0
$\begingroup$

What unique properties of MOF make them interesting in the field of catalysis?

I read a few research articles about MOFs and mostly they reported on tunable porosity using smaller or larger ligands, large internal surface area for catalytic reaction to occur and we can make a variety of MOF materials by changing metal ions and ligands, etc.

But i want to know why exactly this MOF are very much exploring in the field of catalysis?

$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ From the horse’s mouth: special issue intro $\endgroup$
    – Karsten
    Commented Nov 14 at 12:41
  • $\begingroup$ So the points you have already listed are not sufficient to make MOFs interesting? $\endgroup$
    – Jon Custer
    Commented Nov 14 at 13:22
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you for your answer I mean, these points that I have mentioned make better material but I think there are much more interesting properties of metal and ligand coordination along with the porosity that make these MOF materials good for catalysis which I do not properly understand. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 15 at 6:42

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

Being able to tailor the open pore size (and its distribution) allows you to be selective about the (maximal) size of molecules/branch of molecules able to enter the cavity of these heterogenic catalysts where the reaction can take place. As such, similar to artificial zeolithes with 3, 4, or about $\pu{5 Å}$ across the the open pores think (of ZSM-5) suitable for ion-exchange, drying water, or Bronstedt-acid catalyzed esterification/isomerization (e.g., p-xylene does not fit across pores of $\pu{3 Å}$ diameter).

With molecules (e.g., p-terephtalic acid) to keep the limits of the channels away, you already can estimate from the drawing board/synthetic route a size of the open pores and channels. Compared to the ones of alumosilicates, the accessible open pores and channels can be much wider than for alumosilicates, i.e. the inner of catalyst becomes accessible for larger molecules to transform. However since the framework is of organic molecules, it is less rigid/more flexible, too. This can be an advantage (if the MOF's structure adopts according to the guest molecule), or an disadvantage (an empty MOF easier crashes under mechanical stress compared to beads of zeolithes you can routinely pack into a column).

The step to bake the zeolithes (which costs time and energy) isn't there.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you for your answer $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 15 at 6:44

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.