The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Post-synthetic Ti Exchanged UiO-66 Metal-Organic Frameworks that Deliver Exceptional Gas Permeability in Mixed Matrix Membranes
Open accessAbstract
Gas separation membranes are one of the lowest energy technologies available for the separation of carbon dioxide from flue gas. Key to handling the immense scale of this separation is maximised membrane permeability at sufficient selectivity for CO2 over N2. For the first time it is revealed that metals can be post-synthetically exchanged in MOFs to drastically enhance gas transport performance in membranes. Ti-exchanged UiO-66 MOFs have been found to triple the gas permeability without a loss in selectivity due to several effects that include increased affinity for CO2 and stronger interactions between the polymer matrix and the Ti-MOFs. As a result, it is also shown that MOFs optimized in previous works for batch-wise adsorption applications can be applied to membranes, which have lower demands on material quantities. These membranes exhibit exceptional CO2 permeability enhancement of as much as 153% when compared to the non-exchanged UiO-66 mixed-matrix controls, which places them well above the Robeson upper bound at just a 5 wt.% loading. The fact that maximum permeability enhancement occurs at such low loadings, significantly less than the optimum for other MMMs, is a major advantage in large-scale application due to the more attainable quantities of MOF needed.
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
Carbon capture and storage update
Boot-Handford, M. E., Abanades, J. C., Anthony, E. J., Blunt, M. J., Brandani, S., Mac Dowell, N., Fernández, J. R., Ferrari, M.-C., Gross, R., Hallett, J. P., et al. (2014) · Energy Environ. Sci. · doi:10.1039/c3ee42350f · Cited by 2,386
Cited by
Ghalei, B., Sakurai, K., Kinoshita, Y., Wakimoto, K., Isfahani, A. P., Song, Q., Doitomi, K., Furukawa, S., Hirao, H., Kusuda, H., et al. (2017) · Nature Energy · doi:10.1038/nenergy.2017.86 · Cited by 593
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
Recent progress of fillers in mixed matrix membranes for CO 2 separation: A review
Vinoba, M., Bhagiyalakshmi, M., Alqaheem, Y., Alomair, A. A., Pérez, A., & Rana, M. S. (2017) · Separation and Purification Technology · doi:10.1016/j.seppur.2017.07.051 · Cited by 438
Advances in metal–organic framework-based membranes
Cheng, Y., Datta, S. J., Zhou, S., Jia, J., Shekhah, O., & Eddaoudi, M. (2022) · Chemical Society Reviews · doi:10.1039/d2cs00031h · Cited by 423
UiO-66-polyether block amide mixed matrix membranes for CO2 separation
Shen, J., Liu, G., Huang, K., Li, Q., Guan, K., Li, Y., & Jin, W. (2016) · Journal of Membrane Science · doi:10.1016/j.memsci.2016.04.045 · Cited by 371
Metadata
- Authors
- Smith, S. J. D., Ladewig, B. P., Hill, A. J., Lau, C. H., & Hill, M. R.
- Venue
- Scientific Reports
- Published
- 2015-01-16
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 7823-7823
- ISSN
- 2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2091295977
- Cited by
- 201
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 24.85
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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.