Chemistry Reference
In-Depth Information
Sestak-Berggren model (Eq. 2.32) that provides enough flexibility to fit most of the
types of the f (  ʱ ) dependencies.
With regard to physically meaningful models, we should mention a work of San-
chez-Jimenez et al. [ 90 ], who have found a way of converting the random scission
model of polymer degradation [ 91 ] to the convenient f (  ʱ ) form. The original work
by Simha and Wall [ 91 ] describes the kinetics of bond breaking as:
d
d
x
t
(4.57)
=
kT x
()(
1
),
where x is the fraction of broken bonds. Since not every broken bond produces a
volatile fragment, x is not equal to the extent of conversion of polymer to volatile
fragments, ʱ . These two values are related to each other as [ 91 ]:
x NLL
N
(
)(
1
)
L
1
(4.58)
1
−=−
α (
1
x
)
1
+
,
where N is the initial degree of polymerization and L is the number of monomer
units in the shortest chain fragment that does not evaporate before being degraded.
By assuming that normally L << N , Sanchez-Jimenez et al. [ 90 ] simplify Eq. 4.58
to 4.59:
11 1
L
1
(4.59)
α=− −
(
x
)
[
+
x L
(
1
)],
and take its derivative with respect to time:
d
α
d
x
=−−
L
2
(4.60)
LL
(
1)(1
x
)
x
.
d
t
d
t
Replacing d x /d t with the right-hand side of Eq. 4.57 yields:
d
d
α
t
L
1
(4.61)
=
kTLL xx
()(
11
)(
)
.
Comparing Eq. 4.61 with the regular rate equation (Eq. 1.1) suggests that every-
thing but k (  T ) in the right-hand side is f (  ʱ ). Thus, f (  ʱ ) for random scission must
have the following form:
(4.62)
L
1
f
() (
α =−−
L L
11
)(
x
)
x
.
Equation 4.62 does not provide an analytical form of f (  ʱ ) dependence on ʱ as the
models considered earlier (Table 1.1) do. In general, this dependence can be found
in numerical form by substituting the same values of x and L in Eqs. 4.59 and 4.62.
An analytical expression for f (  ʱ ) was determined by fitting numerical dependencies
of f (  ʱ ) on ʱ to an approximating equation of the following form:
 
Search WWH ::




Custom Search