4.6 Article

Anisotropy of Elastic Properties of Metal-Organic Frameworks and the Breathing Phenomenon

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY C
卷 123, 期 40, 页码 24651-24658

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpcc.9b08434

关键词

-

资金

  1. Russian Science Foundation [16-13-10158]
  2. Russian Science Foundation [19-13-13013] Funding Source: Russian Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) need a high mechanical stability to be robust for industrial applications, like gas storage and catalysis. Their adsorption properties also correlate with the structure flexibility, which leads to the so-called breathing phenomenon. Finding relations between geometrical and topological descriptors and mechanical properties is important for explaining and predicting mechanical behavior of both synthesized and hypothetical MOFs. To address this, we present the full tensor DFT analysis of the second-order elastic constants for 22 either rigid or flexible MOFs assembled from rod secondary building units (rod MOFs) and related to 7 topological types of underlying nets: 4/5/t1, bik, crb, dia, gis, cda, and mog. The calculated values of the Young's and shear moduli, linear compressibility, and Poisson's ratio have found a good agreement with experimental observations. We have shown that the geometrical-topological features of the coordination framework predetermine the general form of the elastic tensor, while variations in the MOF composition tune the mechanical properties in specific directions. We report for the first time a negative linear compressibility for the CAU-10-OCH3, NOTT-401, MIL-60, MIL-116, and MIL-118 frameworks. We have also revealed that the breathing behavior of six rod MOFs of the MIL-53, MIL-118, and CAU-10 families is caused by compliant geometrical-topological patterns and ligand-ligand interactions. The proposed classification of the geometrical-topological patterns into compliant and noncompliant can be used to search for and to design breathing MOFs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据