The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Screening Metal–Organic Frameworks by Analysis of Transient Breakthrough of Gas Mixtures in a Fixed Bed Adsorber
Abstract
Metal–organic frameworks (MOFs) offer considerable potential for separating a variety of mixtures that are important in applications such as CO 2 capture and H 2 purification. In view of the vast number of MOFs that have been synthesized, there is a need for a reliable procedure for comparing screening and ranking MOFs with regard to their anticipated performance in pressure swing adsorption (PSA) units. For this purpose, the most commonly used metrics are the adsorption selectivity and the working capacity. Here, we suggest an additional metric for comparing MOFs that is based on the analysis of the transient response of an adsorber to a step input of a gaseous mixture. For a chosen purity of the gaseous mixture exiting from the adsorber, a dimensionless breakthrough time τ break can be defined and determined; this metric determines the frequency of required regeneration and influences the productivity of a PSA unit. The values of τ break are dictated both by selectivity and by capacity metrics .By performing transient adsorber calculations for separation of CO 2 /H 2, CO 2 /CH 4, CH 4 /H 2, and CO 2 /CH 4 /H 2 mixtures, we compare the values of τ break to highlight some important advantages of MOFs over conventionally used adsorbents such as zeolite NaX. For a given separation duty, such comparisons provide a more realistic ranking of MOFs than afforded by either selectivity or capacity metrics alone. We conclude that breakthrough calculations can provide an essential tool for screening MOFs.
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
Cites
An Amine-Functionalized MIL-53 Metal−Organic Framework with Large Separation Power for CO 2 and CH 4
Couck, S., Denayer, J. F. M., Baron, G. V., Rémy, T., Gascon, J., & Kapteijn, F. (2009) · Journal of the American Chemical Society · doi:10.1021/ja900555r · Cited by 988
Metal-organic frameworks with high capacity and selectivity for harmful gases
Britt, D., Tranchemontagne, D., & Yaghi, O. M. (2008) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0804900105 · Cited by 958
Reducing the Cost of CO 2 Capture from Flue Gases Using Pressure Swing Adsorption
Ho, M. T., Allinson, G. W., & Wiley, D. E. (2008) · Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research · doi:10.1021/ie070831e · Cited by 566
Functionalized MOFs for Enhanced CO2 Capture
Torrisi, A., Bell, R. G., & Mellot-Draznieks, C. (2010) · Crystal Growth & Design · doi:10.1021/cg100646e · Cited by 293
Cited by
The high-throughput highway to computational materials design
Curtarolo, S., Hart, G. L. W., Nardelli, M. B., Mingo, N., Sanvito, S., & Levy, O. (2013) · Nature Materials · doi:10.1038/nmat3568 · Cited by 2,053
A Review of CO2 Capture by Absorption and Adsorption
Yu, C.-H., Huang, C.-H., & Tan, C.-S. (2012) · Aerosol and Air Quality Research · doi:10.4209/aaqr.2012.05.0132 · Cited by 1,730
Evaluating metal–organic frameworks for natural gas storage
Mason, J. A., Veenstra, M., & Long, J. R. (2014) · Chem. Sci. · doi:10.1039/c3sc52633j · Cited by 1,239
Self-citationReview of recent advances in carbon dioxide separation and capture
Kenarsari, S. D., Yang, D., Jiang, G., Zhang, S., Wang, J., Russell, A. G., Wei, Q., & Fan, M. (2013) · RSC Advances · doi:10.1039/c3ra43965h · Cited by 784
He, Y., Krishna, R., & Chen, B. (2012) · Energy & Environmental Science · doi:10.1039/c2ee22858k · Cited by 674
Self-citationLuo, F., Yan, C., Dang, L., Krishna, R., Zhou, W., Wu, H., Dong, X., Han, Y., Hu, T.-L., O’Keeffe, M., et al. (2016) · Journal of the American Chemical Society · doi:10.1021/jacs.6b02030 · Cited by 601
Self-citationBloch, E. D., Murray, L. J., Queen, W. L., Chavan, S., Maximoff, S. N., Bigi, J. P., Krishna, R., Peterson, V. K., Grandjean, F., Long, G. J., et al. (2011) · Journal of the American Chemical Society · doi:10.1021/ja205976v · Cited by 531
Self-citationEvaluation of cation-exchanged zeolite adsorbents for post-combustion carbon dioxide capture
Bae, T.-H., Hudson, M. R., Mason, J. A., Queen, W. L., Dutton, J. J., Sumida, K., Micklash, K. J., Kaye, S. S., Brown, C. M., & Long, J. R. (2013) · Energy Environ. Sci. · doi:10.1039/c2ee23337a · Cited by 437
Self-citationLi, P., He, Y., Zhao, Y., Weng, L., Wang, H., Krishna, R., Wu, H., Zhou, W., O'Keeffe, M., Han, Y., et al. (2015) · Angewandte Chemie International Edition · doi:10.1002/anie.201410077 · Cited by 423
Self-citationDubbeldam, D., Krishna, R., Calero, S., & Yazaydın, A. Ö. (2012) · Angewandte Chemie International Edition · doi:10.1002/anie.201205040 · Cited by 106
Self-citationSong, C., Hu, J., Ling, Y., Feng, Y., Krishna, R., Chen, D.-L., & He, Y. (2015) · Journal of Materials Chemistry A · doi:10.1039/c5ta05481h · Cited by 91
Self-citationInvestigation of CO 2 adsorption on carbon material derived from Mesua ferrea L. seed cake
Bhatta, L. K. G., Subramanyam, S., Chengala, M. D., Bhatta, U. M., Pandit, N., & Venkatesh, K. (2015) · Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.jece.2015.10.006 · Cited by 23
Metadata
- Authors
- Krishna, R., & Long, J. R.
- Venue
- The Journal of Physical Chemistry C
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2011-06-14
- Volume
- 115
- Issue
- 26
- Pages
- 12941-12950
- ISSN
- 1932-7447 (ISSN-L)
- 1932-7455
- OpenAlex
- W2008193979
- Cited by
- 217
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 17.55
- 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
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.
