The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Metal–organic frameworks in mixed-matrix membranes for gas separation
Abstract
Mixed-matrix membranes (MMMs) with metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) as additives (fillers) exhibit enhanced gas permeabilities and possibly also selectivities when compared to the pure polymer. Polyimides (Matrimid®) and polysulfones are popular polymer matrices for MOF fillers. Presently investigated MOFs for MMMs include [Cu(SiF(6))(4,4'-BIPY)(2)], [Cu(3)(BTC)(2)(H(2)O)(3)] (HKUST-1, Cu-BTC), [Cu(BDC)(DMF)], [Zn(4)O(BDC)(3)] (MOF-5), [Zn(2-methylimidazolate)(2)] (ZIF-8), [Zn(purinate)(2)] (ZIF-20), [Zn(2-carboxyaldehyde imidazolate)(2)] (ZIF-90), Mn(HCOO)(2), [Al(BDC)(μ-OH)] (MIL-53(Al)), [Al(NH(2)-BDC)(μ-OH)] (NH(2)-MIL-53(Al)) and [Cr(3)O(BDC)(3)(F,OH)(H(2)O)(2)] (MIL-101) (4,4'-BIPY = 4,4'-bipyridine, BTC = benzene-1,3,5-tricarboxylate, BDC = benzene-1,4-dicarboxylate, terephthalate). MOF particle adhesion to polyimide and polysulfone organic polymers does not represent a problem. MOF-polymer MMMs are investigated for the permeability of the single gases H(2), N(2), O(2), CH(4), CO(2) and of the gas mixtures O(2)/N(2), H(2)/CH(4), CO(2)/CH(4), H(2)/CO(2), CH(4)/N(2) and CO(2)/N(2) (preferentially permeating gas named first). Permeability increases can be traced to the MOF porosity. Since the porosity of MOFs can be tuned very precisely, which is not possible with polymeric material, MMMs offer the opportunity of significantly increasing the selectivity compared to the pure polymeric matrix. Additionally in most of the cases the permeability is increased for MMM membranes compared to the pure polymer. Addition of MOFs to polymers in MMMs easily yields performances similar to the best polymer membranes and gives higher selectivities than those reported to date for any pure MOF membrane for the same gas separation. MOF-polymer MMMs allow for easier synthesis and handability compared to pure MOF membranes.
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
Metal-organic framework materials as catalysts
Lee, J., Farha, O. K., Roberts, J., Scheidt, K. A., Nguyen, S. T., & Hupp, J. T. (2009) · Chemical Society Reviews · doi:10.1039/b807080f · Cited by 7,969
Horike, S., Shimomura, S., & Kitagawa, S. (2009) · Nature Chemistry · doi:10.1038/nchem.444 · Cited by 2,486
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
Cited by
Rezakazemi, M., Ebadi Amooghin, A., Montazer-Rahmati, M. M., Ismail, A. F., & Matsuura, T. (2014) · Progress in Polymer Science · doi:10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2014.01.003 · Cited by 853
Sorribas, S., Gorgojo, P., Téllez, C., Coronas, J., & Livingston, A. G. (2013) · Journal of the American Chemical Society · doi:10.1021/ja407665w · Cited by 773
Carbon Capture From Flue Gas and the Atmosphere: A Perspective
Wang, X., & Song, C. (2020) · Frontiers in Energy Research · doi:10.3389/fenrg.2020.560849 · Cited by 428
Metadata
- Authors
- Tanh Jeazet, H. B., Staudt, C., & Janiak, C.
- Venue
- Dalton Transactions
- Publisher
- Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)
- Published
- 2012
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 46
- Pages
- 14003
- ISSN
- 1477-9226 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-9234
- OpenAlex
- W2110668009
- Cited by
- 495
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 63.70
- 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: Metal–organic frameworks in mixed-matrix membranes for gas separation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1039/c2dt31550e
- The paper
- Tanh Jeazet, H. B., Staudt, C., & Janiak, C. (2012). Metal–organic frameworks in mixed-matrix membranes for gas separation. Dalton Transactions. https://doi.org/10.1039/c2dt31550e
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.