The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Comparison of the Behavior of Metal–Organic Frameworks and Zeolites for Hydrocarbon Separations
Abstract
The objective of this work was to study the adsorption and separation of the most important families of hydrocarbon compounds on metal-organic frameworks (MOFs), in comparison with zeolites. For this purpose, we have selected four probe molecules, each of them representing one of these families, i.e., o- and p-xylene as aromatics, 1-octene as an alkene, and n-octane as an alkane. The separation of these four molecules was studied by binary breakthrough experiments. To represent the large diversity of MOF structures, the experiments were carried out with (i) two MOFs with coordinatively unsaturated metal sites (CUS), i.e., Cu-btc (HKUST-1) and CPO-27-Ni, (ii) a MOF with an anionic framework and extraframework cations, i.e. RHO-ZMOF, and (iii) two rather apolar zeolitic imidazolate framework (ZIF) materials with different pore sizes, i.e. ZIF-8 and ZIF-76. Zeolite NaY and zeolite β were used as polar and apolar reference adsorbents, respectively. The results can be briefly summarized as follows: ZIFs (not carrying any polar functional groups) behave like apolar adsorbents and exhibit very interesting and unexpected molecular sieving properties. CUS-MOFs behave like polar adsorbents but show the specificity of preferring alkenes over aromatics. This feature is rationalized thanks to DFT+D calculations. MOFs with extraframework cations behave like polar (cationic) zeolites.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Qiao, X., Su, B., Liu, C., Song, Q., Luo, D., Mo, G., & Wang, T. (2018) · Advanced Materials · doi:10.1002/adma.201702275 · Cited by 469
Advanced Porous Materials in Mixed Matrix Membranes
Cheng, Y., Ying, Y., Japip, S., Jiang, S., Chung, T., Zhang, S., & Zhao, D. (2018) · Advanced Materials · doi:10.1002/adma.201802401 · Cited by 448
Dubbeldam, D., Krishna, R., Calero, S., & Yazaydın, A. Ö. (2012) · Angewandte Chemie International Edition · doi:10.1002/anie.201205040 · Cited by 106
Metadata
- Authors
- Peralta, D., Chaplais, G., Simon-Masseron, A., Barthelet, K., Chizallet, C., Quoineaud, A.-A., & Pirngruber, G. D.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Chemical Society
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2012-03-20
- Volume
- 134
- Issue
- 19
- Pages
- 8115-8126
- ISSN
- 0002-7863 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5126
- OpenAlex
- W2031521238
- Cited by
- 290
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 16.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of the Behavior of Metal–Organic Frameworks and Zeolites for Hydrocarbon Separations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1021/ja211864w
- The paper
- Peralta, D., Chaplais, G., Simon-Masseron, A., Barthelet, K., Chizallet, C., Quoineaud, A.-A., & Pirngruber, G. D. (2012). Comparison of the Behavior of Metal–Organic Frameworks and Zeolites for Hydrocarbon Separations. Journal of the American Chemical Society. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja211864w
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.