst derived from the patterned
Acknowledgment. C.W.J. thanks the NSF for support through
the CAREER program (CTS-0133209). M.W.M. thanks the Mo-
lecular Design Institute (N00014-95-1-1116, Office of Naval
Research) for partial support through a graduate fellowship. We
thank the Coughlin group at UMass for GPC analysis.
silica support (8) was evaluated in the catalytic polymerization of
ethylene. In addition, three control catalysts were prepared for
comparison. The first control was the homogeneous Ti-CGC
precatalyst (9).6 A second control was prepared via addition of a
preformed complex to silica as previously reported (10).6 Catalyst
(11) was assembled using the same protocol as was used for the
patterned catalyst (8), with the exception that the complexes were
assembled on a densely functionalized aminosilica surface. The
precatalysts were contacted with a toluene solution containing tris-
(pentafluorophenyl)borane and an alkylaluminum (trimethylalumi-
num or triisobutylaluminum) as activator and were subsequently
exposed to 60 psi of ethylene pressure at 25 °C. The produced
polymers were analyzed by GPC and TGA-DSC. The catalytic
results are described in Table 1.
Supporting Information Available: Synthetic protocols for Ti
catalysts, polymerization procedures, and 13C NMR spectra (PDF). This
References
(1) Hartley, F. R. Supported Metal Complexes: A New Generation of Catalysts;
Dordrecht, Boston, 1995.
(2) Britovsek, G. J. P.; Gibson, V.; Wass, D. F. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 1999,
38, 428.
(3) Hlatkey, G. G. Chem. ReV. 2000, 100, 1347.
(4) Well-characterized, well-behaved oxide-supported transition metal complex
catalysts are rare, see, for example, early transition metals: (a) Nicholas,
C. P.; Ahn, H. S.; Marks, T. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 4325. Late
transition metals: (b) Jones, M. D.; Raja, R.; Thomas, J. M.; Johnson, B.
F. G.; Lewis, D. W.; Rouzaud, J.; Harris, K. D. M. Angew. Chem., Int.
Ed. 2003, 42, 4326. Surface organometallic chemistry: (c) Coperet, C.;
Chabanas, M.; Saint-Arroman, R. P.; Basset, J. M. Angew. Chem., Int.
Ed. 2003, 42, 156.
(5) The catalysts are referred to here as “CGC-inspired” because there is no
direct evidence here or elsewhere6,7,9 that the immobilized catalysts have
the same structure as homogeneous CGC catalysts.
(6) Galan-Fereres, M.; Koch, T.; Hey-Hawkins, E.; Eisen, M. S. J. Organomet.
Chem. 1999, 580, 145.
(7) (a) Juvaste, H.; Iiskola, E. I.; Pakkanen, T. T. J. Organomet. Chem. 1999,
587, 38. (b) Juvaste, H.; Pakkanen, T. T.; Iiskola, E. I. Organometallics
2000, 19, 4834. (c) Juvaste, H.; Pakkanen, T. T.; Iiskola, E. I. Organo-
metallics 2000, 19, 1729. (d) Juvaste, H.; Iiskola, E. I.; Pakkanen, T. T.
J. Mol. Catal. A 1999, 150, 1.
(8) (a) McKittrick, M. W.; Jones, C. W. Chem. Mater. 2003, 15, 1132. (b)
The amine scaffolds behave chemically as if they are site-isolated.
However, it has not been proven that every amine site is isolated.
(9) Additional metalation strategies could be employed: Kasi, R. M.;
Coughlin, E. B. Organometallics 2003, 22, 1534.
The patterned precatalysts show significantly higher productivity
than the control materials. Furthermore, the patterned catalyst
exhibits increased activity even when compared to the homogeneous
analogue (catalyst 9). There are several possible explanations for
the observed improvement in performance as compared to solid
catalysts made via traditional techniques. It is clear that the
patterning process allows for more efficient assembly of surface
species based on the essentially quantitative yield of each step of
the synthesis, something that is unique as compared to previous
reports.7 Furthermore, if the sites are more uniform and significantly
more isolated than sites on densely functionalized materials (control
11), the patterned sites may be more accessible for activation by
the borane/alkylaluminum cocatalysts and also could more easily
incorporate monomer. In addition, the spectroscopic results and the
quantitative assembly of the supported complex imply that it is
less likely that there are non-CGC metal species on the patterned
catalyst. Another potential advantage of the patterning protocol is
JA031725G
9
J. AM. CHEM. SOC. VOL. 126, NO. 10, 2004 3053