§3.1 The Concept of Polydispersity vs Monodispersity in Macromolecules
Unlike low molecular weight organic molecules or monodisperse biological macromolecules (such as enzymes, insulin, or wild-type genomic DNA) where every molecule possesses an exact, identical chemical formula and invariant mass, synthetic polymers are inherently polydisperse.
Origins of Polydispersity
In any synthetic chemical polymerization process:
- Initiation events occur randomly throughout the reactor volume over time.
- Radical, ionic, or coordination active centers propagate with stochastic collision kinetics.
- Chain transfer, termination by combination or disproportionation, and mass-transfer mixing gradients introduce broad variations in individual chain lifetimes.
Consequently, a synthetic polymer sample consists of a complex statistical mixture of macromolecules possessing identical constitutional repeat units but spanning a broad continuum of chain lengths and molecular weights.
The Number and Weight Distribution Functions
A polydisperse polymer is described by its discrete or continuous molecular weight distribution (MWD):
- Number Distribution $N(M)$: The number of moles (or molecules) $N_i$ of species possessing molecular weight $M_i$. The mole fraction is:
- Weight Distribution $W(M)$: The total mass $w_i = N_i M_i$ of species possessing molecular weight $M_i$. The weight fraction is:
Because heavier molecules contribute proportionally more mass, the weight distribution $W(M)$ is always shifted toward substantially higher molecular weights relative to the number distribution $N(M)$.
§3.2 Statistical Definitions of Molecular Weight Averages (Mn, Mw, Mz, Mv)
Because no single number can fully describe a broad distribution, polymer science employs a family of statistical moments known as molecular weight averages.
1. Number-Average Molecular Weight $M_n$
The first statistical moment of the number distribution, representing the total mass of the sample divided by the total number of moles:
$M_n$ is highly sensitive to the presence of low molecular weight oligomers. It is measured experimentally by colligative properties (membrane osmometry, vapor pressure osmometry, cryoscopy) and end-group chemical titration.
2. Weight-Average Molecular Weight $M_w$
The second statistical moment of the number distribution (or the first moment of the weight distribution):
$M_w$ is heavily influenced by the presence of large, high molecular weight macromolecules. It is determined experimentally by static light scattering, small-angle neutron scattering (SANS), and sedimentation equilibrium.
3. Z-Average Molecular Weight $M_z$
The third moment of the number distribution (or second moment of the weight distribution):
$M_z$ is exceptionally sensitive to high molecular weight tails, micro-gels, and long-chain branching. It is measured by analytical ultracentrifugation (AUC sedimentation equilibrium). Higher moments ($M_{z+1}$) can be defined analogously.
4. Viscosity-Average Molecular Weight $M_v$
Derived from dilute solution viscometry through the Mark-Houwink-Sakurada relationship ($[\eta] = K' M^a$):
where $a$ is the Mark-Houwink exponent ($0.5 \le a \le 0.8$ for flexible coils).
- When $a = 1$: $M_v = M_w$.
- In a theta solvent where $a = 0.5$: $M_v = \left(\sum w_i M_i^{1/2}\right)^2$.
§3.3 Mathematical Hierarchy & Rigorous Inequalities: Mn <= Mv <= Mw <= Mz
A cornerstone theorem of polymer mathematics states that for any polydisperse polymer sample, the molecular weight averages obey the strict hierarchical inequality:
Equality ($M_n = M_v = M_w = M_z$) holds if and only if the polymer is strictly monodisperse.
Proof that $M_w \ge M_n$ via the Cauchy-Schwarz Inequality
The Cauchy-Schwarz inequality states that for any real sequences $(a_i)$ and $(b_i)$:
Let $a_i = \sqrt{N_i}$ and $b_i = \sqrt{N_i} M_i$. Substituting these sequences:
Dividing both sides by $\left(\sum N_i\right) \left(\sum N_i M_i\right)$:
Equality holds if and only if $b_i = c \, a_i$ for all $i$, meaning $\sqrt{N_i} M_i = c \sqrt{N_i} \implies M_i = c$ (monodisperse sample). The proof that $M_w \le M_z$ follows identically by choosing $a_i = \sqrt{N_i M_i}$ and $b_i = \sqrt{N_i M_i} M_i$.
Position of the Viscosity Average $M_v$
Because the Mark-Houwink exponent $a$ satisfies $0 < a < 1$ for flexible random coils in good and theta solvents, Hölder's inequality dictates:
Typically, $M_v$ lies within $10 - 20\%$ below $M_w$, serving as a highly accessible proxy for weight-average molecular weight.
§3.4 The Polydispersity Index (PDI / D) & Breadth of Distribution
The breadth of the molecular weight distribution is quantitatively indexed by the polydispersity index (PDI, denoted by IUPAC as the dispersity $\text{Đ}$):
Variance and Standard Deviation of the MWD
The variance $\sigma_n^2$ of the number distribution is:
Notice that:
Therefore:
The standard deviation relative to the number-average molecular weight is:
This elegant identity proves that the dispersity $\text{Đ}$ is a direct metric of the normalized variance of the distribution.
Typical Dispersity Values across Polymerization Mechanisms
- Living Anionic & Group-Transfer Polymerization: $\text{Đ} \approx 1.01 - 1.05$ (nearly monodisperse Poisson distributions).
- Controlled / Living Radical Polymerization (ATRP, RAFT, NMP): $\text{Đ} \approx 1.05 - 1.20$.
- Step-Growth (Condensation) Polymerization at High Conversion ($p \to 1$): $\text{Đ} = 1 + p \to 2.0$ (Flory-Schulz most probable distribution).
- Free-Radical Polymerization:
- Disproportionation termination: $\text{Đ} = 2.0$.
- Combination termination: $\text{Đ} = 1.5$.
- With autoacceleration (Trommsdorff gel effect) and chain transfer: $\text{Đ} = 2.5 - 5.0$.
- Ziegler-Natta Multi-Site Heterogeneous Coordination Catalysis: $\text{Đ} = 5.0 - 20.0$ (superposition of multiple active catalytic sites).
- Hyperbranched Polymers & Random Crosslinking Gels: $\text{Đ} > 20 - 50$ (diverging as the critical gel point is approached).
§3.5 The Flory-Schulz (Most Probable) Distribution Function
The Flory-Schulz distribution (also termed the "most probable" distribution) governs linear step-growth polycondensation and chain-growth polymerization with constant chain transfer.
Statistical Derivation from Equal Reactivity Postulate
Consider a step-growth polymerization of bifunctional monomers ($A-B$ or stoichiometric $A-A + B-B$). Let $p$ be the extent of reaction (probability that any given functional group has reacted). The probability that a polymer molecule contains precisely $x$ repeating units requires:
- $(x - 1)$ reacted linkages (each with independent probability $p$).
- $1$ unreacted end group terminating the chain (with probability $1 - p$).
The number-fraction distribution (mole fraction of $x$-mers) is:
The total number of molecules in the system at conversion $p$ is $N = N_0 (1 - p)$, where $N_0$ is the initial number of monomers. The total number of $x$-mer chains is:
The Weight-Fraction Distribution $w_x$
The weight fraction $w_x$ of $x$-mers is the mass of $x$-mers divided by total mass $N_0 M_0$:
Molecular Weight Averages and Dispersity
Summing the statistical moments using standard geometric series identities:
1. Number-Average Degree of Polymerization $X_n$:
2. Weight-Average Degree of Polymerization $X_w$:
3. Z-Average Degree of Polymerization $X_z$:
4. Polydispersity Index $\text{Đ}$:
In the limit of high conversion ($p \to 1.0$), $X_n \to \infty$, and the dispersity approaches exactly $2.0$:
The maximum of the weight distribution curve occurs at:
Thus, the weight distribution peaks at precisely $x = X_n$.
§3.6 The Poisson Distribution for Living Polymerization Systems
When polymer chain initiation is instantaneous relative to propagation and termination or chain transfer is completely absent—as in ideal living anionic or living ring-opening polymerizations—the molecular weight distribution follows a Poisson distribution.
Mechanistic Derivation
Let all $N_I$ initiator molecules initiate chain growth simultaneously at $t = 0$. The rate of monomer consumption per active center is identical across all chains:
The probability that a growing chain adds precisely $x$ monomer units during reaction time $t$ obeys Poisson birth-process kinetics:
where $\nu$ is the average number of monomers consumed per initiator molecule (the kinetic chain length):
Molecular Weight Averages and Monodispersity
For the Poisson distribution:
- Number-average degree of polymerization:
- Weight-average degree of polymerization:
- Dispersity $\text{Đ}$:
For a typical polymer with $X_n = 500$:
The distribution is extraordinarily narrow, providing essentially monodisperse polymers used as universal molecular weight calibration standards.
§3.7 The Schulz-Zimm Continuous Distribution Function
To model empirical polymer distributions spanning from narrow living systems to broad industrial materials, the Schulz-Zimm distribution provides a continuous, highly flexible mathematical representation.
Mathematical Formulation
The weight-fraction distribution function $w(M)$ in the Schulz-Zimm model is:
where:
- $z$ is the coupling / breadth parameter ($z > 0$)
- $y$ is a scaling parameter
- $\Gamma(z + 1) = z!$ is the gamma function
The statistical moments are:
Relationship to Dispersity $\text{Đ}$
The dispersity is directly governed by the parameter $z$:
Solving for the parameter $z$:
- As $z \to \infty$: $\text{Đ} \to 1.0$ (monodisperse delta function).
- When $z = 1$: $\text{Đ} = 2.0$ (recovering the Flory-Schulz most probable distribution).
- When $z = 2$: $\text{Đ} = 1.5$ (recovering free-radical polymerization with combination termination).
- When $z < 1$: $\text{Đ} > 2.0$ (broad polydispersity distributions).
The ratio of the Z-average to weight-average is:
The Schulz-Zimm function is widely implemented in Gel Permeation Chromatography software to deconvolute overlapping chromatogram peaks.
§3.8 Gel Permeation Chromatography (GPC/SEC) & Benoit Universal Calibration
Gel Permeation Chromatography (GPC), also termed Size Exclusion Chromatography (SEC), is the premier experimental technique for measuring the full molecular weight distribution of polymers.
Separation Mechanism: Entropy-Driven Size Exclusion
A GPC column is packed with porous, crosslinked polymer beads (typically styrene-divinylbenzene gels) with controlled pore diameter distributions ($10 - 10^5\text{ \AA}$). As a dilute polymer solution flows through the column:
- Large macromolecules with hydrodynamic volume $V_h$ exceeding the pore diameter cannot enter the pore network and are excluded, eluting rapidly at the interstitial void volume $V_0$.
- Small macromolecules permeate freely into both the interstitial spaces and the internal pores, eluting at the total liquid volume $V_t = V_0 + V_p$.
- Intermediate chains partition into a fraction $K_{\text{SEC}}$ of the pore volume based on their steric size.
The retention volume $V_e$ is:
Crucially, GPC separates molecules strictly by their hydrodynamic volume $V_h$, NOT by molecular weight!
Benoit Universal Calibration Principle
In 1967, Henri Benoit demonstrated that the hydrodynamic volume of any polymer chain in solution is directly proportional to the product of its intrinsic viscosity $[\eta]$ and its molecular weight $M$: From Einstein's viscosity law for equivalent hydrodynamic spheres of radius $R_h$:
Benoit established that plotting $\log([\eta] M)$ versus elution volume $V_e$ yields a single universal calibration curve onto which all polymers (linear, branched, polystyrene, PMMA, polyethylene) collapse, independent of chemical composition:
Molecular Weight Determination of Unknown Polymers
If a GPC column is calibrated using narrow polystyrene standards (subscript $\text{PS}$):
Substituting the Mark-Houwink-Sakurada relationship $[\eta] = K' M^a$:
Solving for the true molecular weight $M_x$ of the unknown polymer eluting at the same retention volume $V_e$:
This elegant relation permits precise determination of absolute molecular weights and distribution functions for any polymer whose Mark-Houwink constants are known.
Worked Practice Problems (9 Challenge Exercises)
Multi-step solved problems covering end-to-end vector statistics, radius of gyration, persistence length, characteristic ratio, and tacticity stereochemistry with line-by-line mathematical proofs.
An equimolar mixture ($1:1$ molar ratio) is prepared by blending two monodisperse polystyrene standards:
- Component A: $M_A = 20,000\text{ g/mol}$
- Component B: $M_B = 180,000\text{ g/mol}$
(a) Calculate the number-average molecular weight $M_n$. (b) Calculate the weight-average molecular weight $M_w$. (c) Calculate the Z-average molecular weight $M_z$. (d) Determine the polydispersity index $\text{Đ} = M_w / M_n$. (e) Recalculate $M_n, M_w$, and $\text{Đ}$ if the two components are blended in an equal weight ratio ($1:1$ mass ratio).
Step 1: Equimolar Blend ($N_A = N_B = 1\text{ mol}$)
The total number of moles is $\sum N_i = 1 + 1 = 2\text{ mol}$. (a) Number-average molecular weight $M_n$:
(b) Weight-average molecular weight $M_w$:
(c) Z-average molecular weight $M_z$:
(d) Polydispersity index:
Notice that $M_n (100\text{k}) < M_w (164\text{k}) < M_z (178\text{k})$, satisfying the theoretical inequality.
Step 2: Equal Weight Blend ($w_A = w_B = 0.50$)
Let $m_A = m_B = 180,000\text{ g}$. Then:
(e) Averages for the $1:1$ mass blend:
In an equal mass blend, the low molecular weight component dominates the number count ($9$ times more molecules), driving $M_n$ down to $36,000\text{ g/mol}$ and broadening the dispersity to $2.78$.
Equimolar blend: (a) M_n = 100,000 g/mol; (b) M_w = 164,000 g/mol; (c) M_z = 178,049 g/mol; (d) PDI = 1.640. Equal mass blend: (e) M_n = 36,000 g/mol, M_w = 100,000 g/mol, PDI = 2.778.
A polydisperse poly(methyl methacrylate) sample contains three distinct fractions:
- Fraction 1: Weight fraction $w_1 = 0.20$, $M_1 = 10,000\text{ g/mol}$
- Fraction 2: Weight fraction $w_2 = 0.50$, $M_2 = 50,000\text{ g/mol}$
- Fraction 3: Weight fraction $w_3 = 0.30$, $M_3 = 200,000\text{ g/mol}$
(a) Calculate $M_n$ and $M_w$. (b) Calculate the viscosity-average molecular weight $M_v$ in a theta solvent where the Mark-Houwink exponent is $a = 0.50$. (c) Calculate $M_v$ in a good solvent where $a = 0.76$. (d) Compare $M_n, M_v(a=0.50), M_v(a=0.76)$, and $M_w$.
Step 1: Calculation of $M_n$ and $M_w$
Step 2: Calculation of $M_v$ in Theta Solvent ($a = 0.50$)
Calculate each term:
Sum of terms:
Squaring:
Step 3: Calculation of $M_v$ in Good Solvent ($a = 0.76$)
Calculate each term ($M_i^{0.76}$):
- $10,000^{0.76} = 1,096.48 \implies 0.20 \times 1,096.48 = 219.30$
- $50,000^{0.76} = 3,727.59 \implies 0.50 \times 3,727.59 = 1,863.80$
- $200,000^{0.76} = 10,696.52 \implies 0.30 \times 10,696.52 = 3,208.96$
Sum:
Raising to power $1 / 0.76 = 1.31579$:
Step 4: Comparison
As the Mark-Houwink exponent $a$ increases from $0.50$ (theta solvent) to $0.76$ (good solvent), $M_v$ increases systematically, approaching $M_w$ as $a \to 1.0$.
(a) M_n = 31,746 g/mol, M_w = 87,000 g/mol; (b) M_v(a=0.50) = 70,738 g/mol; (c) M_v(a=0.76) = 81,146 g/mol; (d) Confirmed: M_n < M_v(0.5) < M_v(0.76) < M_w.
In the synthesis of Nylon 6,6 by equimolar polycondensation of adipic acid and hexamethylenediamine: (a) Calculate the number-average degree of polymerization $X_n$, weight-average degree of polymerization $X_w$, and dispersity $\text{Đ}$ at conversions $p = 0.900, 0.990, 0.999$, and $0.9999$. (b) At $p = 0.990$, calculate the mole fraction ($N_{100}$) and weight fraction ($w_{100}$) of chains containing precisely $100$ repeating units. (c) What is the peak of the weight distribution $x_{\text{max}}$ at $p = 0.990$?
Step 1: Degree of Polymerization and Dispersity vs Conversion
From Flory-Schulz step-growth equations for stoichiometric mixtures:
- At $p = 0.900$:
- At $p = 0.990$:
- At $p = 0.999$:
- At $p = 0.9999$:
Notice that as $p \to 1.0$, $\text{Đ} \to 2.000$.
Step 2: Fractions for $x = 100$ at $p = 0.990$
- Mole fraction $N_x = (1 - p) p^{x-1}$:
Since $(0.990)^{99} = \exp(99 \ln 0.990) = \exp(99 \times -0.010050) = \exp(-0.9950) = 0.3697$:
- Weight fraction $w_x = x (1 - p)^2 p^{x-1}$:
Step 3: Peak of Weight Distribution $x_{\text{max}}$
Notice that $x_{\text{max}} \approx X_n = 100$. The weight distribution achieves its exact maximum at $x = X_n$.
(a) p=0.90: X_n=10, X_w=19, PDI=1.90; p=0.99: X_n=100, X_w=199, PDI=1.99; p=0.999: X_n=1000, X_w=1999, PDI=1.999; p=0.9999: X_n=10000, X_w=19999, PDI=2.000; (b) N_100 = 0.370%, w_100 = 0.370%; (c) x_max = 100.
A living anionic polymerization of styrene is carried out with complete, instantaneous initiation ($[I]_0 = 2.50\text{ mmol/L}$) and initial monomer concentration $[M]_0 = 1.25\text{ mol/L}$. Polymerization is allowed to reach $100\%$ conversion without termination. (a) Calculate the kinetic chain length $\nu$ and number-average degree of polymerization $X_n$. (b) Calculate the weight-average degree of polymerization $X_w$ and polydispersity index $\text{Đ}$. (c) Calculate the standard deviation $\sigma_n$ in degree of polymerization. (d) Compare $\text{Đ}$ with that of a step-growth polymer synthesized to the same $X_n$.
Step 1: Kinetic Chain Length $\nu$ and $X_n$
The kinetic chain length is the average number of monomers consumed per initiator molecule:
Since each initiated chain incorporates the initiator fragment plus $\nu$ monomer units:
Step 2: Weight-Average Degree of Polymerization and Dispersity
From the Poisson distribution formulas:
The polydispersity index is:
Using the analytical approximation:
Relative standard deviation:
Step 4: Comparison with Step-Growth Polymerization
For a step-growth polymer synthesized to $X_n = 500$: The conversion required is $1 - 1/X_n = 1 - 1/500 = 0.9980$ ($99.8\%$). Its dispersity is:
Its standard deviation is:
The step-growth polymer has a standard deviation of nearly $500$ units, whereas the living anionic polymer has a standard deviation of only $22$ units. The living polymer is over $22$ times narrower in distribution.
(a) nu = 500, X_n = 501; (b) X_w = 502.00, PDI = 1.002; (c) sigma_n = 22.36 units (4.46% relative); (d) Step-growth has PDI = 1.998 and sigma = 499.5 units, showing living polymerization is 22x narrower.
A commercial poly(ethyl acrylate) resin characterized by triple-detection GPC yields:
- Number-average molecular weight: $M_n = 45,000\text{ g/mol}$
- Weight-average molecular weight: $M_w = 112,500\text{ g/mol}$
(a) Calculate the dispersity $\text{Đ} = M_w / M_n$. (b) Determine the Schulz-Zimm parameters $z$ and $y$. (c) Calculate the predicted Z-average molecular weight $M_z$ and the ratio $M_z / M_w$. (d) Calculate the peak molecular weight $M_{\text{peak}}$ of the weight distribution.
Step 1: Dispersity $\text{Đ}$
Step 2: Schulz-Zimm Parameters $z$ and $y$
For the Schulz-Zimm distribution:
From $M_n = z / y$:
Check with $M_w$:
Step 3: Z-Average Molecular Weight $M_z$
The ratio $M_z / M_w$ is:
Step 4: Peak Molecular Weight $M_{\text{peak}}$
The weight distribution function is:
Differentiating with respect to $M$ and setting to zero:
The peak of the differential weight distribution occurs at $M = 45,000\text{ g/mol}$.
(a) PDI = 2.500; (b) z = 2/3 (0.667), y = 1.481 x 10^(-5) mol/g; (c) M_z = 180,000 g/mol, M_z / M_w = 1.600; (d) M_peak = 45,000 g/mol (= M_n).
A GPC instrument is calibrated with monodisperse polystyrene standards in THF at $25^\circ\text{C}$ ($K_{\text{PS}} = 1.60 \times 10^{-4}\text{ dL/g}, a_{\text{PS}} = 0.706$). An unknown poly(vinyl chloride) (PVC) fraction elutes at retention volume $V_e = 24.50\text{ mL}$, which corresponds to a polystyrene apparent molecular weight of $M_{\text{PS}} = 100,000\text{ g/mol}$. Given the Mark-Houwink constants for PVC in THF at $25^\circ\text{C}$ are $K_{\text{PVC}} = 1.50 \times 10^{-4}\text{ dL/g}$ and $a_{\text{PVC}} = 0.770$: (a) Calculate the hydrodynamic volume parameter $[\eta]_{\text{PS}} M_{\text{PS}}$ at this elution volume. (b) Using the Benoit universal calibration principle, calculate the true molecular weight $M_{\text{PVC}}$ of the fraction. (c) Calculate the percentage error if the apparent polystyrene calibration were used directly without correction.
Step 1: Hydrodynamic Volume Parameter $[\eta]_{\text{PS}} M_{\text{PS}}$
From the Mark-Houwink relation for polystyrene:
Calculate $(100,000)^{0.706}$:
The hydrodynamic volume parameter is:
Step 2: Benoit Universal Calibration Calculation
By Benoit's principle:
Substituting $[\eta]_{\text{PVC}} = K_{\text{PVC}} M_{\text{PVC}}^{a_{\text{PVC}}}$:
Taking logarithms:
Step 3: Percentage Error
If the polystyrene calibration was used directly without correction ($M_{\text{apparent}} = 100,000\text{ g/mol}$):
Uncorrected polystyrene equivalent calibration overestimates the true molecular weight of PVC by more than $46\%$, demonstrating the absolute necessity of universal calibration.
(a) [eta]_PS * M_PS = 54,215 dL g / mol; (b) True M_PVC = 68,400 g/mol; (c) Error of uncorrected PS calibration = +46.2% overestimation.
Prove rigorously from first principles that $M_w \ge M_n$ for any arbitrary molecular weight distribution, and show that the difference $M_w - M_n$ is directly proportional to the variance of the number-average distribution $\sigma_n^2$. Deduce the condition under which $M_w = M_n$.
Step 1: Definition of Statistical Moments
Let $N_i$ be the number of moles of macromolecular species possessing molecular weight $M_i$. The zeroth, first, and second moments of the number distribution are:
By definition:
Step 2: Formulation of the Variance $\sigma_n^2$
The variance of the molecular weight about the number-average mean is:
Because $(M_i - M_n)^2 \ge 0$ for all real $M_i$ and $N_i > 0$, the sum of squares is non-negative:
Expanding the squared term inside the summation:
Dividing by $\sum N_i = \mu_0$:
Step 3: Expressing $\mu_2 / \mu_0$ in Terms of $M_w$ and $M_n$
Notice that:
Substitute this identity into the variance expression:
Rearranging for the difference $M_w - M_n$:
Step 4: Deduction of the Inequality
Since $\sigma_n^2 \ge 0$ and $M_n > 0$:
Furthermore:
Equality $M_w = M_n$ (and $\text{Đ} = 1.000$) holds if and only if $\sigma_n^2 = 0$. A variance of zero requires $(M_i - M_n)^2 = 0$ for all species with non-zero $N_i$, which implies $M_i = M_n$ for every molecule in the sample. Hence, $M_w = M_n$ if and only if the polymer is strictly monodisperse. This completes the rigorous proof.
Proved: M_w - M_n = sigma_n^2 / M_n >= 0, so M_w >= M_n. Equality holds if and only if sigma_n^2 = 0 (monodisperse sample).
A differential refractive index (dRI) detector in GPC yields a Gaussian response signal $S(V_e)$ as a function of retention volume $V_e$ (in mL):
with peak retention volume $V_{e0} = 22.00\text{ mL}$ and volume variance $\sigma_V = 0.750\text{ mL}$. The linear GPC calibration curve is:
with $A = 24.50$ and $B = 0.550\text{ mL}^{-1}$. (a) Show that the differential weight distribution $w(\ln M)$ is also Gaussian, and determine its mean $\langle \ln M \rangle$ and variance $\sigma_{\ln M}^2$. (b) Using log-normal distribution properties, calculate analytical values for $M_n, M_w, M_z$, and the dispersity $\text{Đ}$. (c) Compute numerical values for $M_n, M_w, M_z$, and $\text{Đ}$.
Step 1: Transformation of Variables to $w(\ln M)$
From the linear calibration equation:
The differential relation is:
Substituting $V_e$ into the Gaussian detector signal:
Let $\mu = A - B V_{e0} = \ln M_0$. Then:
Let the variance in logarithmic molecular weight be:
Then the normalized differential weight distribution is:
This proves that $w(\ln M)$ is an exact log-normal Gaussian distribution with:
- Mean $\mu = A - B V_{e0} = 24.50 - 0.550(22.00) = 24.50 - 12.10 = 12.40$
- Variance $\sigma_{\ln M}^2 = (B \sigma_V)^2 = (0.550 \times 0.750)^2 = (0.4125)^2 = 0.170156$
Step 2: Analytical Expressions for Molecular Weight Averages
For a log-normal distribution where $\ln M \sim \mathcal{N}(\mu, \sigma^2)$ under the weight distribution: The $k$-th moment of $M$ under the weight distribution is:
From the statistical definitions of averages:
- Weight-average ($k = 0$ of weight, which is the mean of $M$):
- Z-average ($k = 1$ of weight):
- Number-average ($k = -1$ of weight):
- Dispersity $\text{Đ}$:
Notice that the dispersity depends solely on the logarithmic variance $\sigma^2$!
Step 3: Numerical Calculations
Given $\mu = 12.40$ and $\sigma^2 = 0.170156$:
- Number-average:
- Weight-average:
- Z-average:
- Dispersity:
Check: $M_w / M_n = 264,364 / 222,995 = 1.1855$. Everything is in perfect mathematical alignment.
(a) w(ln M) is Gaussian with mean mu = 12.40 and variance sigma^2 = 0.1702; (b) M_n = exp(mu - sigma^2/2), M_w = exp(mu + sigma^2/2), M_z = exp(mu + 3*sigma^2/2), PDI = exp(sigma^2); (c) M_n = 223,000 g/mol, M_w = 264,400 g/mol, M_z = 313,400 g/mol, PDI = 1.186.
A multimodal engineering resin is produced by blending $K$ distinct polymer batches. Batch $k$ has weight fraction $W_k$ (where $\sum_{k=1}^K W_k = 1$), number-average molecular weight $M_{n,k}$, and weight-average molecular weight $M_{w,k}$. (a) Derive the universal formulas for the overall blend number-average $M_n$, weight-average $M_w$, and dispersity $\text{Đ}_{\text{blend}}$ in terms of $W_k, M_{n,k}$, and $M_{w,k}$. (b) Prove that $\text{Đ}_{\text{blend}} \ge \sum_{k=1}^K W_k \text{Đ}_k$, showing that blending always broadens or maintains dispersity, never narrows it. (c) For a ternary blend with components:
- Batch 1: $W_1 = 0.25, M_{n1} = 20,000, M_{w1} = 30,000\text{ g/mol}$
- Batch 2: $W_2 = 0.50, M_{n2} = 80,000, M_{w2} = 120,000\text{ g/mol}$
- Batch 3: $W_3 = 0.25, M_{n3} = 200,000, M_{w3} = 360,000\text{ g/mol}$
Calculate the overall $M_n, M_w$, and $\text{Đ}_{\text{blend}}$, and compare with the weighted average of individual dispersities $\sum W_k \text{Đ}_k$.
Step 1: Derivation of Overall Blend Averages
Let $m_{\text{tot}}$ be the total mass of the blend. The mass of batch $k$ is $m_k = W_k m_{\text{tot}}$.
1. Overall $M_n$:
The total number of moles of chains in batch $k$ is $n_k = m_k / M_{n,k} = W_k m_{\text{tot}} / M_{n,k}$. The total moles in the blend is $n_{\text{tot}} = \sum n_k = m_{\text{tot}} \sum (W_k / M_{n,k})$. Therefore:
2. Overall $M_w$:
By definition of weight-average:
3. Overall Dispersity $\text{Đ}_{\text{blend}}$:
Step 2: Proof that $\text{Đ}_{\text{blend}} \ge \sum W_k \text{Đ}_k$
For each batch $k$, the individual dispersity is $\text{Đ}_k = M_{w,k} / M_{n,k}$. Notice that:
By the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality for probability expectations $\langle X \rangle \langle Y \rangle \ge \langle \sqrt{X Y} \rangle^2$, let $X_k = M_{w,k}$ and $Y_k = 1 / M_{n,k}$ with weight probabilities $W_k$:
Furthermore, since $M_{w,k} \ge M_{n,k}$, expanding:
For monodisperse components where $\text{Đ}_k = 1$, this simplifies to:
Blending distinct distributions always broadens dispersity due to the disparity between component molecular weights.
Step 3: Numerical Calculation for Ternary Blend
Given components:
- Batch 1: $W_1 = 0.25, M_{n1} = 20,000, M_{w1} = 30,000 \implies \text{Đ}_1 = 1.50$
- Batch 2: $W_2 = 0.50, M_{n2} = 80,000, M_{w2} = 120,000 \implies \text{Đ}_2 = 1.50$
- Batch 3: $W_3 = 0.25, M_{n3} = 200,000, M_{w3} = 360,000 \implies \text{Đ}_3 = 1.80$
Calculate overall $M_w$:
Calculate overall $M_n$:
Calculate overall dispersity:
Compare with weighted sum of individual dispersities:
Notice that:
The blend dispersity ($3.15$) is double the average component dispersity ($1.575$), proving the dramatic broadening caused by multimodal molecular weight spans.
(a) M_n = 1 / sum(W_k / M_nk), M_w = sum(W_k M_wk), PDI_blend = (sum W_k M_wk) (sum W_k / M_nk); (b) Proved via cross-term expansion; (c) Overall M_n = 50,000 g/mol, M_w = 157,500 g/mol, PDI_blend = 3.150 vs weighted average PDI = 1.575.