Chai D., Xin J., Li B. et al. · Dalton Transactions · 2019 · 13026-13033
Open a family to keep every result attached to its sample, method and conditions.
Paraphrased for this database from the authors’ stated interpretations — never quoted verbatim — and kept separate from reported measurements.
Compounds 1 and 2 are stable during immersion in 1 M H2SO4 for up to 48 h by FTIR evidence.
Caveat: Stability evidence is qualitative FTIR peak coincidence; no post-cycling crystallography or dissolution quantification is reported in this passage.
p007 / article p.13032 · Electrochemical performance · Figure S12 · Linked to 1 structured result
The integrated POMOF compound 1 outperforms both isolated parent POM (PMo@TBAB) and bare Cu-MOF controls in the SI capacitance comparison.
Caveat: Control figure lacks exact numeric capacitances and electrode preparation/current density details in the SI text around Figure S9.
p005 · Supporting information - Figure S9 · Figure S9 · Linked to 2 structured results
Compound 1 gives higher capacitance than compound 2 because its 2D lattice with free TEA/H2O provides more favourable electronic transmission and accessible electrochemical surface area than the 3D host-guest compound 2 structure.
Caveat: Electronic conductivity is inferred from electrochemical behaviour and EIS/Cdl proxies; no four-probe or pellet conductivity value is reported.
p005-p006 / article pp.13030-13031 · Electrochemical performance · Figure 7 · Linked to 6 structured results
Compound 1 has higher redox capacity than compound 2 because its PMo12 cluster is fully Mo(VI), whereas compound 2 contains reduced PMo(VI)9Mo(V)3.
Caveat: The link to capacitance is interpretive; XPS supports oxidation states but does not directly quantify redox capacity in operation.
p005 / article p.13030 · Electrochemical performance · Figure 1; Figure S4 · Linked to 4 structured results
Names and aliases are kept exactly within the paper’s own identity model.
| Material | Composition | Structure context | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| compound 1: [CuIH2(C12H12N6)(PMo12O40)].[(C6H15N)(H2O)2] | C24H48CuMo12N8O42P; reported as [Cu(I)H2(C12H12N6)(PMo12O40)].[(C6H15N)(H2O)2]Cu(I) centres bridging PMo12 polyoxometalate units and btx linkers · btx = 1,4-bis(triazol-1-ylmethyl)benzene; free triethylamine molecules present | 2D · PristineTriclinic P-1 2D lattice layers; POM molecules linked to Cu(I)-btx lines, with free TEA and water molecules stacking layers into a 3D supramolecular structure through hydrogen bonds. | p003 / article p.13028 · Results and discussion - Structure of compound 1 · Table 1; Figs. 2-3 |
| compound 2: [CuII2(C12H12N6)4(PMoVI9MoV3O39)] | C48H48Cu2Mo12N24O39P; reported as [Cu(II)2(C12H12N6)4(PMo(VI)9Mo(V)3O39)]Cu(II)-btx MOF host with reduced PMoVI9MoV3 polyoxometalate chains · btx = 1,4-bis(triazol-1-ylmethyl)benzene | 3D · PristineMonoclinic P21/c host-guest structure; 1D POM chains encapsulated in a 3D Cu(II)-btx MOF framework. | p004 / article p.13029 · Results and discussion - Structure of compound 2 · Figs. 4-5 |
| bare Cu-MOF particle | Cu-btx MOF; exact empirical formula not reportedCu nodes · btx = 1,4-bis(triazol-1-ylmethyl)benzene | 3D · PristineBare MOF control prepared by the compound 1 method without POM; characterised by IR spectrum. | p005 · Supporting information - Figure S9 and control synthesis · Figure S9; Figure S9-2 |
| PMo@TBAB parent POM control | PMo12/TBAB adduct; precise formula not reportedPMo12 polyoxometalate cluster · tetrabutylammonium bromide counter-ion/adduct; no MOF linker | 0D · Model SystemParent POM/TBAB control precipitate characterised by IR spectrum. | p005-p006 · Supporting information - Figure S9 and control synthesis · Figure S9; Figure S9-1 |
Sample form, processing state and composition status define the context for measurements.
| Sample | Form and role | Processing and geometry | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| yellow block crystals of compound 1research_0374__mat__compound_1_pomof | Single Crystal · Target Sample · Guest Loaded | Filtered, washed with water, and dried at room temperature after hydrothermal synthesis. | p002 / article p.13027 · Experimental - Synthesis of compound 1 |
| compound 1-based GCE working electroderesearch_0374__mat__compound_1_pomof | Electrode · Target Sample · Composite | 2.5 mg compound 1 and 2.5 mg acetylene black ground, dispersed in 0.5 mL water, 10 uL deposited on GCE, dried 3 h, then 2.5 uL Nafion deposited and dried 1 h.glassy carbon electrode, 3 mm diameter · 10 uL slurry plus 2.5 uL Nafion; film thickness not reported | p002-p003 / article pp.13027-13028 · Experimental - Preparation of the working electrodes |
| green block crystals of compound 2research_0374__mat__compound_2_pomof | Single Crystal · Target Sample · Guest Loaded | Filtered, washed with water, and dried at room temperature after hydrothermal synthesis. | p002 / article p.13027 · Experimental - Synthesis of compound 2 |
| compound 2-based GCE working electroderesearch_0374__mat__compound_2_pomof | Electrode · Target Sample · Composite | 2.5 mg compound 2 and 2.5 mg acetylene black ground, dispersed in 0.5 mL water, 10 uL deposited on GCE, dried 3 h, then 2.5 uL Nafion deposited and dried 1 h.glassy carbon electrode, 3 mm diameter · 10 uL slurry plus 2.5 uL Nafion; film thickness not reported | p002-p003 / article pp.13027-13028 · Experimental - Preparation of the working electrodes |
| Cu-MOF bare MOF control powderresearch_0374__mat__cu_mof_control | Powder · Pristine Control · Pristine Framework | Prepared by the compound 1 method without adding POMs; green powder washed with distilled water three times and dried at 80 C for 5 h. | p005 · Supporting information - Synthesis of Cu-MOF · Figure S9-2 |
| PMo@TBAB parent POM control powderresearch_0374__mat__pmo_tbab_control | Powder · Pristine Control · Guest Loaded | PMo12 aqueous solution combined with TBAB aqueous solution under stirring; precipitate filtered, washed three times with water, and dried at 80 C for 5 h. | p005 · Supporting information - Synthesis of PMo@TBAB · Figure S9-1 |