Investigates self-assembly and morphology in copolymer melts, suggesting new materials with unique properties.
We investigated the self-assembly capabilities of comb-shaped macromolecules with alternating side chains of different chemical types (A and B) in melts using dissipative particle dynamics. Due to the variety in the number of parameters controlling architecture/composition, the molecular structure of such objects can be finely tuned, thereby programming their self-assembly in melts. In the current work, we confine ourselves by considering two macromolecular architectures: (i) equal fractions of A and B side chains so that the elementary “building block” (segment) of the brush represents a linear triblock copolymer (A- d -B, d being a dimer from the backbone) and (ii) unequal fractions of A and B side chains so that the elementary segment corresponds to a branched (star-like) motif (one arm of a minor component (A) and few arms of the major component (B), all being connected by the backbone fragment). In the linear elementary segment regime, the presence of a long backbone enables stabilization of not only conventional morphologies like lamellae, perforated lamellae, and cylinders, but also structures with three-dimensional percolation: the double gyroid with bicontinuous percolation and the novel cocontinuous M 15 morphology. In the star-like elementary segment regime, molecular brushes tend to form morphologies with spherical domain types. We observed the conventional spheres ordered with the symmetry of the body-centered cubic lattice as well as Frank-Kasper σ-type spheres. It was also shown that the backbone directly influences Frank-Kasper sphere packing types, since individual star-like macromolecules not connected by a backbone can form Frank-Kasper A15-type spheres. Furthermore, materials based on molecular brushes with star-like elementary segments can exhibit microphase separation with unique viscoelastic properties due to polymer bridge formation between the domains.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Makarov et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: