Anish V Dighe1, Luke Huelsenbeck2, Rajan R Bhawnani1, Prince Verma2, Kevin H Stone3, Meenesh R Singh1, Gaurav Giri2. 1. Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60607, United States. 2. Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia 22903, United States. 3. Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lightsource, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Menlo Park, California 94025, United States.
Abstract
Synthesis of porous, covalent crystals such as zeolites and metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) cannot be described adequately using existing crystallization theories. Even with the development of state-of-the-art experimental and computational tools, the identification of primary mechanisms of nucleation and growth of MOFs remains elusive. Here, using time-resolved in-situ X-ray scattering coupled with a six-parameter microkinetic model consisting of ∼1 billion reactions and up to ∼100 000 metal nodes, we identify autocatalysis and oriented attachment as previously unrecognized mechanisms of nucleation and growth of the MOF UiO-66. The secondary building unit (SBU) formation follows an autocatalytic initiation reaction driven by a self-templating mechanism. The induction time of MOF nucleation is determined by the relative rate of SBU attachment (chain extension) and the initiation reaction, whereas the MOF growth is primarily driven by the oriented attachment of reactive MOF crystals. The average size and polydispersity of MOFs are controlled by surface stabilization. Finally, the microkinetic model developed here is generalizable to different MOFs and other multicomponent systems.
Synthesis of porous, covalent crystals such as zeolites and metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) cannot be described adequately using existing crystallization theories. Even with the development of state-of-the-art experimental and computational tools, the identification of primary mechanisms of nucleation and growth of MOFs remains elusive. Here, using time-resolved in-situ X-ray scattering coupled with a six-parameter microkinetic model consisting of ∼1 billion reactions and up to ∼100 000 metal nodes, we identify autocatalysis and oriented attachment as previously unrecognized mechanisms of nucleation and growth of the MOF UiO-66. The secondary building unit (SBU) formation follows an autocatalytic initiation reaction driven by a self-templating mechanism. The induction time of MOF nucleation is determined by the relative rate of SBU attachment (chain extension) and the initiation reaction, whereas the MOF growth is primarily driven by the oriented attachment of reactive MOF crystals. The average size and polydispersity of MOFs are controlled by surface stabilization. Finally, the microkinetic model developed here is generalizable to different MOFs and other multicomponent systems.
Multicomponent
porous crystals, such as zeolites and metal–organic
frameworks (MOFs), have greatly impacted the fields of gas separation,
catalysis, separations, and adsorption.[1−4] The fundamental processes behind the crystallization
of these porous materials are not adequately described by the well-known
theories of classical crystallization. Although the classical crystallization
theories were developed for noncovalent solidification of single-component
systems, it is widely used to describe and draw insight into covalent
crystallization of MOFs.[5,6] However, recent research
on zeolite and MOF crystallization has shown multiple deviations from
classical crystallization theories.[7,8]Two-step
nucleation is one such deviation that has been invoked
for certain MOFs such as ZIF-8 and zeolites.[9−11] In fact, a
three-step crystallization mechanism has been proposed recently for
ZIF-8.[7] Nonclassical growth mechanisms
have also been recently proposed as a deviation from the classical
monomer-by-monomer based crystal growth, including for composite systems
such as protein-MOF composites.[7,12−14] Nonclassical growth can occur because of the attachment of oligomers
or amorphous clusters or through the oriented attachment of nanocrystals.[10,15] Previous literature has already indicated that nonclassical growth
may play a part in MOF synthesis, where Cu2(ndc)2(dabco) nanoparticles have been observed
to grow by oriented attachment using ex-situ transmission electron
microscopy (TEM).[16] However, a mathematical
description of the nonclassical nucleation mechanism needs to be formulated.Studies aimed at understanding MOF formation generally utilize
a combination of in-situ techniques combined with empirical models
such as the Johnson–Mehl–Avrami–Kolmogorov (JMAK)
and Gualtieri models.[17,18] Although these models provide
information on crystallization rate constants, growth dimensionality,
and probability of nucleation, the inherent empiricism limits the
fundamental insights into the crystallization mechanism. Thus, the
development of a kinetic model capable of detailing formation mechanisms
remains a significant hurdle in understanding MOF crystallization.In this article, we have utilized a combination of in-situ wide-angle
X-ray scattering (WAXS) and reaction kinetic modeling to describe
the crystallization of the prototypical MOF UiO-66 (see Figure ).[19−24] The novel reaction kinetics model utilized here makes several predictions
that are fundamentally different than previously enumerated for MOF
crystallization. We first show that a formation of a “building
unit” (termed SBU) occurs through an autocatalytic mechanism.
Second, the attachment of these SBUs to each other can then proceed
through either classical or nonclassical (oriented attachment) growth,
analogous to chain or step extension in polymeric systems, respectively.
Third, we propose that there is a limit to the size of MOF crystal
that can undergo oriented attachment. Finally, we show that the reaction
kinetics system of equations can be reduced to obtain parameters related
to crystal nucleation and growth, such as the activation energetics
and rates, that are commonly obtained using other crystallization
theories.
Figure 1
(a) Schematic of governing processes occurring during the synthesis
of the MOF UiO-66. The first phase of MOF synthesis involves the autocatalytic
initiation, where a metal node and a linker adsorb on an existing
SBU surface, followed by their reaction to form the SBU, followed
by the SBU desorption. Following initiation, the free SBUs (SBU1) undergo a chain reaction by sequential attachment with MOF
clusters (SBU). MOFs can also grow via
step reaction where intermediate size clusters (SBUi) undergo
oriented attachment to form a bigger cluster. Finally, after attaining
a sufficiently large size of MOF (SBUnk), the oriented
attachment stops because of the stabilization of the MOF surface.
(b) In-situ data showing integral intensity from the (111) peak diffraction,
representative of crystalline fraction, of UiO-66 as a function of
time (red curve). Four different phases can be identified in the sigmoidal
growth curve of the crystalline volume fraction. The induction phase
(blue shaded region) represents the onset of crystal nucleation due
to autocatalytic initiation and chain reaction; the exponential growth
phase (green shaded region) represents the steady growth of MOFs due
to oriented attachment or step reaction; the transition phase (yellow
shaded region) is determined by the onset of the surface-stabilization-driven
termination reaction; and the stationary phase (red shaded region)
is attained when there is negligible change in the crystalline volume
fraction.
(a) Schematic of governing processes occurring during the synthesis
of the MOF UiO-66. The first phase of MOF synthesis involves the autocatalytic
initiation, where a metal node and a linker adsorb on an existing
SBU surface, followed by their reaction to form the SBU, followed
by the SBU desorption. Following initiation, the free SBUs (SBU1) undergo a chain reaction by sequential attachment with MOF
clusters (SBU). MOFs can also grow via
step reaction where intermediate size clusters (SBUi) undergo
oriented attachment to form a bigger cluster. Finally, after attaining
a sufficiently large size of MOF (SBUnk), the oriented
attachment stops because of the stabilization of the MOF surface.
(b) In-situ data showing integral intensity from the (111) peak diffraction,
representative of crystalline fraction, of UiO-66 as a function of
time (red curve). Four different phases can be identified in the sigmoidal
growth curve of the crystalline volume fraction. The induction phase
(blue shaded region) represents the onset of crystal nucleation due
to autocatalytic initiation and chain reaction; the exponential growth
phase (green shaded region) represents the steady growth of MOFs due
to oriented attachment or step reaction; the transition phase (yellow
shaded region) is determined by the onset of the surface-stabilization-driven
termination reaction; and the stationary phase (red shaded region)
is attained when there is negligible change in the crystalline volume
fraction.
Results and Discussion
In-situ WAXS was used to measure UiO-66 formation as a function
of different reaction temperatures and initial concentrations of the
Zr-oxo cluster and H2BDC linker. Briefly, a reactor containing
Zr metal oxo-cluster solution (9.5 mL) was stirred and held at a constant
temperature, and a small quantity of linker solution (0.5 mL) was
injected quickly. The integral intensity of the dominant diffraction
plane (111) relative to the steady-state value was used to estimate
the volume fraction of UiO-66 crystals produced in the reactor (see Section S1 and Figures S1 and S2 for details).[17,25] The increase in crystal volume fraction (or crystalline yield) over
time follows a sigmoid curve (Figure ), which typically consists of four phases, named induction,
(or lag), exponential, transition, and stationary (Figure b). The features of the sigmoid
curve are shown in Figure S3 discussed in Section S2. Such a sigmoidal growth curve has been reported for the
synthesis of zeolites, MOFs, and other nanomaterials.[26−31] The onset of the induction phase (or induction time) decreases with
increasing temperature (Figures a–c) and increases with decreasing the initial
concentration of Zr (Figures d, f) and linker (Figure e). The onset of the transition phase also follows
a similar trend as induction time. The slope of the exponential growth
phase decreases with increasing temperature and increases with decreasing
initial concentration of Zr and linker.
Figure 2
Normalized crystalline
volume fraction for experimental (red) and
theoretical (black dashes) results for (a)14.4 mM Zr, 16.3 mM H2BDC at 25 °C; (b) 14.4 mM Zr, 16.3 mM H2BDC
at 35 °C; (c) 14.4 mM Zr, 16.3 mM H2BDC at 45 °C
(theoretical results predicted using the Arrhenius relationship);
(d) 7.2 mM Zr, 16.3 mM H2BDC at 25 °C; (e) 14.4 mM
Zr, 8.15 mM H2BDC at 25 °C; and (f) 28.8 mM Zr, 8.15
mM H2BDC at 25 °C (theoretical results predicted using
Arrhenius relationship). The black dotted line shows the calculated
volume fraction due to the formation of nuclei for each condition.
The background fill represents the relative rate contribution to crystal
volume fraction from initiation (blue), chain growth (green), step
growth (yellow), and termination (red). Panels enclosed with the black
box represent the results used to validate the microkinetic model,
and panels enclosed with the blue box represent the results predicted
using the microkinetic model. The y-axis labels in
panel a apply to panels b–f as well.
Normalized crystalline
volume fraction for experimental (red) and
theoretical (black dashes) results for (a)14.4 mM Zr, 16.3 mM H2BDC at 25 °C; (b) 14.4 mM Zr, 16.3 mM H2BDC
at 35 °C; (c) 14.4 mM Zr, 16.3 mM H2BDC at 45 °C
(theoretical results predicted using the Arrhenius relationship);
(d) 7.2 mM Zr, 16.3 mM H2BDC at 25 °C; (e) 14.4 mM
Zr, 8.15 mM H2BDC at 25 °C; and (f) 28.8 mM Zr, 8.15
mM H2BDC at 25 °C (theoretical results predicted using
Arrhenius relationship). The black dotted line shows the calculated
volume fraction due to the formation of nuclei for each condition.
The background fill represents the relative rate contribution to crystal
volume fraction from initiation (blue), chain growth (green), step
growth (yellow), and termination (red). Panels enclosed with the black
box represent the results used to validate the microkinetic model,
and panels enclosed with the blue box represent the results predicted
using the microkinetic model. The y-axis labels in
panel a apply to panels b–f as well.To understand the mechanistic effects of the temperature and reactant
concentrations on the induction time and the evolution of crystallization
rates, we developed a comprehensive microkinetic model[32] considering a full reaction network (see Section S3 for details) consisting of ∼1
billion reactions while producing UiO-66 with up to 100 000
SBUs, or 62.5 nm crystallite size assuming an octahedral morphology.
The microkinetic model[33] considers an initiation
reaction for the synthesis of secondary building unit (SBU) that has
a Zr metal node connected with six linkers, chain reactions involving
sequential attachment of SBUs to growing MOFs, step reactions allowing
oriented attachment of MOFs, and a termination reaction, where the
step reaction yields a stable MOF that does not further undergo oriented
attachment to a larger particle. Briefly, the activation energy and
rate constant for initiation reaction were estimated and validated
using integral intensities as a function of temperature in Figure a–c, and the
reaction orders were determined from Figure a, d, and e. Figure The rate constants estimated for the chain
and step reactions followed Flory’s approximation[34] such that they were independent of the size
of oligomers (see Sections S4–S6, Figures S4–S17, and Table S1).
Figure 3
Validation of autocatalysis mechanism:
(a) Complete FT-IR spectra
of UiO-66 with the carbon–oxygen double bond peak highlighted.
(b) Comparison of normalized volumetric rates observed in in-situ
WAXS and FT-IR studies with the expected normalized volumetric rate
theoretically expected without an autocatalysis mechanism. (c) Activation
energy of SBU formation on the existing building unit (SBU) and unit
cell (lattice). The red line represents the energetic barrier to form
an SBU on another SBU, and the blue line represents the energetic
barrier to form an SBU on a crystal lattice composed of four SBUs.
(d) Estimated crystalline fraction curves with and without autocatalysis.
The red curve in panel d is the theoretically estimated crystalline
fraction curve shown by the dashed line in Figure a.
Validation of autocatalysis mechanism:
(a) Complete FT-IR spectra
of UiO-66 with the carbon–oxygen double bond peak highlighted.
(b) Comparison of normalized volumetric rates observed in in-situ
WAXS and FT-IR studies with the expected normalized volumetric rate
theoretically expected without an autocatalysis mechanism. (c) Activation
energy of SBU formation on the existing building unit (SBU) and unit
cell (lattice). The red line represents the energetic barrier to form
an SBU on another SBU, and the blue line represents the energetic
barrier to form an SBU on a crystal lattice composed of four SBUs.
(d) Estimated crystalline fraction curves with and without autocatalysis.
The red curve in panel d is the theoretically estimated crystalline
fraction curve shown by the dashed line in Figure a.Figure shows the
estimated crystal volume fraction and the normalized relative rates
of initiation, chain, step, and termination reactions obtained from
the microkinetic model. The synthesis of UiO-66 proceeds with an initiation
reaction to form SBUs, which are gradually consumed by chain reactions
to yield nuclei (defined as the smallest crystal size observed by
WAXS at the onset of crystal volume fraction, see Table S2). The dotted lines in Figure show the calculated nucleation rate for
the various conditions. As the reaction temperature increases (Figure a–c), the
ratio of chain reaction rate to initiation reaction rate increases,
leading to the consumption of SBUs and to the formation and consumption
of nuclei at a faster rate, leading to a shorter induction time but
also a decrease in the total volume fraction of nuclei present in
solution (see Figure S18). The theoretical
results shown in Figure c, f are predicted using the error minimized values of the parameters
involved in the model (see Section S7).On the other hand, decreasing the concentration of metal node or
linker decreases the rate of the initiation reaction and hence the
concentration of SBUs available for the subsequent chain reaction.
The lower number of SBUs reduces the rate of chain reaction more as
compared to the initiation reaction (Figures d–f). Therefore, both the induction
time and the volume fraction of nuclei increase with decreasing the
initial concentration of metal node and linker, contradictory to conventional
models.[17,18,35]We focused
on understanding the initiation reaction mechanism as
it determines the induction time. In ideal reactions, the concentration
of free metal node and linker decreases stoichiometrically with an
increase in the crystal volume fraction. Therefore, decreasing reactant
concentrations should cause a monotonic decrease in the SBU rate of
formation, resulting in the MOF volumetric growth rate. However, Figure shows an increase
in the volumetric growth rate in the induction phase even as the metal
node and linker deplete in the solution (see Figure S19), which indicates an autocatalytic initiation reaction.Here we hypothesize that the SBU and its aggregates act as templates
for further formation of SBUs via an autocatalytic initiation reaction
(see Section S8 and Figure S20–S22). In this reaction, we hypothesize that the metal node adsorbs to
the MOF template and reacts with free linkers to form a surface SBU,
which then desorbs into the solution. To validate this hypothesis,
we analyzed the spectra of UiO-66 during synthesis at various times
using Fourier transformed infrared spectroscopy (FT-IR). Figure a shows the complete
FT-IR spectra with the carbon–oxygen double bond (C=O
1670 cm–1) peak highlighted. The C=O bond
on the terephthalic acid must be broken for the formation of UiO-66.
Hence, the absorbance intensity shows a negative value at various
times of UiO-66 synthesis due to background subtraction. Furthermore,
the rate of normalized intensity change of C=O peak shows a
rate increase, followed by a decrease as shown in Figure b, which is similar to the
rate increase and decrease seen in in-situ XRD (WAXS). The rate without
autocatalysis does not match the rate profiles as seen in in-situ
WAXS and FT-IR. The in-situ experiments validate the autocatalysis
mechanism of UiO-66 formation. The energy profiles in Figure c are the backward barriers
obtained from the potential of the mean force approach,[36] where the transition state (peak) is described
by a metal node in close proximity to the template, which then reversibly
attaches with linkers to produce SBU at reaction coordinate = 1. Figure c shows a drastic
reduction in the activation energy of SBU formation from 278 to 92
kJ/mol when the size of the template increases from an SBU to the
unit cell composed of 4 SBUs. In Figure d, the theoretical result without the autocatalytic
assumption does not show the sigmoidal curve and does not achieve
the crystalline fraction observed in experiments. To further validate
the hypothesis that the autocatalysis of initiation reaction proceeds
through the self-templating mechanism and not just heterogeneous nucleation,
we added graphite particles to the reactor to triple the accessible
surface area (see Figure S23). Table S3 shows a slight reduction in the induction
time from 146 to 110 s by the addition of graphite, indicating that
additional nontemplating nucleation sites have minimal influence on
the induction mechanism of UiO-66.Figure shows the
dominant pathway of nuclei formation at various experimental conditions
obtained from the microkinetic model and yields insight into the evolution
of the reaction network at the onset of nucleation. The nodes in each
panel of Figure represent
the cluster sizes increasing from 1 SBU1 to 129 SBU1 from left to right, as shown on the number line below each
panel. Hence, the rightmost node represents the crystal of critical
size of 8.6 nm. The solid black lines connecting the nodes represent
the dominant pathway of nuclei formation, and the thickness of the
lines is relative to the highest volumetric rate theoretically obtained
in all of the experimental conditions. Figure a shows the experimental condition with initial
concentrations of 14.4 mM Zr and 16.3 mM H2BDC at 25 °C.
For this experimental condition, the onset of nucleation is near 45
s. In this case, nucleation occurs due to the attachment of clusters
with similar lattice structures. Hence, the cluster sizes increase
in powers of two, representing the attachment of SBUs with similar
lattice structures. However, at the higher temperature shown in Figure b, the cluster size
increase is greater than powers of two due to high volumetric rates
at the onset of nucleation of 6 s. The increase in cluster size in
powers greater than two is also observed for the case of halved initial
concentration metal oxo-cluster concentration at 25 °C as shown
in Figure c. The size
increase, in this case, depends on the concentration of the clusters.
The clusters with limiting concentration do not significantly contribute
to the volumetric rate, and hence the dominant pathway of critical
size nuclei formation shows longer jumps regardless of very low volumetric
rates of the reactions involved.
Figure 4
Evolution of subcritical clusters to the
critical size of the nucleus.
The title represents the experimental conditions: (a) 14.4 mM Zr,
16.3 mM H2BDC, 25 °C; (b) 14.4 mM Zr, 16.3 mM H2BDC, 45 °C; (c) 7.2 mM Zr, 16.3 mM H2BDC,
25 °C. The nodes represent the cluster size, and the size is
shown based on the number of SBU1 in the cluster. Each
node is a part of the reaction network where the leftmost node represents
the crystal size of 1 SBU1, and the rightmost node represents
the crystal size of 129 SBU1. The size increase from left
to right is represented by the number line given below each panel.
The rightmost node represents the critical size (8.6 nm) of nuclei
observed in in-situ WAXS. The black lines between the two nodes represent
the dominant pathway of formation of critical size of nuclei. The
thickness of the black line is relative to the highest volumetric
rate observed in all of the experiments. Higher thickness implies
a higher volumetric rate. Diamond-shaped nodes are part of the dominant
pathway of nuclei formation. The color of each node represents the
total number of reactions emerging out from each node. The pathway
is shown for the time near the onset of nucleation as observed in
in-situ
WAXS.
Evolution of subcritical clusters to the
critical size of the nucleus.
The title represents the experimental conditions: (a) 14.4 mM Zr,
16.3 mM H2BDC, 25 °C; (b) 14.4 mM Zr, 16.3 mM H2BDC, 45 °C; (c) 7.2 mM Zr, 16.3 mM H2BDC,
25 °C. The nodes represent the cluster size, and the size is
shown based on the number of SBU1 in the cluster. Each
node is a part of the reaction network where the leftmost node represents
the crystal size of 1 SBU1, and the rightmost node represents
the crystal size of 129 SBU1. The size increase from left
to right is represented by the number line given below each panel.
The rightmost node represents the critical size (8.6 nm) of nuclei
observed in in-situ WAXS. The black lines between the two nodes represent
the dominant pathway of formation of critical size of nuclei. The
thickness of the black line is relative to the highest volumetric
rate observed in all of the experiments. Higher thickness implies
a higher volumetric rate. Diamond-shaped nodes are part of the dominant
pathway of nuclei formation. The color of each node represents the
total number of reactions emerging out from each node. The pathway
is shown for the time near the onset of nucleation as observed in
in-situ
WAXS.The relative rates of the initiation
reaction and chain reaction
determine the induction time and nucleation rate. Similarly, the relative
rates of chain and step reactions (or oriented attachment) govern
the average crystal size and polydispersity. From the microkinetic
model, we see that the step reaction contributes more to decreasing
the nuclei number density and increasing the overall growth of each
MOF crystal compared to the chain reaction (Figure a–f). The exponential phase of the
sigmoidal growth curve is primarily due to step reactions. The transition
phase of the growth is due to the onset of termination reactions,
where MOF crystals are large and stop undergoing further step reactions.
Finally, the stationary phase begins when step reactions are almost
completely terminated, and the remaining growth is primarily due to
chain reactions (Figure ).
Figure 5
Grain size for experimental (red curve) and theoretical (dashed
curve) results for (a) 14.4 mM Zr, 16.3 mM H2BDC at 25
°C; (b) 14.4 mM Zr, 16.3 mM H2BDC at 35 °C; (c)
14.4 mM Zr, 16.3 mM H2BDC at 45 °C; (d) 7.2 mM Zr,
16.3 mM H2BDC at 25 °C; (e) 14.4 mM Zr, 8.15 mM H2BDC at 25 °C; (f) 28.8 mM Zr, 16.3 mM H2BDC
at 25 °C. The background fill represents the volumetric rate
contribution to grain size from chain growth (green), step growth
(yellow), and termination (red). The total volumetric rate contribution
from step growth is at least 1.5 times higher than the chain growth
for all the cases. (g) Nonclassical addition of various cluster sizes
for step growth; (h) termination events such as lattice mismatch,
linker covered surface sites, and surface stabilization; (i) theoretical
size distribution of crystal sizes as a function of the synthesis
temperature; (j) theoretical crystal size distributions as a function
of the starting metal oxo cluster concentration; (k) dynamics of free
linkers in the solution per surface SBU; and (l) scaling relationship
between the number of free linkers per surface SBU at a steady-state
and the number of initial linkers per surface SBU of MACS. In panels
a–f, the dotted line represents the calculated contribution
of the chain growth to the overall grain size. Panels enclosed with
the black box represent the results used to validate the microkinetic
model, and panels enclosed with the blue box represent the results
predicted using the microkinetic model. The y-axis
labels in panel a apply to panels b–f as well.
Grain size for experimental (red curve) and theoretical (dashed
curve) results for (a) 14.4 mM Zr, 16.3 mM H2BDC at 25
°C; (b) 14.4 mM Zr, 16.3 mM H2BDC at 35 °C; (c)
14.4 mM Zr, 16.3 mM H2BDC at 45 °C; (d) 7.2 mM Zr,
16.3 mM H2BDC at 25 °C; (e) 14.4 mM Zr, 8.15 mM H2BDC at 25 °C; (f) 28.8 mM Zr, 16.3 mM H2BDC
at 25 °C. The background fill represents the volumetric rate
contribution to grain size from chain growth (green), step growth
(yellow), and termination (red). The total volumetric rate contribution
from step growth is at least 1.5 times higher than the chain growth
for all the cases. (g) Nonclassical addition of various cluster sizes
for step growth; (h) termination events such as lattice mismatch,
linker covered surface sites, and surface stabilization; (i) theoretical
size distribution of crystal sizes as a function of the synthesis
temperature; (j) theoretical crystal size distributions as a function
of the starting metal oxo cluster concentration; (k) dynamics of free
linkers in the solution per surface SBU; and (l) scaling relationship
between the number of free linkers per surface SBU at a steady-state
and the number of initial linkers per surface SBU of MACS. In panels
a–f, the dotted line represents the calculated contribution
of the chain growth to the overall grain size. Panels enclosed with
the black box represent the results used to validate the microkinetic
model, and panels enclosed with the blue box represent the results
predicted using the microkinetic model. The y-axis
labels in panel a apply to panels b–f as well.To obtain insights into UiO-66 growth, we used the Scherrer
equation
to relate the full-width half-maximum (FWHM) of the diffraction from
the (111) plane to the average grain size of MOFs (see Section S9). Figure a–c shows a sigmoidal curve (red)
of the experimentally obtained average grain size as a function of
time, at reaction temperatures of 25, 35, and 45 °C, respectively
(see Figure S24 for versions with linear x-axis). As the temperature increases, the time for the
onset of growth (defined as the onset of WAXS signal acquisition above
background) decreases, and the volumetric growth rate increases. In
the generalized reaction model, the MOF can grow either by a chain
reaction (see Figure S25), indicative of
a classical growth mechanism or a through step reaction (Figure g), indicative of
a nonclassical growth mechanism. The simulated growth curves with
(dash) and without (dot) the step reaction contribution show that
the growth contribution from the step reaction is significantly higher
than that for the chain reaction.Corroborating the observation
that step growth significantly contributes
to the grain size, the colormap of the volumetric rate of reaction
(molar rate divided by the molar density) in Figure a–c confirms that step reaction dominates
MOF growth. Here, the green background color shows the volumetric
rate contribution due to chain growth, orange shows the volumetric
rate contribution due to step growth, and red shows the volumetric
rate contribution due to the onset of termination. Figure a–c also shows that
the step reaction rate increases with increasing temperature. This
increase in the step growth rate leads to an earlier onset of growth
as well. Figure i
shows the predicted size distribution of the UiO-66 at the three different
reaction temperatures from Figure a–c at a steady state. Although the variance
does not change significantly with temperature, the polydispersity
index decreases with increasing temperature, 1.0686 at 25 °C,
1.0577 at 35 °C, and 1.0492 at 45 °C. These results agree
with existing analytical models of chain and step polymerization,
where the average length of polymer is directly proportional to the
growth rate constant, and polydispersity is inversely dependent on
the growth rate constant.[34,37]Panels d and
e in Figure show
the growth dynamics when the initial concentrations
are halved for metal node and linker, respectively. The average grain
size increases with decreasing metal node and linker concentration,
which is due to a higher degree of oriented attachment and step-growth
rate (orange). The inverse is also true and can be seen in Figure f, where two times
higher concentration of metal node reduces the step growth rate resulting
in smaller grain size at the steady-state. Figure j shows the increase in the average size
and variance of the size distribution when the metal node concentration
is decreased from 14.4 to 7.2 mM and the decrease in the average size
and variance when the metal node concentration is increased from 14.4
to 28.8 mM at a fixed linker concentration and temperature. Using
the microkinetic model, we show that stabilization of the MOF crystal
surface is a primary reason for the termination of the step reaction
and is responsible for the steady-state MOF size.There are
two major factors that determine termination: lattice
mismatch during oriented attachment of MOFs and the reactivity of
MOF surface (Figure h).[38,39] We propose that the
oriented attachment of two MOF crystals begins with the alignment
of surface lattices followed by a reaction between the surface SBUs,
as observed before for nanoparticles.[39] Although the lattice alignment is dependent on the MOF surface and
rotational motion, the surface reactivity is primarily governed by
the number of exposed linkers per SBU on the surface of the two attaching
crystals. For instance, the stable (111) surface of UiO-66 MOFs cannot
undergo oriented attachment when the number of exposed linkers per
SBU in both crystals is either four (linker saturated) or zero (modulator
saturated) (see Figure S26). Thus, although
a defect-free oriented attachment will occur only with exactly one
exposed linker per pair of attaching SBUs, a lower number of linkers
per SBU will still keep the surface reactive but will induce a higher
number of defects in the MOF. In contrast, a higher number of linkers
per SBU will compete for the vacant site for attachment to the metal
node, resulting in a lower volumetric rate and larger crystal sizes.
Furthermore, as the reaction proceeds faster because of the high temperature
(Figure c), crystals
are more likely to have defects, resulting in a lower than expected
grain size as probed by in-situ WAXS.Using the size distribution
in panels i and j in Figure , we calculate the amount of
free SBUs on the octahedral UiO-66 crystal surface. Figure k shows the evolution of free
linkers in the solution present per surface SBU for the six different
conditions corresponding to Figure a– f. It can be seen that the ratio of free
linker per surface SBU stays constant at a steady state for varying
reaction temperatures because the amount of the linker concentration
and the metal node is initially the same. Therefore, decreasing the
metal node concentration increases the ratio of free linker per surface
SBU because the linker is initially present at a stoichiometrically
higher ratio. However, we find that decreasing the linker concentration
also increases the ratio of free linkers per surface SBU. In this
case, we have a lower number of UiO-66 crystals, which are larger
(Figure e), which
reduces the SBU surface area and increases the linker to surface SBU
ratio.Increasing the linker to surface SBU ratio increases
the reactivity
of the MOF surface, as the concentration of the linker in solution
is proportional to the number of linkers on the MOF surface. Therefore,
increasing the free linker to surface SBU ratio allows oriented attachment
over a longer time duration (see Figure a, d, and e), thereby permitting larger MOF
crystals to aggregate. The largest size of MOF that can undergo oriented
attachment to a larger crystal is referred to as the maximum aggregating
crystal size (MACS). The estimated MACS is 15.1, 25.5, 60.3, and 9.6
nm for the experimental conditions in panels a and d–f in Figure , respectively. Figure l shows a scaling
relationship between the number of free linkers per surface SBU at
a steady-state and the number of initial linkers per surface SBU of
MACS. Here, we see that conditions that allow for a larger number
of free linkers per surface of the SBU allow for oriented attachment
of larger crystallites.Figure summarizes
the different processes and the governing mechanisms for the microkinetic
model. However, these results are not as straightforwardly compared
to the nucleation and growth rates obtained from other models. For
example, the classical crystallization model arises from a reaction
kinetic model that considers only the monomeric attachment of building
units, which can then be used to obtain nucleation and growth rates.
To increase the applicability of our microkinetic model, we use the
model to predict nucleation and growth rate kernels (functions). We
compare these kernels with those estimated from the widely used Gualtieri
model.[17]Figure a shows the estimated probability distribution
of nucleation utilizing the Gualtieri model for different reaction
temperatures as a function of reaction extent. The estimated normalized
probability distribution using the microkinetic model is given in Figure S27. Figure b shows the Arrhenius plot of the estimated
nucleation (kn) and growth (kg) rate constants from the Gualtieri model with activation
energies of 78 and 83 kJ/mol, respectively (see Gualtieri Model Fitting
section, Figure S28 and Table S4). The
close values suggest the nucleation and growth mechanisms, while not
explicitly defined in the Gualtieri model, are indistinguishable with
respect to the rate-limiting crystallization mode.
Figure 6
Summary of various growth
phases with the respective governing
process and the corresponding conceptual figure. The induction phase
is governed by the initiation reaction, catalyzed by the SBUs formed
in the solution and resulting in a rapid increase of the SBU formation
rate and sigmoidal kinetics. A large number of SBUs formed in the
solution activates a cascade of the aggregation reaction, resulting
in the exponential growth phase governed by step reaction (oriented
attachment). Although both chain and step reactions are active in
the exponential phase, the step reaction dominates the volumetric
rate increase. The formation of larger crystals due to step growth
decreases the surface-to-volume ratio, stabilizing the surface and
reducing surface reactivity, causing the onset of the termination
resulting in the transition phase. The absence of oriented attachment
due to stable crystals moves the crystal growth to the stationary
phase. In the stationary phase, crystal growth is governed by chain
elongation until reactants are consumed.
Figure 7
Comparison
of the reaction-aggregation model with the Gualtieri
model and the nucleation and growth kernels. (a) Nucleation probability
obtained from the Gualtieri model experimental fitting. (b) Arrhenius
plots for nucleation and growth rate constants obtained using the
Gualtieri model (red lines) and theoretical model (black lines with
filled symbols), and initiation and aggregation rate constants obtained
from the theoretical model (black lines with hollow symbols). (c)
Theoretical nucleation rate as a function of reaction extent and reaction
temperature. (d) Theoretical growth rate as a function of the extent
of the reaction and the reaction temperature. (e) Nucleation rate
as a function of the extent of the reaction at varying initial concentrations
of the Zr-oxo cluster and the organic linker. (f) Growth rate as a
function of the extent of the reaction at varying initial concentrations
of the Zr-oxo cluster and the organic linker.
Summary of various growth
phases with the respective governing
process and the corresponding conceptual figure. The induction phase
is governed by the initiation reaction, catalyzed by the SBUs formed
in the solution and resulting in a rapid increase of the SBU formation
rate and sigmoidal kinetics. A large number of SBUs formed in the
solution activates a cascade of the aggregation reaction, resulting
in the exponential growth phase governed by step reaction (oriented
attachment). Although both chain and step reactions are active in
the exponential phase, the step reaction dominates the volumetric
rate increase. The formation of larger crystals due to step growth
decreases the surface-to-volume ratio, stabilizing the surface and
reducing surface reactivity, causing the onset of the termination
resulting in the transition phase. The absence of oriented attachment
due to stable crystals moves the crystal growth to the stationary
phase. In the stationary phase, crystal growth is governed by chain
elongation until reactants are consumed.Comparison
of the reaction-aggregation model with the Gualtieri
model and the nucleation and growth kernels. (a) Nucleation probability
obtained from the Gualtieri model experimental fitting. (b) Arrhenius
plots for nucleation and growth rate constants obtained using the
Gualtieri model (red lines) and theoretical model (black lines with
filled symbols), and initiation and aggregation rate constants obtained
from the theoretical model (black lines with hollow symbols). (c)
Theoretical nucleation rate as a function of reaction extent and reaction
temperature. (d) Theoretical growth rate as a function of the extent
of the reaction and the reaction temperature. (e) Nucleation rate
as a function of the extent of the reaction at varying initial concentrations
of the Zr-oxo cluster and the organic linker. (f) Growth rate as a
function of the extent of the reaction at varying initial concentrations
of the Zr-oxo cluster and the organic linker.The microkinetic model can also be used to obtain the nucleation
rate, where nucleation is defined as the formation of crystals of
size greater than (an arbitrary) critical size (e.g., 8.6 nm). Figure c shows the nucleation
rate distribution obtained from the microkinetic model. While similar
trends in nucleation rate can be observed compared to the Gualtieri
model, with maxima between a reaction extent of 0.1 and 0.3, the microkinetic
model offers more insight into this behavior. In addition, our model
can relate nucleation rate to metal node concentration, linker concentration,
and reaction temperature (Figure c, d). The estimated form of the nucleation kernel
is given below.where Ṅ (s–1) is the nucleation rate,
ξ is the reaction extent, T (K) is the temperature, k0,n (s–1) is the pre-exponential
factor of the nucleation
rate constant kn, An is the rate order with respect to the reaction extent, Bn is the rate order with respect to limiting
reactant, ΔGn (J mol–1) is the activation barrier for nucleation, and R (J mol–1 K–1) is the gas constant.
Thus, the autocatalytic effect due to self-templating is captured
by ξA term in eq .Similarly, the linear growth rate can be computed
using the microkinetic
model as the rate of change of grain size for each condition in Figure . Figure d shows a sharp increase in
the growth rate due to oriented attachment of smaller nuclei generated
from autocatalytic initiation, followed by a constant decrease in
growth rate due to depletion of limiting reactant. The estimated growth
rate kernel is given below.where G (m s–1) is the growth rate of stable facet, k0,g (m s–1) is the pre-exponential factor
of the growth
rate constant kg, Ag is the rate order with respect to reaction extent, Bg is the rate order with respect to limiting
reactant, and ΔGg (J mol–1) is the activation energy for growth. Figure b also shows the Arrhenius plot for the nucleation
and growth rate constants from the microkinetic model with the activation
energies of 19.9 and 66.2 kJ/mol, respectively. Panels e and f in Figure show the effect
of varying metal node and linker concentrations on the rates of nucleation
and growth, respectively. The order and the activation energies were
obtained by nonlinear least-squares fitting.The microkinetic
model also yields insight into the reaction order
and activation energy of reactions involved in the UiO-66 synthesis.
The estimated reaction order for autocatalytic initiation reaction
with 1:1 node-to-linker stoichiometry is 1.2 and 1.8 with respect
to metal node and linker, respectively. In contrast, the reaction
order for chain and step reactions matches exactly the stoichiometry
of the reactants. This suggests the initiation reaction is nonelementary,
whereas the chain and step reactions can be considered elementary.
The activation energy for autocatalytic initiation is 52 kJ/mol (Figure b). Interestingly,
the activation energy for chain and step reactions are identical −118
kJ/mol, which follows Flory’s approximation[34] that rate constants of polymerization reaction are independent
of polymer length.
Conclusions and Perspectives
In this article, we identify key physical processes that govern
the induction, nucleation, growth, and stabilization of UiO-66 crystals
using time-resolved in-situ WAXS and large-scale microkinetic modeling.
These physical processes are the formation of SBUs (or initiation),
attachment of SBUs to the growing MOF (or chain growth), oriented
attachment of MOF crystals (or step-growth), and surface stabilization
of MOFs (or termination) (Figure ). A simplified overview and limitations of the work
presented in the manuscript are given in Section S11. The flowchart of the work is given in Figure S29.The time-resolved WAXS study shows an increase
in the volumetric
rate of MOF crystal formation in the induction phase, indicating autocatalysis
of SBU formation that becomes more favorable with a larger template
size. We find the exponential growth phase is primarily due to step-growth
or oriented attachment. The estimated rate constant for step-growth
is similar to chain growth, which suggests Flory’s approximation
is also applicable to oligomerization reactions in MOF synthesis.
The termination of step-growth is determined by the reactivity of
the MOF crystal surface, and we identify that the average number of
linkers per SBU on the surface of MOF can be used as a reactivity
descriptor.The nucleation and growth insights from a conventional
Gualtieri
analysis are also compared with the detailed microkinetic model. Although
the Gualtieri model assumes the nucleation and growth probability
that influences the estimated barriers, the microkinetic model can
deconvolute the contributions from autocatalytic initiation, chain
growth, step-growth (oriented attachment), and termination to accurately
determine the activation barriers for nucleation and growth. These
fundamental insights on the mechanism of MOF nucleation and growth
that are revealed from in-situ X-ray scattering and microkinetic modeling
will provide molecular control toward the synthesis of a wide range
of MOFs.
Authors: Dongsheng Li; Michael H Nielsen; Jonathan R I Lee; Cathrine Frandsen; Jillian F Banfield; James J De Yoreo Journal: Science Date: 2012-05-25 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Xiangwen Liu; See Wee Chee; Sanoj Raj; Michal Sawczyk; Petr Král; Utkur Mirsaidov Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2021-03-09 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Alana F Ogata; Alexander M Rakowski; Brooke P Carpenter; Dmitry A Fishman; Jovany G Merham; Paul J Hurst; Joseph P Patterson Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2020-01-08 Impact factor: 15.419