2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.ccr.2015.09.013
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Formation of oriented and patterned films of metal–organic frameworks by liquid phase epitaxy: A review

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

1
171
0
4

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

3
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 212 publications
(182 citation statements)
references
References 261 publications
1
171
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…By taking advantage of the varied functional groups, such as self-assembled monolayers (SAMs) with different end groups, the specific orientation of growing MOFs on the different surfaces was realized and studied by Wöll and coworkers. 7,[30][31][32][33][34] Although the LBL technique provides good control of the film orientation and crystallinity, the oriented directions of the MOF thin films prepared by the LBL technique usually depend on the speciation of the SAMs and require solid supports. Kitagawa et al combined the Langmuir-Blodgett (LB) method with the LBL technique for MOF thin film deposition.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…By taking advantage of the varied functional groups, such as self-assembled monolayers (SAMs) with different end groups, the specific orientation of growing MOFs on the different surfaces was realized and studied by Wöll and coworkers. 7,[30][31][32][33][34] Although the LBL technique provides good control of the film orientation and crystallinity, the oriented directions of the MOF thin films prepared by the LBL technique usually depend on the speciation of the SAMs and require solid supports. Kitagawa et al combined the Langmuir-Blodgett (LB) method with the LBL technique for MOF thin film deposition.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[15][16][17][18][19] It is generally accepted that, independent of the deposition method, the key for the growth of homogeneous and highly oriented SUR-MOFs is the suitable adjustment of the surface chemistry,asit determines the interactions between the MOF structure and the surface.Avery convenient method to control the surface chemistry is the use of self-assembled monolayers (SAMs), which can be tailored to expose av ariety of functional groups. [13,22,25,26] Tw oclasses of MOFs,which both are based on secondary building units (SBUs) comprising dinuclear tetracarboxylate clusters [M 2 (O 2 CR) 4 ]h aving the so-called paddle-wheel symmetry,h ave been successfully deposited in the form of highly defined SURMOFs.F irst, the cubic HKUST-1 MOF (Cu 3 btc 2 ;b tc = benzene-1,3,5-tricarboxylate) and its derivatives, [13,27] and second, the tetragonal, layered MOFs of the general formula [M 2 L 2 P],w here M = Cu 2+ or Zn 2+ ,L = a rigid, linear dicarboxylate linker,and P = an optional diamine pillar. -COOH or -NH 2 ), these can directly interact with the metal ions at the interface with the SURMOF,which does not only contribute to at ight binding,b ut also opens opportunities to control the orientation of the growing SURMOF crystallites.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In recent years, much attention has been paid to techniques of fabricating MOF thin films for practical applications such as membranes and gas sensors . From the viewpoints of efficient use of the pores of MOFs and functionality integration (heterosystem comprising different MOFs), precise control of the film thickness and growth direction are required.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%