4.2 Article

Stress-strain relationships and yielding of metal-organic framework monoliths

期刊

COMMUNICATIONS MATERIALS
卷 4, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s43246-023-00412-0

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) have great potential for a wide range of applications, but their low mechanical stability has hindered the development of practical devices. The synthesis of MOFs in a monolithic morphology offers a solution to this problem. In this study, the mechanical behavior of MOF monoliths (specifically ZIF-8 and MIL-68) was investigated using nanoindentation, micropillar compression, and Raman microspectroscopy.
Metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) have emerged as a versatile material platform for a wide range of applications. However, the development of practical devices is constrained by their inherently low mechanical stability. The synthesis of MOFs in a monolithic morphology represents a viable way for the transition of these materials from laboratory research to real-world applications. For the design of MOF-based devices, the mechanical characterization of such materials cannot be overlooked. In this regard, stress-strain relationships represent the most valuable tool for assessing the mechanical response of materials. Here, we use flat punch nanoindentation, micropillar compression and Raman microspectroscopy to investigate the stress-strain behaviour of MOF monoliths. A pseudo-plastic flow is observed under indentation, where the confining pressure prevents unstable crack propagation. Material flow is accommodated by grain boundary sliding, with occasional stepwise cracking to accommodate excessive stress building up. Micropillar compression reveals a brittle failure of ZIF-8, while plastic flow is observed for MIL-68. Mechanical characterizations of metal-organic framework monoliths are often overlooked. Here, the stress-strain behaviour of ZIF-8 and MIL-68 monoliths was investigated with flat punch nanoindentation, micropillar compression and Raman microspectroscopy.

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

4.2
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