Recent progress in the synthesis and characterization of metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) has opened the door to an increasing number of possible catalytic applications. The great versatility of MOFs creates a large chemical space, whose thorough experimental examination becomes practically impossible. Therefore, computational modeling is a key tool to support, rationalize, and guide experimental efforts. In this outlook we survey the main methodologies employed to model MOFs for catalysis, and we review selected recent studies on the functionalization of their nodes. We pay special attention to catalytic applications involving natural gas conversion.
Recent progress in the synthesis and characterization of metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) has opened the door to an increasing number of possible catalytic applications. The great versatility of MOFs creates a large chemical space, whose thorough experimental examination becomes practically impossible. Therefore, computational modeling is a key tool to support, rationalize, and guide experimental efforts. In this outlook we survey the main methodologies employed to model MOFs for catalysis, and we review selected recent studies on the functionalization of their nodes. We pay special attention to catalytic applications involving natural gas conversion.
The
discovery and design of superior catalysts is a fundamental
challenge of modern chemistry.[1] The use
of quantum mechanicalcalculations for catalyst design is poised to
revolutionize the field. The catalysts that are most suitable for
both experimental structural characterization and computational modeling
are well-defined sites with single-atom or well-defined-cluster catalysts
in a uniform mesoscale environment; ideally they should be isolated
from each other on supports to minimize cluster–cluster interactions,
sintering, and agglomeration, all of which can decrease catalytic
activity. Furthermore, one would like to ensure uniformity of critical
factors like cluster size, shape, composition, and arrangement of
atoms. There are remarkably few experimental examples of uniform,
well-defined, supported subnanometer cluster catalysts due to the
challenges of synthesis and the limits of stability. The primary examples
are supported metal clusters, and a few highly selective and active
catalysts of this type have been described.[2−5] Homogeneous catalysts are often
more active, selective, and well-defined than heterogeneous ones,
but they may lack stability and are less widely used than heterogeneous
catalysts with a major reason being challenges in separation of products,
catalysts, and additives, including the recovery of catalysts for
subsequent catalytic cycles.Metal–organic frameworks
(MOFs) are highly tunable nanoporous
or microporous (and sometimes mesoporous) network compounds composed
of inorganic nodes connected by organic linkers,[6−18] and they offer tremendous potential for rational materials design.[19−24] MOF-supported catalysts can in principle exploit the advantages
of homogeneous catalysis without most of its disadvantages by isolating
highly active catalytic sites in a robust and recyclable solid framework
having crystalline or near-crystalline periodicity. Taking advantage
of this structural control, applications of MOFs for catalysis have
started to emerge;[7,25−29] but the large variety of possible nodes and organic
linkers that may connect them renders the potential number of MOF-supported
cluster catalysts enormous, so there are many possibilities that have
not been explored yet. It is impractical to synthesize even a modest
fraction of the possibilities, much less to experimentally characterize
their structures, physical properties, and catalytic efficacy. Computational
modeling offers the potential to sort out the myriad of possibilities
and prioritize synthetic planning, characterization, and kinetics
testing at affordable cost.MOFs can play several roles in catalysis
by serving as catalytic
species, by encapsulating them, or by acting as support materials
for metals and anchored inorganometallic complexes.[30] Postsynthetic modification allows one to precisely tailor
and design MOFs for specific applications. Although much work has
been devoted to the functionalization of linkers,[31−34] less attention has been paid
to nodes.[35] Common techniques that target
node functionalization (Figure ) are solvent-assisted ligand incorporation (SALI),[36] atomic layer deposition in MOFs (AIM),[37] solvothermal deposition in MOFs (SIM),[38,39] and metal exchange (ME).[38,40] Whereas SALI incorporates
organic groups on the nodes, AIM, SIM, and ME allow synthesis of a
variety of metal-functionalized nodes.
Figure 1
Methodologies for postsynthetic
functionalization of MOF nodes.
Methodologies for postsynthetic
functionalization of MOF nodes.Zr-based
MOFs are especially appealing materials[41,42] due to their
outstanding chemical and thermal stability.[43,44] We focus here on NU-1000 (Figure ),[37] which is composed of
1,3,6,8-tetrakis(p-benzoate)pyrene linkers and [Zr6(μ3-O)4(μ3-OH)4(OH)4(OH2)4]8+ nodes,[45] where aquo and hydroxo groups
are available for further functionalization. These types of nodes
resemble refractory metal-oxide support materials, but they do not
suffer from activity-degrading sintering.
Figure 2
Porous structure of NU-1000
MOF viewed along two crystal axes.
Zr atoms are green, O atoms red, C atoms gray, and H atoms white.
Porous structure of NU-1000
MOF viewed along two crystal axes.
Zr atoms are green, O atoms red, C atoms gray, and H atoms white.In the quest for improved catalyst
design, the computational modeling
of nanoporous materials plays a prominent role.[46−51] Modeling catalysis on MOFs, like modeling traditional heterogeneous
catalysis,[52−63] poses higher-level challenges than modeling molecular[64−69] catalysis because one must model not only the local catalytic site
but also the structure of the support and its possible local and long-range
influence on reactivity and selectivity. Theoretically informed surface
catalysis design has made significant progress, and interaction energies
of molecules and atoms with metal surfaces can now be described with
sufficient accuracy to predict trends in reactivity for transition
metals and alloys.[52,53,64−68,70−72] Similar progress
has been made in homogeneous catalysis.[52,53,64−68,73−75] In both these
instances, the chief tool is generally Kohn–Sham density functional
theory[76] (KS-DFT), and by using KS-DFT
each elementary step in a catalytic reaction (or in a family of reactions)
can be described in a detail that is often not available from experiment
alone.Achieving energy-efficient liquefaction of natural gas
is a grand
challenge for society, and it ranks high among the targets for catalytic
design. This involves either catalytic oligomerization of abundant
C1, C2, and C3 hydrocarbons to longer congeners or selective oxidation
to alcohols or other fuel molecules, while avoiding overoxidation
to water and carbon dioxide. As the energy economy of North America
has been transformed by the exploitation of rich shale-oil deposits,
this challenge is one of enormous potential economic significance,
and it provides a rich application area to study a number of fundamental
aspects of heterogeneous catalytic processes that will have significance
beyond this specifically targeted chemistry.In this outlook
we discuss the current progress, ongoing challenges,
and future prospects of the computational modeling of functionalized
MOF nodes in catalysis. This contribution is focused on NU-1000 nodes,
but the majority of the considerations are more broadly applicable,
especially to other Zr- and Hf-based materials.[42] After a brief summary of the available methodologies and
models, we discuss catalytic transformations and their challenges
for computational modeling.
Computational Methods and
Models
Modeling of functionalized MOFs for catalysis has
four major goals:
(i) understanding the structure and possible postmodification structural
changes of these materials and their relation to reactivity; (ii)
understanding the energetics and details of the chemical dynamics
at catalytic sites, including modeling of potential energy surfaces
for competing mechanisms; (iii) discovering and understanding underlying
structure–function relationships that can lead to further catalyst
discovery; and (iv) predicting novel materials with superior catalytic
properties. Classical molecular mechanics simulations of macroscopic
properties of MOFs[77−79] are useful for goal (i), but since catalysis involves
bond breaking and formation, a quantum mechanical treatment[46−48] is most appropriate for (ii), (iii), and (iv) and for the reactivity
aspect of (i). A variety of quantum mechanical methods are available,
and each method has advantages and drawbacks.
Electronic
Structure Methods
One
of the main challenges of modern electronic structure theory is to
find the balance between affordability and reliability for complex
and large-scale systems.[46,80] Kohn–Sham DFT
is widely applied in materials science owing to its relatively low
computational cost for large systems and its semiquantitative accuracy.
A key issue in applying KS-DFT is which density functional to use.
While many KS-DFT validation studies have been carried out for molecular
species[81,82] and surfaces,[72,83−86] less attention has been paid specifically to MOFs, although Nazarian
et al.[87] computed structural parameters,
mechanical properties, and partial charges of a wide variety of MOFs
using several density functionals. Validation is especially important
because the best choice of density functional depends on the application
and may be different for molecular structures and bond energies, barrier
heights and transition-state structures, relative energies of spin
energies, van der Waals interactions, and lattice constants, although
progress is being made in developing more universally accurate density
functionals.[82,88,89]The MOFs with most promise
for catalysis contain transition metals, and when the 3d orbitals
of these metals are partially filled, this can produce degenerate
or near-degenerate electron configurations that are challenging for
both KS-DFT and wave function theory (WFT); in general the latter
can handle such systems reliably only by using high-level excitation
operators (e.g., for quadruple excitations), which is very demanding
of computational resources, or by a multireference method, which is
also demanding. One important approach is multiconfiguration self-consistent
field (MCSCF) followed by second order perturbation theory, e.g.,
the CASPT2 method.[90,91] Novel methods that combine the
advantages of WFT and DFT, namely, MC-PDFT, have been developed to
provide highly accurate results at lower computational costs.[92] However, in the present outlook, we focus mainly
on KS-DFT, which is a more mature approach.Among the density
functionals that have proven useful in the KS-DFT
context, we single out the Minnesota functional M06-L,[93,94] which has shown a good performance in reproducing experimental trends
and being able to accurately predict spin-state energetics in MOFs
in good agreement with high-level methods, such as the CASPT2 method.[95,96] The M06-L functional has been validated for many applications relevant
to catalysis[97−119] (including some cases very similar to the cases discussed in the
next section but also including studies
relevant to the broader applicability for transition metal catalysis
and barrier heights) and MOFs.[120,121]
Modeling the Framework
Both periodic
and cluster models are used for MOFs. The periodic approach describes
the unit cell of an infinite crystal with periodic boundary conditions
(PBC) (Figure ). Such
models are needed to get realistic structural information and to study
collective properties, cavities, and pores; they are also useful when
taking into account the rearrangement (mobility and sintering) of
catalytic sites on length scales that make cluster modeling unwieldy.
For moderate length scales, periodic structures can be cropped and
capped to create finite-sized cluster models, and this allows more
accurate modeling of local effects should levels of theory beyond
KS-DFT be desirable to explore. Note that the accuracy depends on
the choice of the electronic structure method, and the accuracy for
periodic calculations cannot be as high as for clusters because the
highest-level post-SCF correlation methods are not available for periodic
calculations. Cluster calculations can be particularly useful for
metal-functionalized nodes of MOFs, where chemical reactions occur
on the node and diffusion of reactants through the pores is not usually
rate limiting.
Figure 3
Modeling MOFs: from periodic DFT to WFT cluster models.
Zr atoms
are green, O atoms red, C atoms gray, H atoms white, and generic deposited
metal atoms are indicated in blue for some models.
Modeling MOFs: from periodic DFT to WFT cluster models.
Zr atoms
are green, O atoms red, C atoms gray, H atoms white, and generic deposited
metal atoms are indicated in blue for some models.The size of the clusters to be studied varies and
depends on the
material, the reaction under investigation, and the methodology. Taking
NU-1000 as an example, three approaches have been adopted, namely,
2-node, 1-node, and small cluster models (Figure ). Selected examples will be discussed in
the following section. The 2-node cluster
approach[122] contains two Zr6 nodes connected through four pyrene-like linkers and is useful to
describe the small 12 Å pore of the material (Figure ). The 1-node model[45] is constructed by one node and eight linkers
truncated to any of biphenyl-4-carboxylate, benzoate, acetate, or
formate groups, depending on the perceived importance of fully reproducing
the linker steric environment. Selected atoms of linkers are generally
kept fixed during geometry optimizations of cluster models to mimic
the rigid conditions of the framework. This is our most used model
for reaction mechanisms and computational screening. Finally, a very
small cluster[123] can be constructed containing
only two Zr atoms and retaining only their respective first coordination
spheres. While the size of the 2-node and 1-node structures renders
them affordable for the most part only to KS-DFT, the very small cluster
is specifically designed to also allow high-level WFT calculations.
One should keep in mind that errors due to truncation of the periodic
system cannot be separated from those due to the inexactness of the
density functional or incompleteness of the wave function method.For clusters, one could also consider combined quantum mechanics
and molecular mechanics (QM/MM) methods,[124−131] with QM methods for the chemically reactive portion of the cluster
and a set of structural and interaction parameters for the MM part.
The QM/MM accuracy depends on the choice of the QM methodology and
MM parameters and also on the treatment of electrostatics at the QM–MM
boundary.[132−134]
Dynamics
Once
the structure of the
functionalized MOF nodes is understood, one can try to develop design
principles and predict novel catalysts. To achieve these goals it
is necessary to employ accurate, but computationally affordable, electronic
structure methods in conjunction with methods that efficiently scan
the energy landscape, taking into account dynamical aspects of the
system over a range of time scales. A variety of active site structures
can be simultaneously present on a functionalized MOF, and they can
yield several chemical species as products of disparate plausible
pathways. The most useful catalytic processes are those specific for
individual products. Hence a major goal is the understanding and prediction
of selectivity. The correct prediction of selectivity requires a reliable
computation of kinetic and thermodynamic quantities.[67,68] Two general kinds of approaches are available, which we may classify
as molecular dynamics simulations and catalogue-based approaches.In molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, one explores configurations,
local structures, defects, and branching probabilities without a catalogue.[20,135,136] The time scales that need to
be sampled are usually too large for conventional molecular dynamics,
so one must use rare-event sampling of some sort, such as weighted-histogram
analysis, hyperdynamics,[137] temperature-accelerated
dynamics,[138] or metadynamics.[139] These methods can allow one to study time scales
many orders of magnitude larger than straight molecular dynamics,
in some instances requiring the selection of appropriate collective
variables from which to construct bias potentials.Catalogue-based
approaches include kinetic Monte Carlo and microkinetic
modeling. These methods[140−153] involve three or four steps: (i) create a catalogue of microscopic
states, local structures, and possible transformations, energy transfer
events, site-to-site diffusion or hopping processes, and reactions;
(ii) characterize the rate constants for each of the elementary processes
atomistically; (iii, sometimes omitted) develop a model for the environmental
dependence of such elementary processes when they occur in a complex
cluster, fluid, or material; and (iv) gather the rate constants for
elementary reaction steps into a nonlinear coupled set of kinetic
equations, called a master equation,[154] and simulate the solution of the master equation by Monte Carlo
methods or solve the master equation by numerical integration. The
master equation should take account of reaction conditions, in particular
concentrations, flows, partial pressures, chemical potentials, and
temperature. This kind of complete treatment has been achieved for
some catalytic processes, but not so far for MOFs. Rather, for MOFs
we are still at the stage of calculating the energetics (energies,
enthalpies, and free energies) and kinetics of the elementary steps
without yet arriving at full modeling with the inclusion of reaction
conditions. Such full modeling is challenging, but it is a realistic
near-term goal because the regular nature of MOF crystals—with
well-defined, isolated sites in a uniform environment as emphasized
in the very first paragraph of this article—not only makes
consideration of well-defined elementary steps possible (and thereby
enables the catalogue-based approach) but also is the central feature
that motivated the use of MOFs for catalysis in the first place. The
periodic nature of MOFs can also facilitate the modeling of well-defined
cell-to-cell transport phenomena. However, the first and critical
step for modeling dynamics is to calculate accurately the energetics
of reactions and their reaction rates for the various chemical reactions
in the catalytic mechanism.The simplest indicator of whether
a reaction will proceed is provided
by the reaction energy, which is the potential energy difference of
the product from the reactant structure on the Born–Oppenheimer
potential energy surface, and by the classical barrier height, which
is the potential energy difference of the transition-state (TS) structure
from the reactant. A TS structure is a first order saddle point on
the potential energy surface which may be thought of either as the
highest-energy point on the lowest-energy reaction path from reactants
to products or as the lowest-energy point of the conventional transition
state, which is a hypersurface in coordinate space separating reactants
from products. Reaction energies and barrier heights can be converted
to enthalpies of reaction at 0 K (or enthalpies of activation at 0
K) by adding the difference of zero point energies of the products
(or TS structure) from those of the reactants. For highest accuracy,
zero point energies are calculated from scaled vibrational frequencies.[155] Enthalpies at 0 K can then be turned into standard-state
free energies of reaction and standard-state free energies of activation
by adding thermal enthalpic and entropic effects. Low-frequency modes
are usually very anharmonic, and one can obtain more accurate entropies
by raising frequencies calculated to be lower than 50 cm–1 up to 50 or 100 cm–1 when entropies are computed.[49,88,156−160] Standard-state free energies of reaction can be used to calculate
equilibrium constants. All the quantities mentioned in this paragraph
are straightforward to calculate by KS-DFT.A higher-level estimate
of the reaction rate than the free energy
of activation is provided by transition state theory (TST).[161] In quasiclassical TST the rate constant is
obtained from the free energy of activation described above. In conventional
TST, the transition state passes through the saddle point; in variational
TST, it is found by maximizing the free energy of activation with
respect to the location of the transition state.[162] Quasiclassical theory is classical in that it does not
include tunneling, but it does use quantized vibrational states to
calculate partition functions.In full variational TST, one
adds a transmission coefficient that
is greater than unity and that increases the calculated rate constant
by accounting for quantum mechanical tunneling,[163] which is mainly important when the reaction coordinate
involves a hydrogen, proton, or hydride transfer.A key take-home
message of this outlook is that density functional
theory and transition state theory, taken together, are accurate enough
to understand many chemicalmechanisms, even in systems as complicated
as MOFs.
Structures of Bare and Functionalized
MOF Nodes
Characterization is essential for understanding
the kinetic relevance
of different catalytic sites and for building correlations to predict
catalytic power of new or potential materials, and theory has become
a major tool for characterizing the local and complex structure of
catalytic nodes.[164] This section collects
several characterization studies where the synergy between experiment
and theory led to a precise description of the local structure of
the materials. After initial studies with bare Zr-based nodes, selected
examples of metal-functionalized nodes are highlighted.The
starting point involves the characterization of metal-oxide
MOF nodes, whose proton topologies are not straightforward to define.[165,166] Planas et al.[45] used KS-DFT to assign
the proton topology of Zr6 nodes of NU-1000 by means of
cluster and periodic calculations. Among the potential tautomers,
the so-called mix-staggered (mix-S) configuration
was predicted to be the thermodynamically most stable structure (Figure left). This node
contains four μ3-O and four μ3-OH
groups and displays eight faces that are connected to eight organic
linkers and four faces with terminal −OH2 and −OH
ligands with hydrogen-bonding motifs. Interrogation of the computed
NU-1000 proton topology via diffuse reflectance infrared Fourier transform
spectroscopy (DRIFTS) was consistent with this assignment. Troya has
recently assigned a similar mixed topology for the Zr-based node of
MOF-808.[167]This kind of OH/H2O termination is closely related to
the defect sites of other Zr-based MOFs.[168] For instance, the UiO family contains the same Zr6O4(μ3-OH)4 nodes connected to 12
linkers, e.g., benzene-1,4-dicarboxylic acid (UiO-66) and biphenyl-4,4′-dicarboxylic
acid (UiO-67). However, all Zr atoms in “pristine” UiO
MOFs are saturated with linker functionality and a priori there are
no accessible sites for reactivity. Therefore, all catalytic activity
has been associated with nodes in which linkers are missing from the
framework. Based on X-ray diffraction studies, Trickett et al.[169] initially claimed that the missing linker termination
in UiO-66 was charge balanced by a hydroxide group hydrogen-bonded
to μ3-OH of the node. Later, Ling and Slater[135] performed simulations on defective UiO-66 and
showed that the OH group was actually bound to Zr, as previously reported
for NU-1000.[45] They also highlighted the
dynamic fluxionality of defects where hydroxides transform into waters
via rapid proton transfers. In the case of bound water molecules,
as opposed to hydroxides, the binding free energy is sufficiently
small that site occupations may depend on the relative humidity of
the environment. The different protons on the MOF node have been experimentally
observed to exhibit characteristic pKa values that may influence the activity of the MOF nodes for catalysis
of hydrolysis reactions.[170−172]The nanoscale nature of
metal-oxide nodes provides new challenges
associated with structural behavior. Valenzano et al.[173,174] initially reported periodic calculations for the transformation
of pristine Zr6O4(μ3-OH)4 to dehydrated Zr6O6 UiO nodes, and
Vandichel et al.[175] studied different mechanistic
pathways for the dehydration of defect sites of UiO-66. Very recently,
Platero-Prats et al.[176] reported local
structural transitions of Zr-based MOF nodes. For the [M6(μ3-O)4(μ3-OH)4(OH)4(H2O)4]8+ node of
NU-1000 under dehydration conditions (150 °C), one would expect
the formation of symmetric [M6O8]8+ cores (M = Zr, Hf). However, a combination of in situ pair distribution
function (PDF) experiments and KS-DFT calculations revealed the formation
of metastable node distortions. To further probe such structures,
ab initio MD simulations were performed on a hydrated NU-1000 node.
While low and intermediate temperature simulations display proton
transfers and terminal water dissociations, at high temperatures the
dynamic features of μ3-OH groups become prominent.
Reoptimization of selected high-temperature snapshots for fully dehydrated
nodes yields dislocations where oxygen atoms change their coordination
mode from μ3 to μ2 and nonbridging.
These structural transitions are related to transitions between polymorphic
forms of bulk oxides,[177] although milder
conditions are required for such transitions in the nanoscale M6O8 nodes of MOFs.Synthetic strategies have
been developed that lead to a partial
dehydration and functionalization of nodes. Yang et al.[178] reported the fine-tuning of defective UiO-66
and NU-1000 node faces through the intermediacy of alkoxy groups (Figure ). Treatment of the
pristine node 1 with methanol affords the methoxy derivative 2, which becomes the hydroxo species 3 upon hydration.
While cluster KS-DFT calculations predict exergonic processes from 1 to 2, the coordination of one methanol molecule
to the vacant site in 2 is uphill. Computed C–H
and C–O vibrational frequencies of 2 were in line
with experimental IR spectra. Binding of different capping agents
to defective UiO-66 nodes has also been evaluated using cluster and
periodic KS-DFT.[179−181]
Figure 4
Fine-tuning of node faces via alkoxy intermediates.
Fine-tuning of node faces via alkoxy intermediates.The OH and OH/H2O motifs
of metal-oxide nodes can be
functionalized with a wide variety of metal precursors, in analogy
to the functionalization of hydroxylated bulk surfaces.[182−184] To date there are reports on gas-phase and solution functionalization
of Zr- and Hf-based MOF nodes with Mg(II),[185] Al(III),[37,41,186] Si(IV),[187] Ca(II),[121] V(V),[188] Fe(II),[189] Fe(III),[190] Co(II),[38,39,189,191−193] Ni(II),[38,39,194] Cu(II),[38,122,195] Zn(II),[37,38,196] Zr(IV),[197] Nb(V),[198] Mo(VI),[170,199] Rh(I),[200] In(III),[186] Ir(I),[201,202] and Au(I).[203] In many cases, modeling has been used to understand the
structures that have been synthesized.Mixed-metal structures
can also be synthetically accessed as recently
shown for Co(II)Al(III)-functionalized NU-1000 nodes.[204,205] Precoating of MOF nodes with aluminum-oxide clusters and subsequent
functionalization with Ir(I) precursors presents a major challenge
to structural characterization, with extensive calculations suggesting
that AlO clusters and Ir may attach to different faces of individual nodes.[206] Transition metal complexes can also be attached
to MOF nodes via SALI.[207]Another
possibility is that the framework itself can act as a host
for metal nanoparticles.[208,209] However, calculations
of these complex systems are scarce[210,211] due to their
high computational cost, so we do not comment on this further here.
Rather we discuss some selected cases where the synergistic combination
of experiments and theory was crucial for the structural determination
of the functionalized MOFs.The OH/H2O groups that
direct metal functionalization
are directed into the 30 Å hexagonal pores and 12 Å small
windows (c pores) of NU-1000 (Figure ). In this regard, Gallington et al.[196] reported the regioselective deposition of Zn(II)O
species into the small pores. A typical atomic layer deposition (ALD)
cycle involves treatment with a metal precursor, ZnEt2 in
this case, followed by exposure to water vapor. Difference envelope
densities (DED) reveal electron density on node faces within the small
window, while no significant densities were found in the large hexagonal
pores. Periodic KS-DFT calculations reported in the same article found
lower energies for Zn complexes located in the small pore compared
to those place in the hexagonal cavity. Further energetic analysis
revealed that this preference was dictated by damped dispersion interactions
between the Zn alkyl and the linkers at the preferential adsorption
sites prior to hydrolysis.Rimoldi et al.[41] functionalized the
nodes of NU-1000 using a mild Al(III) precursor. A joint experimental
and computational effort pointed toward the presence of distributed
AlO clusters
confined within the small pores of NU-1000. Since spectroscopic evidence
suggests similarities between the nanoconfined clusters and bulk γ-Al2O3, one Al4 (4) and two
Al8 models (5, 6) were constructed
from periodic γ-Al2O3 structures (Figure ). The computational
models qualitatively reproduce the OH stretching regions in the DRIFTS
and the Al–O and Al–Al scattering signals in extended
X-ray absorption fine structure (EXAFS) data. The structure 5 labeled Al8-flat (Figure b) best fits the DRIFTS spectrum, but the
presence of different clusters cannot be completely excluded.
Figure 5
(a) Al4, (b) Al8-flat, and (c) Al8-vertical
clusters deposited on an NU-1000 node. Zr atoms are green,
O atoms red, C atoms gray, H atoms white, and Al atoms magenta.
(a) Al4, (b) Al8-flat, and (c) Al8-vertical
clusters deposited on an NU-1000 node. Zr atoms are green,
O atoms red, C atoms gray, H atoms white, and Al atoms magenta.Ikuno et al.[122] performed an ALD of
Cu(II) precursors on NU-1000 nodes. The combination of EXAFS analysis
with computational models suggests the presence of Cu-hydroxo-like
species as products. Calculations on clusters with two nodes and periodic
calculations predict a stable [Cu3(OH)4] fragment
connecting two consecutive nodes within the small pore of NU-1000
(7, Figure ). Further DED analysis by Platero-Prats et al.[195] agreed with the bridging motif inside the small pore. A
related structure has been elucidated for Ni(II)-functionalized MOF
nodes, where KS-DFT-optimized α-Ni(OH)2 clusters
tethered in the small pore best match experimental data.[212]
Figure 6
Side (left) and top (right) views of the 2-node cluster
model 7 of Cu-NU-1000. Zr atoms are green, Cu atoms light
green,
O atoms red, C atoms gray, and H atoms white.
Side (left) and top (right) views of the 2-node cluster
model 7 of Cu-NU-1000. Zr atoms are green, Cu atoms light
green,
O atoms red, C atoms gray, and H atoms white.Thus, modeling of MOFs contributes to an understanding of
proton
topologies, defect sites, and metal-functionalized nodes that form
a foundation for follow-on catalytic studies.
Catalysis
with Functionalized MOF Nodes
One approach to the modeling
of these materials begins with the
optimization of crystal structures by static periodic KS-DFT calculations
from which cluster models (see section ) are extracted in order to explore the
potential energy surface associated with catalysis at a moderate cost.
A full understanding of catalytic cycles based on computed relative
energies and free energies sets the foundation for a rational design
of metal-functionalized materials. This section highlights computational
studies on the transformation of natural-gas-derived substrates, with
particular emphasis on studies that show the promise of using theory
to understand reaction mechanisms and identify chemical descriptors.
Ethylene Conversion Catalyzed by Noble Metals
Gates
et al. anchored single-site Ir(I) and Rh(I) diethylene complexes
on the Zr6-based nodes of NU-1000 and UiO-66 using M(C2H4)(acac) precursors (acac = acetylacetonate).[200−202,206] Both metal-supported materials
have shown catalytic activity under relevant C2H4/H2 flow conditions for ethylene hydrogenation and dimerization.
KS-DFT calculations shed light on the competitive mechanism between
these two reactions (Figure ).[200,206] Electronic effects of the support
can indeed modulate the catalyst performance,[200−202,206] and an interesting goal of computational
work is to find correlations between simple descriptors and catalytic
selectivity that may be exploited in computational design; correlations
with experimental observables such as stretching frequencies for metal–carbonyl
compounds would be particularly interesting.
Figure 7
General reaction mechanisms
of ethylene hydrogenation and dimerization.
General reaction mechanisms
of ethylene hydrogenation and dimerization.Thus, Bernales et al.[200] used this vibrational frequency descriptor to explore other supports
such as Hf6-based NU-1000 and dealuminated zeolite Y (DAY,
SiO2/Al2O3 ratio = 30), where the
zeolite is known to have a higher selectivity toward dimerization.
The CO vibrational frequencies for the Hf6 analogue were
predicted to be similar to those for Zr6-based NU-1000,
whereas those in DAY zeolite were predicted to be higher, in agreement
with experimental trends in selectivity. A comparison between MOFs
and DAY zeolite was performed, showing the impact of the support’s
electronic structure on the catalytic performance through activation
energies. For both hydrogenation and dimerization reactions, lower
barriers were calculated for Rh-DAY zeolite for every step along the
reaction coordinate. However, the substantially higher selectivity
for dimerization exhibited by the DAY-supported catalyst has been
attributed to spillover effects rather than a direct electronic effect
on the Rh(I) center, and this is not captured in the stretching frequency
descriptor.[213−216]The good performance of the aluminum-containing DAY zeolite
inspired
work involving a treatment of MOF nodes with Al oxides followed by
deposition of Ir(I) to further tune the electronic effects of the
support. Yang et al.[206] showed that incorporation
of Al clusters weakened the electron donor tendency of the MOF and
increased the catalytic activity for ethylene hydrogenation and selectivity
for dimerization. KS-DFT calculations were in agreement with the observed
results, and the calculated free energies of activation for the rate-determining
step, the insertion of ethylene into the metal–hydride bond
(from 9 to 10, Figure ), were 9.8 and 11.4 kcal mol–1 for Al-NU-1000 and bare NU-1000 supports, respectively.[206] Unfortunately, no quantity (such as partial
atomic charges on the metal or supporting atoms) was found to correlate
with the CO stretching descriptor or catalyst performance, limiting
the further insight that can be used for design purposes in these
systems.
Ethylene Conversion Catalyzed by First-Row
Transition Metals
Li et al.[194] reported a Ni(II)-decorated NU-1000 (synthesized via ALD) that is
also catalytically active for ethylene hydrogenation and oligomerization
(Figure ). The hydrogenation
reaction mechanism was initially studied at the KS-DFT level using
a cluster model with formate linkers and a single Ni atom supported
on the surface of the node. The computed activation enthalpy for the
rate-determining step is 4.9 kcal mol–1, slightly
below the lower error bar of the experimental value of 8.3 kcal mol–1, the latter being a phenomenological enthalpy of
activation encompassing all elementary steps. As mentioned before,
it is not possible to separate the source of discrepancy between experiment
and theory, since it can be related to the computational model, methodology,
complexity of the kinetics with respect to the number of steps affecting
the rate constant, or all of the above.
Figure 8
(a) Cossee–Arlman
dimerization mechanism. (b) Orbital descriptor.
(a) Cossee–Arlman
dimerization mechanism. (b) Orbital descriptor.Later on, Bernales et al. reported a computational study
of ethylene
dimerization including the reported Ni(II)-modified NU-1000 material[194] as well as a hypotheticalCo(II) analogue.[123,194] In ref (123) computations
were used to characterize the structure resulting from ALD, to examine
three plausible catalytic pathways, to calculate reaction energetics,
to explain the mechanism of activation by Et2AlCl, to calculate
transition states and activation energies for steps that are assumed
to be rate-determining for ethylene insertion into metal–methyl
bonds, and to explain the greater reactivity of the Ni(II) by transition-state
stabilization associated with an empty 3d orbital that hybridizes
more readily with relevant carbon 2p orbitals in low-spin Ni than
in high-spinCo. Cluster KS-DFT calculations (with acetate linkers)
suggested a Cossee–Arlman reaction mechanism as the most plausible
pathway (Figure a).
It was found that the electron configuration of the metals had a strong
impact on the preferential coordination adopted by the support and
the reactants, enhancing the activity of Ni (15.5 kcal mol–1) compared to the Co (24.1 kcal mol–1) for the
rate-determining C–C bond formation step (from 16 to 17). Additionally, CASSCF orbitals of key transition
structures demonstrated the crucial role of the metal in assisting
the bond formation (Figure b). These calculations motivated further experiments, which
indeed showed that the Co(II) analogue material was catalytically
active for ethylene dimerization, but less effective than Ni. Subsequent
periodic KS-DFT studies with pore-spanning polynuclear Ni clusters
showed similar trends to those found for single Ni atoms sited on
node faces,[217] suggesting that the local
reactivity of these catalysts can indeed be captured with cluster
models extracted from periodic systems.
Propane
Oxidative Dehydrogenation
Li et al.[192] reported Co-functionalized
NU-1000 materials that, upon activation in a flow of O2 at 230 °C, are able to selectively catalyze the oxidative dehydrogenation
(ODH) of propane to propylene. This reaction was studied by KS-DFT
with the dual purpose of characterizing potential active species (oxidized
Co-NU-1000) and elucidating the reaction mechanism. A dehydrated cluster
model was employed to properly represent the catalyst under experimental
conditions. Based on the weak contribution of Co···Co
scattering signals in EXAFS, the initial model considered a single
Co deposited on a dehydrated NU-1000 node. Structural changes, namely,
the loss of water molecules and the detection of Co(III) species,
were observed and modeled. The proposed active species promoted the
conversion of propane to propylene with computed activation enthalpies
of 12.6 and 15.8 kcal mol–1 for the first and second
hydrogen atom abstractions, respectively. It was found that the second
hydrogen abstraction (22) was 7.3 kcal mol–1 more favorable than the isopropyl migration step (21), which would otherwise lead to undesired side products (Figure ). Ongoing work involves
the assessment of polynuclear clusters as kinetically competent catalytic
sites and the evaluation of the oxidation states and multiconfigurational
electronic structures of these active species.
Figure 9
Competing pathways and
transition structures for oxidative dehydrogenation:
isopropyl migration versus H-bond abstraction.
Competing pathways and
transition structures for oxidative dehydrogenation:
isopropyl migration versus H-bond abstraction.
Prospecting for Chemical Descriptors for C–H
Bond Activation and Beyond
With the mechanistic insights
gained from modeling many of the systems above, which can involve
single metal atoms, homometallic clusters, heterometallic clusters,
or inorganometallic nodes, theory can be employed to investigate a
wider variety of catalysts. It can correlate their activities to properties
that change along the reaction path, used in this case as chemical
descriptors. Indeed, such correlations have been found for Cu-based[218] and Co-based[219] homo-
and heterobimetallic catalysts, where spin densities and partial atomic
charges on oxyl groups proved to be robust descriptors to predict
trends in homolytic C–H bond breaking processes. These results
can be used for in silico design of not-yet-synthesized catalysts
that can provide lower activation energies. Catalyst screenings of
different processes are also underway.[220]
Conclusions
Using quantum mechanical
methods to support and guide experimental
work (synthesis, characterization, and catalytic kinetics) on catalyst
design at tailored MOF nodes is opening many new prospects for advances
in catalysis science, and here we have highlighted some of these in
the context of metal-functionalized MOFs with inorganometallic Zr-based
nodes. These materials pose grand challenges for theory due to the
large sizes of the basic structural units, the complexity of the catalytic
active sites, and the inherently multiconfigurational character of
the electronic configurations of many transition-metal-containing
species. Theory and computation provide structural and kinetic information
that complements experimental methods and can be used to suggest experiments
as yet unperformed. Theory is of particular use when details of structures
of catalytic sites, prereaction complexes, intermediates, and transition
states are experimentally inaccessible, and theory can rationalize
observations in terms of electronic and geometric structures that
explain reactivity and selectivity, and it has made some successful
predictions of catalytic activity. We foresee the use of quantum mechanical
modeling interacting closely with experimental investigations as the
ultimate tool for realizing the tunability potential of MOFs for improved
catalysis.This work is a prime illustration of interdisciplinary
research
since it lies at the intersection of physical chemistry, inorganic
chemistry, organic chemistry, and materials science. Although great
advances have been achieved in this field, the journey to in silico
design of catalytic MOFs has just begun.
Authors: Dong Yang; Mohammad R Momeni; Hakan Demir; Dale R Pahls; Martino Rimoldi; Timothy C Wang; Omar K Farha; Joseph T Hupp; Christopher J Cramer; Bruce C Gates; Laura Gagliardi Journal: Faraday Discuss Date: 2017-09-08 Impact factor: 4.008
Authors: Yanfeng Dang; Shuanglin Qu; John W Nelson; Hai D Pham; Zhi-Xiang Wang; Xiaotai Wang Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2015-01-23 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Sol Ahn; Nicholas E Thornburg; Zhanyong Li; Timothy C Wang; Leighanne C Gallington; Karena W Chapman; Justin M Notestein; Joseph T Hupp; Omar K Farha Journal: Inorg Chem Date: 2016-10-31 Impact factor: 5.165
Authors: Martino Rimoldi; Leighanne C Gallington; Karena W Chapman; Keith MacRenaris; Joseph T Hupp; Omar K Farha Journal: Chemistry Date: 2017-05-30 Impact factor: 5.236
Authors: Ann J Liang; Raluca Craciun; Mingyang Chen; T Glenn Kelly; Philip W Kletnieks; James F Haw; David A Dixon; Bruce C Gates Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2009-06-24 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Konstantinos D Vogiatzis; Mikhail V Polynski; Justin K Kirkland; Jacob Townsend; Ali Hashemi; Chong Liu; Evgeny A Pidko Journal: Chem Rev Date: 2018-10-30 Impact factor: 60.622