Four different MOFs were exposed to γ rays by a cobalt-60 source reaching a maximum dose of 5 MGy. The results showed that the MIL-100 (Cr) and MIL-100 (Fe) did not exhibit obvious structural damage, suggesting their excellent radiation stability. MIL-101 (Cr) showed good radiation stability up to 4 MGy, but its structure started degrading with increasing radiation dose. Furthermore, the results showed that the structure of AlFu MOFs started to decompose at a gamma dose of 1 MGy, exhibiting a much lower tolerance to γ radiation. At this radiation energy, the dominant interaction of the gamma-ray with MOFs is the Compton effect and the radiation stability of MOFs can be improved by prolific aromatic linkers, high linker connectivity, and good crystallinity. The results of this study indicate that MIL-100 and MIL-101 MOFs have a good potential to be employed in nuclear applications, where relatively high radiation doses play a role, for example, nuclear waste treatment and radionuclides production.
Four different MOFs were exposed to γ rays by a cobalt-60 source reaching a maximum dose of 5 MGy. The results showed that the MIL-100 (Cr) and MIL-100 (Fe) did not exhibit obvious structural damage, suggesting their excellent radiation stability. MIL-101 (Cr) showed good radiation stability up to 4 MGy, but its structure started degrading with increasing radiation dose. Furthermore, the results showed that the structure of AlFu MOFs started to decompose at a gamma dose of 1 MGy, exhibiting a much lower tolerance to γ radiation. At this radiation energy, the dominant interaction of the gamma-ray with MOFs is the Compton effect and the radiation stability of MOFs can be improved by prolific aromatic linkers, high linker connectivity, and good crystallinity. The results of this study indicate that MIL-100 and MIL-101 MOFs have a good potential to be employed in nuclear applications, where relatively high radiation doses play a role, for example, nuclear waste treatment and radionuclides production.
In recent years, increasing energy demand
has renewed interest
in nuclear energy, especially since it is an effective way to achieve
carbon dioxide neutral energy production.[1] Nevertheless, nuclear waste is still a major concern and has resulted
in studies aiming at better waste management in which separation or
sequestration of the different radionuclides is essential, especially
in the long-run. On top of that, the production of radionuclides of
medical interest is also a major topic in the nuclear field.[2]Metal–organic frameworks (MOFs)
materials have been investigated
extensively as adsorbents for nuclear waste treatment as well as for
radionuclide production, due to their high specific surface area,
tunable functional groups allowing high selectivity, and good chemical
stability.[3−6] For instance, several MOFs have shown outstanding performance in
the field of radioactive gas separation (85Kr, 129I, 135Xe, and 222Rn),[7−11] seawater purification,[12−14] radionuclide adsorption
for wastewater remediation (59Fe, 65Zn, 137Cs, and 235U),[15−24] and radionuclide production.[25] Although
these MOFs have excellent chemical stability and have shown great
potential in waste treatment application, their resistance to ionizing
radiation has hardly been reported. To fully exploit the potential
of MOFs in these fields, it is imperative to determine their radiation
resistance. So far, the stability of only a few MOFs has been investigated
under γ radiation. For example, A series of SIFSIX-3 MOFs have
been studied under beta and gamma irradiation by Elsadi et al., who
reported that SIFSIX-3-Cu had the best radiation resistance to gamma
and beta radiation up to a dose of 50 kGy and 25 MGy, respectively.[22] The radiation stability of several MOFs with
different metals (Al, Zr, Cu, Zn) have been studied under different
gamma doses and the results have demonstrated that MIL-100 (Al) shows
the best radiation tolerance, that is, 2 MGy.[23] Gilson et al. have developed a thorium-based MOF, which has survived
γ radiation up to a dose of 4 MGy and a dose of α particles
up to 25.5 MGy.[26] Furthermore, Nenoff et
al. have investigated the influence of gamma dose rates (0.78 Gy/min,
3days and 423.3 Gy/min, 23 min) on the stability of NU-1000 and UiO-66,
and found that NU-1000 exhibits better stability because of its high
linker connectivity and lower node density.[27] However, the radiation resistance of many other promising MOFs and
especially at higher γ radiation dose remains unknown.MIL-101 (Cr), possessing high surface area and excellent chemical
stability, has shown good potential to separate radionuclides.[28] In addition, this MOF can also be applied to
produce the 51Cr radionuclide, which is widely used to
label platelets and red blood cells, and to evaluate their lifespan
in clinical application and is desired radionuclide, requiring high
specific activity (high activity per unit mass). Achieving high specific
activity with nuclear reactors is hard but would be possible by the
combination of Cr-based MOFs and hot atom approaches (Szilard-Chalmers
effect).[29] In order to realize the application
of MIL-101 (Cr) in a highly radioactive environment, the effects of
γ radiation on its structural evolution need to be explored.
At the same time, it is very interesting to determine the influence
of organic linkers and metal clusters on the radiation stability of
MOFs in a more systematic fashion allowing rational choice of a MOF
according to its application. Therefore, MIL-100 (Fe), MIL-100 (Cr),
and aluminum fumarate MOFs (AlFu MOFs) have been studied and compared.
The structure of these MOFs and corresponding organic linkers are
shown in Figure .
All MOFs in this study have been irradiated by gamma-ray from 0 Gy
to 5 MGy, and their structural changes were monitored by XRD, SEM,
FT-IR and nitrogen adsorption.
Figure 1
Illustration of the structure and corresponding
organic linkers
of (a) MIL-100 (Fe), (b) MIL-100 (Cr), (c) MIL-101 (Cr), and (d) AlFu
MOFs. Iron, chromium, aluminum, carbon, and oxygen atoms are denoted
in orange, green, blue, gray, and red colors, respectively.
Illustration of the structure and corresponding
organic linkers
of (a) MIL-100 (Fe), (b) MIL-100 (Cr), (c) MIL-101 (Cr), and (d) AlFu
MOFs. Iron, chromium, aluminum, carbon, and oxygen atoms are denoted
in orange, green, blue, gray, and red colors, respectively.
Experimental Section
Synthesis and Characterization
MIL-100 (Cr), MIL-100
(Fe), MIL-101 (Cr), and aluminum fumarate (AlFu) MOFs were synthesized
according to previous literature.[30−33] The details of the synthesis
are shown in the Supporting Information (SI).Powder X-ray diffraction patterns of the synthesized MOFs
were obtained by a PANalytical X’Pert Pro pw3040/60 diffractometer
with Cu Kα radiation operating at 45 kV and 40 mA. Brunauer–Emmett–Teller
(BET) surface area of the samples was collected on a Micromeritics
Tristar II at 77 K, and all samples were pretreated at 200 C for 15
h before measurement. Fourier transform infrared spectra (FTIR) of
powder samples was directly measured by a PerkinElmer Spotlight 400
FT-IR spectrometer with a range of 650–2500 cm–1. The morphology and particle size of the samples were determined
by scanning electron microscopy (SEM, JEOL, JSM-IT100). X-ray photoelectron
spectra (XPS) was collected using a ThermoFisher Al K-alpha apparatus
and scans were performed by a 400 μm spot size with an energy
step size of 0.2 eV. The thermal stability of four MOFs was investigated
by thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) using a Mettler-Toledo/STDA 851e
apparatus with a heating rate of 5 C/min.
Gamma Irradiation
The gamma source (GC220) is an irradiation
cell using the radionuclide 60Co (as shown in SI Figure S1), which was used to study the effects
of gamma irradiation on the selected MOFs. The cobalt-60 (1.17, 1.33
MeV) source has a half-life of 5.272 years. We packed ∼0.2
g of powder of each sample in Posthumus plastic capsules in air and
irradiated for different times to achieve different doses. The gamma
dose was calculated according to eq -1:Where D and Ḋ
Ḋ are dose and dose rate, respectively. The initial
dose rate was 0.65 kGy/h and λ (3.6 × 10–4 d–1) is the decay constant of 60Co. The radiation
time (T) was 32.8 days (0.5 MGy), 66 days (1.0 MGy),
99 days (1.5 MGy), 133 days (2.0 MGy), 199 days (3.0 MGy), 269 days
(4.0 MGy), and 340.5 days (5.0 MGy), respectively.
Results and Discussion
To evaluate the radiation stability,
the structure changes or the
loss of crystallinity of the synthesized MOFs were monitored through
XRD, SEM, FT-IR, and nitrogen adsorption after exposure to a cobalt-60
source at different doses of γ radiation.Figure shows the
XRD patterns of MIL-100 (Fe), MIL-100 (Cr), MIL-101 (Cr), and AlFu
MOFs before and after the irradiation at different γ radiation
doses. Their diffraction peaks are consistent with the simulated patterns
for each material. After exposure to different γ radiation doses,
the diffraction peaks of MIL-100 (Fe) (Figure (a)), MIL-100 (Cr) (Figure (b)) and MIL-101 (Cr) (Figure (c)) maintained the same diffraction patterns.
The full-width half-maximum (fwhm) of the most intense peak in XRD
patterns was analyzed and shown in SI Figure S2. There is a small variation in the values of fwhm for MIL-100 (Fe)
and MIL-100 (Cr). The values of fwhm for MIL-101 (Cr) increased slightly
at relatively low radiation dose (from 0 to 4 MGy) and the value increased
significantly (22%) when exposed to 5 MGy, showing severe loss of
crystallinity. The diffraction peaks of AlFu MOF became broader as
the gamma dose increased (Figure (d)). When the γ radiation dose was lower than
1 MGy, the fwhm of AlFu MOF remained stable. The value of fwhm increased
from 0.4 to 0.51 after receiving 2 MGy of gamma irradiation, resulting
in broader diffraction peaks.
Figure 2
XRD patterns of (a) MIL-100 (Fe), (b) MIL-100
(Cr), (c) MIL-101
(Cr), and (d) FuAl MOFs exposed to different gamma doses.
XRD patterns of (a) MIL-100 (Fe), (b) MIL-100
(Cr), (c) MIL-101
(Cr), and (d) FuAl MOFs exposed to different gamma doses.The surface area of the four materials was determined
by N2 adsorption at 77 K. Figure (a) shows the N2 adsorption–desorption
isotherms of MIL-100 (Fe) after exposure to the different gamma doses.
MIL-100 (Fe) possessed type I adsorption isotherm and had a surface
area of 1574 m2/g. After exposure of 1 and 2 MGy, its surface
area was 1527 and 1528 m2/g (having a 3% drop), respectively.
When MIL-100 (Fe) was exposed to higher irradiation doses (between
3 and 5 MGy) its surface area decreased to 1513 m2/g, 1498
m2/g, and 1507 m2/g (as shown in SI Table S1).
Figure 3
N2 adsorption isotherms of
(a) MIL-100 (Fe), (b) MIL-100
(Cr), (c) MIL-101 (Cr), and (d) AlFu MOFs exposed to different gamma
doses.
N2 adsorption isotherms of
(a) MIL-100 (Fe), (b) MIL-100
(Cr), (c) MIL-101 (Cr), and (d) AlFu MOFs exposed to different gamma
doses.The SEM images in SI Figure S3 show
that MIL-100 (Fe) exhibited a rod-like shape with inhomogeneous size.
There were no detectable changes observed to the particle morphology
and size after the different radiation exposures. The FT-IR spectrum
of MIL-100 (Fe) can be found in SI Figure S4. The spectrum displays two peaks at 1625 and 1382 cm–1 that are attributed to asymmetric and symmetric vibrations of carboxyl
groups,[34] respectively. The peak at around
1445 cm–1 is assigned to stretching vibrations of
the O–C–O group.[35] No obvious
changes can be observed in the FT-IR spectra, which is consistent
with the XRD analysis.Figure (b) shows
the N2 adsorption isotherms of MIL-100 (Cr) after different
gamma irradiation doses. The BET surface area of MIL-100 (Cr) calculated
from nitrogen adsorption isotherm was 1862 m2/g before
gamma irradiation. The shape of the adsorption isotherms was the same
as that of fresh MIL-100 (Cr), but they were found to decrease gradually
in adsorption capacity. Correspondingly, their surface area decreased
by 3.2% (1802 m2/g), 6.3% (1744 m2/g,) 10.8%
(1660 m2/g), 14.1% (1600 m2/g), and 18.9% (1510
m2/g) after receiving gamma doses of 1 MGy, 2 MGy, 3 MGy,
4 MGy and 5 MGy, respectively, where there was an approximately 4%
decrease in surface area for each gamma dose. SEM images (SI Figure S5) showed that the morphology of MIL-100
(Cr) was unchanged. But the crystal size decreased a little after
high γ radiation exposure (4 MGy and 5 MGy). The FT-IR spectrum
of MIL-100 (Cr) was measured (as shown in SI Figure S6) and no obvious changes could be observed with γ radiation
up to 5 MGy.Nitrogen adsorption isotherms of MIL-101 (Cr) after
exposure to
the different gamma doses are shown in Figure (c). The BET surface area of the fresh sample
was 2203 m2/g. After receiving gamma doses of 1 MGy, 2
MGy, 3 MGy, and 4 MGy, the BET surface area of MIL-101 (Cr) decreased
from 2203 m2/g to 2159 m2/g, 2101 m2/g, 2072 m2/g, and 2099 m2/g, respectively
(SI Table S1). The BET surface area of
MIL-101 (Cr) was reduced by only 4.7% when exposed to a gamma dose
of 4 MGy. When the gamma dose reached 5 MGy, MIL-101 (Cr) decreased
by 20.0% in surface area (1762 m2/g). Its micropore volume
decreased from 1.0715 cm3/g to 0.7508 cm3/g
(30% reduction, as shown in SI Table S2). Additionally, the microstructure and morphology of MIL-101 (Cr)
particles were examined by SEM, as shown in SI Figure S7. The images show that the MIL-101 (Cr) particles
are irregular spheres with a relatively uniform distribution. The
morphology and size of the particles did not show any obvious changes
after exposure to different gamma doses.Figure (d) shows
the N2 adsorption isotherms of AlFu MOFs. The surface area
of AlFu MOFs at 2 MGy had a significant decrease (63 m2/g) when compared to the original surface area of 1070 m2/g. SEM images in SI Figure S9 showed
that the morphology of MIL-100 (Cr) was unchanged. The damage to the
structure of AlFu MOFs was further confirmed by FT-IR spectra (see SI Figure S10). The C=C vibrations at
1600 cm–1 and O–H bending vibrations of the
aluminum clusters[36,37] at 998 cm–1 could not be observed after 1 MGy radiation.The radiation
stabilities of four MOFs were explored by determining
their most important characteristics (e.g., crystallinity). The small
fluctuation value of fwhm and the lack of significant reduction in
BET surface area (Figure a) after receiving γ radiation of 5 MGy indicate that
MIL-100 (Fe) has excellent radiation stability toward γ radiation.
After exposure to a γ radiation dose of 5MGy, the XRD pattern
and fwhm of MIL-100 (Cr) did not have obvious changes, suggesting
that it kept good crystallinity. Although a small decrease in surface
area and micropore volume (Figure b) could be observed with increasing gamma doses, MIL-100
(Cr) showed tenacious resistance to gamma irradiation, exhibiting
as good radiation stability as MIL-100 (Fe). The TGA curves also demonstrated
that they still kept good thermal stability after receiving 5 MGy
of gamma irradiation (see SI Figure S11). Furthermore, MIL-101 (Cr) showed the same performance as MIL-100
(Cr) when it was irradiated by γ rays at doses of 1, 2, 3, and
4 MGy. Its surface area and micropore volume had a slight decrease,
but it also demonstrated that this MOF is highly resistant up to 4
MGy of a gamma dose. Subsequently, its surface area decreased significantly
(20%) and the fwhm value also increased visibly, suggesting that the
structure of MIL-101 (Cr) started decomposing at a gamma dose of 5
MGy, causing lower decomposing temperature (see the SI Figure S11(c)). In addition, the crystallinity of AlFu
MOF began to degenerate after receiving 1 MGy of γ radiation
and its pore structure characteristics completely disappeared at a
gamma dose of 2 MGy, exhibiting much lower radiation stability, which
could also be proved by the TGA curve (SI Figure S11(d)). Why the different MOFs react differently when exposed
to γ radiation is not clear but there seem to be certain clues
that can explain why one material is more stable than another.
Figure 4
3D representations
of the four MOFs (a) surface area and (b) micropore
volume as a function of the γ radiation dose. Red lines represent
the observed trend with increasing gamma dose.
3D representations
of the four MOFs (a) surface area and (b) micropore
volume as a function of the γ radiation dose. Red lines represent
the observed trend with increasing gamma dose.Three main processes rule the interaction of gamma-ray
with matter,
namely the photoelectric effect, the Compton effect, and the pair
production. The probability of these interactions strongly depends
on the atomic number (Z) and the energy of gamma-ray.[38] The Compton effect is expected to be the most dominant
based on the gamma energy (Eγ = 1.17, 1.33
MeV) and the Z of the elements comprising the MOFs.
The Compton process consists in a partial transfer of energy to an
electron in the MOF resulting in the energy loss of the γ radiation,
which can then further interact with other electrons, accompanied
by the second Compton effect or photoelectric effect, and thus generating
recoil electrons (Figure (a)). Some of the Compton electrons could travel to air without
collision and the other electrons can collide with the orbital electrons
of surrounding atoms in the MOFs by incoherent scattering, causing
ionizations or excitations (Figure (b)). Finally, the energy of the excited atoms can
be dissipated through the emission of fluorescence or Auger electrons,
and, in the last instance, through vibration (heat dissipation).
Figure 5
Schematic
illustration (a) of interactions between MIL-101 (Cr)
with gamma-rays (b) interaction of traveled electrons with atoms in
framework of MOFs.
Schematic
illustration (a) of interactions between MIL-101 (Cr)
with gamma-rays (b) interaction of traveled electrons with atoms in
framework of MOFs.As discussed above, the structure of the MOF seems
to affect its
stability toward radiation. First, the mass-energy absorption coefficient
is an effective index to measure the average fraction of photon energy
absorbed by materials. Metal clusters of MOFs in this research consist
of metal and oxygen atoms, which have a much higher total attenuation
coefficient than organic linkers, suggesting that metal clusters can
act as radiation antennas.As shown in Table , Al metal atom had the lowest photon cross-section,
but AlFu MOF
had the worse radiation stability compared with the other three MOFs,
which could be attributed to the lack of aromaticity of the organic
linkers. The aromatic linkers can promote delocalization and migration
of excitations based on high energy delocalization.[39,40] Therefore, the aromaticity of the linker has a significant impact
on the radiation stability of MOFs under gamma-ray environment. Second,
MIL-100 (Fe) and MIL-100 (Cr), which have the same linker and crystal
structure, showed good irradiation stability. The surface area of
MIL-100 (Cr) reduced a little bit more (16%), although Cr has a lower
photon cross-section. The larger fwhm value of MIL-100 (Cr) indicated
that it had a worse crystallinity compared with MIL-100 (Fe). The
formed defects could be not beneficial for the energy transfer and
dissipation,[41] resulting in low tolerance
ability for γ radiation, which could be the reason for the better
stability of MIL-100 (Fe).
Table 1
Total Photon Cross Sections (Barns)
Of Different Metals, 1 Barn = 10–24 cm2
metal
energy (MeV)
total attenuation
(barns/atom)
Al
1.17
2.55
1.33
2.39
Cr
1.17
4.74
1.33
4.44
Fe
1.17
5.51
1.33
4.82
C
1.17
1.17
1.33
1.09
O
1.17
1.56
1.33
1.46
H
1.17
0.19
1.33
0.18
Figure shows the
XPS spectra of MIL-100 (Cr) before and after a γ radiation dose
of 5 MGy. It can be seen that the sample contains Cr, O, and C elements
according to the XPS survey (Figure a). The Cr 2p spectrum is shown in Figure (b) and two peaks at 577.6
and 587.2 eV are ascribed to Cr 2p3/2 and Cr 2p1/2, respectively.[42] The binding energy shifts
cannot be observed suggesting that the metal clusters in MIL-100 (Cr)
maintain integrity after exposure to a gamma dose of 5 MGy. The C
1s XPS (Figure (c))
spectrum of MIL-100 (Cr) before irradiation could be deconvoluted
into four peaks at binding energies of 284.8 eV, 286.2 eV, 288.5 eV,
and 290.6 eV, which were attributed to C–C/C–H, C–O,
C=O, and O—C=O/π–π, respectively.[43] Apparently, the peaks ascribed to O—C=O/π–π
and C–O positively shift to the binding energy of 291.6 and
286.3 eV, implying the decrease of electron density of the carboxyl
groups.[44] The O 1s spectrum of MIL-100
(Cr) (Figure (d))
could be deconvoluted into three peaks at 531.9 eV, 534.2 eV, and
536.1 eV, which were ascribed to Cr–O–Cr, Cr–O–,C
and O—C=O, respectively.[45] After gamma irradiation, the two peaks of Cr–O–C and
O—C=O shift to higher binding energies by 0.2 and 0.1
eV, which were attributed to decreased electron density of the junction
of metal clusters and organic linkers, indicating that the bonds between
Cr–O clusters and the carboxylate of H3BTC linkers
could be partly broken during irradiation, resulting in the formation
of defects. Third, MIL-100 (Cr) and MIL-101 (Cr), which have the same
metal clusters but different connecting linkers, had good radiation
stability under γ radiation of 4 MGy. However, MIL-101 (Cr)
started to decompose with increasing gamma dose, which is related
to the linker connectivity. Since each linker in MIL-100 (Cr) is connected
with three metal clusters and the structure can still be kept when
one or two connection sites are broken, causing this material to exhibit
better stability. Another possible explanation could be that the metal
nodes concentration per volume unit of MIL-100 (Cr) is slightly higher
than that of MIL-101 (Cr), indicating that closer metallic atoms might
attenuate more the generated electrons, which is instrumental in stabilizing
the structure of MOFs.
Figure 6
XPS spectra of MIL-100 (Cr) before and after (5 MGy) gamma
irradiation;
(a) XPS survey, (b) Cr 2p, (c) C 1s, and (d) O 1s.
XPS spectra of MIL-100 (Cr) before and after (5 MGy) gamma
irradiation;
(a) XPS survey, (b) Cr 2p, (c) C 1s, and (d) O 1s.To better understand the relationship between structural
characteristics
and radiation stability of the MOFs, more systematic experiments need
to be carried out to explore other possible factors that determine
the stability of MOFs. In addition, more studies should be carried
out to determine the maximum radiation dose that the MOFs can tolerate
without loss of their characteristic properties.
Conclusions
In conclusion, MIL-100 (Fe), MIL-100 (Cr),
MIL-101 (Cr), and AlFu
MOFs were prepared and irradiated using γ rays at doses ranging
from 0 Gy to 5 MGy. The structure of all materials was characterized
by XRD, BET, SEM, and FT-IR. The MIL-100 (Fe) and MIL-100 (Cr) presented
outstanding stability when exposed to radiation of high doses (5 MGy).
MIL-101 (Cr) exhibited good radiation stability when the material
was subjected to gamma doses within a range of 0–4 MGy. A sudden
decrease in the surface area demonstrated that MIL-101 (Cr) started
to be damaged with increasing gamma dose. Meanwhile, the XRD results
of AlFu MOF proved that the crystallinity of AlFu MOFs suffered a
severe loss after receiving 1 MGy gamma dose. The BET and FI-IR results
indicated that the structure of AlFu MOFs collapsed after exposure
to high radiation dose. According to the structural analysis, the
linker aromaticity plays an important role in the radiation stability
of the MOFs. Additionally, high linker connectivity and good crystallinity
of MOFs can also strengthen their radiation stability. To fully examine
the potential of MOFs in nuclear applications their resistance to
even higher doses should be assessed in the future.
Authors: Patricia Horcajada; Christian Serre; María Vallet-Regí; Muriel Sebban; Francis Taulelle; Gérard Férey Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2006-09-11 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Sameh K Elsaidi; Mona H Mohamed; Ahmed S Helal; Mitchell Galanek; Tony Pham; Shanelle Suepaul; Brian Space; David Hopkinson; Praveen K Thallapally; Ju Li Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2020-06-18 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Debasis Banerjee; Cory M Simon; Anna M Plonka; Radha K Motkuri; Jian Liu; Xianyin Chen; Berend Smit; John B Parise; Maciej Haranczyk; Praveen K Thallapally Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2016-06-13 Impact factor: 14.919