We describe here the implementation of methylene-bridged binuclear “constrained geometry catalyst” (μ-CH 2 -3,3‘){(η 5 -indenyl)[1-Me 2 Si( t BuN)](ZrMe 2 )} 2 (C1-Zr 2 ) to produce high- M w branched polyethylene. In ethylene homopolymerization, ∼70× increases in molecular weight are achieved with(C1-Zr 2 ) vs (μ-CH 2 CH 2 -3,3‘){(η 5 -indenyl)[1-Me 2 Si( t BuN)](ZrMe 2 )} 2 (C2-Zr 2 ) under identical polymerization conditions using(Ph 3 C + ) 2 [1,4-(C 6 F 5 ) 3 BC 6 F 4 B(C 6 F 5 ) 3 ] 2- (B 2 ) as the cocatalyst for both. With MAO as the cocatalyst, ∼600× increases in polyethylene molecular weight are achieved with (μ-CH 2 CH 2 -3,3‘){(η 5 -indenyl)[1-Me 2 Si( t BuN)](ZrCl 2 )} 2 (C2-Zr 2 Cl 4 ) and (μ-CH 2 -3,3‘){(η 5 -indenyl)[1-Me 2 Si( t BuN)](ZrCl 2 )} 2 (C1-Zr 2 Cl 4 ) vs mononuclear [1-Me 2 Si(3-ethylindenyl)( t BuN)]ZrCl 2 (Zr 1 Cl 2 ). In the ethylene + 1-hexene copolymerization, C1-Zr 2 enchains 3× more 1-hexene than does C2-Zr 2 under identical polymerization conditions (B 2 as cocatalyst). With MAO as the cocatalyst, C2-Zr 2 Cl 4 enchains 3.5× more, and C1-Zr 2 Cl 4 4.2× more, 1-hexene than does Zr 1 Cl 2 . When the polar solvent C 6 H 5 Cl is used as the polymerization medium, dramatic compression in the dispersion of polymerization activities and molecular weights is found. Both homopolymerization and copolymerization results argue that achievable Zr−Zr spatial proximity significantly influences chain transfer rates and selectivity for comonomer enchainment and that such proximity effects are highly cocatalyst and solvent sensitive.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: