Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-5bvrz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-09T02:11:17.104Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Intrinsically conducting metal–organic frameworks

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2016

Chanel F. Leong
Affiliation:
School of Chemistry, The University of Sydney, Australia; chanel.leong@sydney.edu.au
Pavel M. Usov
Affiliation:
Department of Chemistry, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, USA; pusov@vt.edu
Deanna M. D’Alessandro
Affiliation:
School of Chemistry, The University of Sydney, Australia; deanna.dalessandro@sydney.edu.au

Abstract

The development of metal–organic frameworks (MOFs) as microporous electronic conductors is an exciting research frontier that has the potential to revolutionize a wide range of technologically and industrially relevant fields, from catalysis to solid-state sensing and energy-storage devices, among others. After nearly two decades of intense research on MOFs, examples of intrinsically conducting MOFs remain relatively scarce; however, enormous strides have recently been made. This article briefly reviews the current status of the field, with a focus on experimental milestones that have shed light on crucial structure–property relationships that underpin future progress. Central to our discussion are a series of design considerations, including redox-matching, donor–acceptor interactions, mixed valency, and π-interactions. Transformational opportunities exist at both fundamental and applied levels, from improved measurement techniques and theoretical understanding of conduction mechanisms to device engineering. Taken together, these developments will herald a new era in advanced functional materials.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2016 
Figure 0

Figure 1. (a–b) Structures of tetrathiafulvalene (TTF) and tetracyanoquinodimethane (TCNQ) with their charge-transfer (CT) salt, a TTF–TCNQ compound in which there is a partial degree of charge transfer between the donor TTF and acceptor TCNQ, showing the segregated stacking arrangement of TTF and TCNQ. Individual columns of each molecule are stacked along the crystallographic b-axis, into the page. (a) Reprinted with permission from Reference 19. © 2008 Nature Publishing Group. (b) Adapted with permission from Reference 20. © 1974 IOP Publishing. (c) Schematic of Torrance’s “V-shaped” diagram showing the relationship between the energy of CT, ΔECT, and the difference between donor and acceptor ionization potential and electron affinity, respectively. The red region highlights the range in which partial CT and metallic conductivity are observed. Reprinted with permission from References 21 and 23. © 1981 American Physical Society and 2014 Royal Society of Chemistry, respectively. Note: h, Planck’s constant; ν, frequency; HOMO, highest occupied molecular orbital; LUMO, lowest unoccupied molecular orbital; HOMOdonor, highest occupied molecular orbital for the donor; LUMOacceptor, lowest unoccupied molecular orbital for the acceptor; Edonor, donor energy; Eacceptor, acceptor energy.

Figure 1

Figure 2. (a) Crystal structure of (NBu4)2[FeIII2(dhbq)3] showing the redox-active unit (inset). (Na)0.9(NBu4)1.8[FeIII2(dhbq)3] is formed on chemical reduction, leading to a decrease in both (b) the conductivity (σ) and (c) the intensity of the intervalence charge-transfer band. For (a), orange, red, and gray spheres represent Fe, O, and C atoms, respectively. In (b), black lines are fits to the conductivity profiles. (d) The observed reduction in conductivity is consistent with the reduction of dhbq2– to dhbq3–, R = H. Reprinted with permission from Reference 27. © 2015 American Chemical Society. Note: NBu4, tetra-n-butylammonium; dhbq, dihydroxybenzoquinone; T, temperature; F (R), Kubelka-Munk function; R, reflectance.

Figure 2

Figure 3. (a) General scheme for the construction of [(Ru2(O2CCF3)4)24-TCNQ)]·(C7H8) frameworks showing the donor [Ru2(O2CCF3)4] and acceptor TCNQRx components, (b) the charge-transfer (CT) interactions leading to intervalence CT (IVCT), and (c) a packing diagram of the 2D network projected along the c-axis. Each of the four TCNQ cyanide arms is bound to a ruthenium center (indicated by μ4). Pink, red, green, and gray lines represent Ru, O, H, and C atoms, respectively. In (c), the gray box represents the unit cell for the packing diagram projected along the c-axis. Reprinted with permission from Reference 32. © 2010 American Chemical Society. Note: TCNQ, tetracyanoquinodimethane; S, spin component; R, substituents on the central ring, H4 for TCNQ.

Figure 3

Figure 4. A helical tetrathiafulvalene (TTF) stack in the crystal structure of [Zn2(TTFTB)] showing the shortest intermolecular S···S contact (dashed purple line). The tetrathiafulvalene tetrabenzoate (TTFTB) ligands (shown in the inset) run parallel to infinite chains of metal carboxylates. Orange, yellow, red, and gray spheres represent Zn, S, O, and C atoms, respectively. Reprinted with permission from Reference 38. © 2012 American Chemical Society.

Figure 4

Figure 5. (a–b) Schematic structure of [Ni3(BHT)2] where the electron is delocalized throughout the entire 2D nanosheet. In (a), red spheres represent the nickel centers, and each blue triangle represents a benzenehexathiol (BHT) ligand. Yellow circle indicates a fragment of the structure that is represented in (b). In (b), the green, yellow, and gray spheres (lightly shaded below the chemical structure) represent the Ni, S, and C atoms, respectively. (c) Scanning tunneling microscope image of a single layer of the metal–organic framework on highly oriented pyrolytic graphite (HOPG) showing a cross-sectional analysis (inset) with a zoomed-in view of the hexagonal structure (which is a moiré interference pattern) in the white box, also shown in (d). The cross-sectional analysis in the inset plot shows the thickness of the 2D nanosheet (called nano-1) as a function of the distance. These data show that the thickness was estimated to be 0.6 nm. The red line shows the distance over which the scan was conducted. (d) The insets show the fast Fourier transform (FFT) of the image (upper right) and the FFT-filtered image (lower left). (a) Reprinted with permission from Reference 41. © 2013 American Chemical Society. (a,d) Reprinted with permission from Reference 43. © 2014 American Chemical Society.