4.8 Article

Three-Dimensional Triptycene-Functionalized Covalent Organic Frameworks with hea Net for Hydrogen Adsorption

期刊

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/anie.202117101

关键词

Covalent Organic Frameworks; Functionalization; Hydrogen Adsorption; Porous Organic Materials

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [22025504, 21621001, 22105082, 21390394]
  2. 111 project [BP0719036, B17020]
  3. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2020TQ0118, 2020M681034]
  4. program for JLU Science and Technology Innovative Research Team

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, two non-interpenetrated three-dimensional COFs, named JUC-596 and JUC-597, were successfully reported by using the combination of tetrahedral and triangular prism building units. JUC-596 exhibited exceptional performance in H-2 adsorption, surpassing previous benchmarks from porous organic materials. The strong interaction between H-2 and COF materials was verified through theoretical calculations.
Owing to the finite building blocks and difficulty in structural identification, it remains a tremendous challenge to elaborately design and synthesize three-dimensional covalent organic frameworks (3D COFs) with predetermined topologies. Herein, we report the first two cases of 3D COFs with the non-interpenetrated hea net, termed JUC-596 and JUC-597, by using the combination of tetrahedral and triangular prism building units. Due to the presence of triptycene functional groups and fluorine atoms, JUC-596 exhibits an exceptional performance in the H-2 adsorption up to 305 cm(3) g(-1) (or 2.72 wt%) at 77 K and 1 bar, which is higher than previous benchmarks from porous organic materials reported so far. Furthermore, the strong interaction between H-2 and COF materials is verified through the DFT theoretical calculations. This work represents a captivating example of rational design of functional COFs based on a reticular chemistry guide and demonstrates its promising application in clean energy storage.

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

4.8
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