Cited by 762Metal-Organic Frameworks: Synthesis and ApplicationsMachine Learning in Materials ScienceCovalent Organic Framework Applications

Mechanical properties of hybrid inorganic–organic framework materials: establishing fundamental structure–property relationships

Tan, Jin Chong, Cheetham, Anthony K.·2011·Chemical Society Reviews

Abstract

The mechanical properties of hybrid framework materials, including both nanoporous metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) and dense inorganic-organic frameworks, are discussed in this critical review. Although there are relatively few studies of this kind in the literature, major recent advances in this area are beginning to shed light on the fundamental structure-mechanical property relationships. Indeed research into the mechanical behavior of this important new class of solid-state materials is central to the design and optimal performance of a multitude of technological applications envisaged. In this review, we examine the elasticity of hybrid frameworks by considering their Young's modulus, Poisson's ratio, bulk modulus and shear modulus. This is followed by discussions of their hardness, plasticity, yield strength and fracture behavior. Our focus is on both experimental and computational approaches. Experimental work on single crystals and amorphized monoliths involved primarily the application of nanoindentation and atomic force microscopy to determine the elastic moduli and hardness properties. The compressibility and bulk moduli of single crystals and polycrystalline powders were studied by high-pressure X-ray crystallography in the diamond anvil cell, while in one instance spectroscopic ellipsometry has also been used to estimate the elastic moduli of MOF nanoparticles and deposited films. Theoretical studies, on the other hand, encompassed the application of first princi…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1039/c0cs00163e

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tan, J. C., & Cheetham, A. K.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Cheetham, Anthony K.
Venue
Chemical Society Reviews
Published
2011
Volume
40
Issue
2
Pages
1059
ISSN
  • 0306-0012 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-4744
OpenAlex
W2141287164
Cited by
762
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 39 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 59 · 2022: 44 · 2021: 53 · 2020: 60 · 2019: 48 · 2018: 53 · 2017: 48 · 2016: 67 · 2015: 61 · 2014: 45 · 2013: 43 · 2012: 34
FWCI
1.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Chemical Society Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Inorganic Chemistry › Metal-Organic Frameworks: Synthesis and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Machine Learning in Materials Science
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Covalent Organic Framework Applications
Keywords
metal-organic frameworks, mechanical properties, structure-property relationships, elasticity, Young's modulus, Poisson's ratio, bulk modulus, shear modulus, hardness, plasticity, yield strength, fracture behavior, nanoindentation, spectroscopic ellipsometry, density functional theory, molecular dynamics simulation

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