Sensing Application — Catalytic Metal Nanoparticles Embedded in Conductive Metal–Organic Frameworks for Chemiresistors: Highly Active and Conductive Porous Materials

4 measurement groups · 36 results

Reported values remain attached to the sample, method, conditions, extraction quality and source location that produced them.

Arrhenius analysis of reaction rate constants

Cu3(HHTP)2, Pd@Cu3(HHTP)2, and Pt@Cu3(HHTP)2 powder comparison set · Powder

Activation energies for NO2 adsorption and desorption calculated from ln(kads or kdes) versus 1/T.

Temperature: 298-348
Atmosphere: dry air
Geometry: Chemiresistor with Pt microheater.
Context: Pristine control compared with Pd- and Pt-loaded sensors.
Measurement source: p008 · Results and Discussion · Figure 5b-d

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
NO2 adsorption activation energy for Cu3(HHTP)2	511.5 cal mol-1	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p008 · Results and Discussion · Figure 5d
NO2 adsorption activation energy for Pd@Cu3(HHTP)2	1351.5 cal mol-1	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p008 · Results and Discussion · Figure 5d
NO2 adsorption activation energy for Pt@Cu3(HHTP)2Marked as a best value within this paper	83.4 cal mol-1	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p008 · Results and Discussion · Figure 5d
NO2 desorption activation energy for Cu3(HHTP)2Marked as a best value within this paper	3644.8 cal mol-1	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p008 · Results and Discussion · Figure 5d
NO2 desorption activation energy for Pd@Cu3(HHTP)2	4015.7 cal mol-1	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p008 · Results and Discussion · Figure 5d
NO2 desorption activation energy for Pt@Cu3(HHTP)2	3822.7 cal mol-1	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p008 · Results and Discussion · Figure 5d

Exponential fitting of NO2 response curves

Cu3(HHTP)2, Pd@Cu3(HHTP)2, and Pt@Cu3(HHTP)2 powder comparison set · Powder

Adsorption and desorption rate constants calculated from response curves to 5 ppm NO2 at 25, 50, and 75 C.

Temperature: 298; 323; 348
Atmosphere: dry air
Geometry: Chemiresistor with Pt microheater for elevated-temperature tests.
Context: Pristine control compared with Pd- and Pt-loaded sensors.
Measurement source: p015 · Table S3 · Table S3

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
Cu3(HHTP)2 equilibrium constant at 298 K	483.8 +/- 19.9 ppm-1	—	+/- 19.9	SI Table Exact Reported	p015 · Table S3 · Table S3
Pd@Cu3(HHTP)2 equilibrium constant at 298 K	491.3 +/- 13.4 ppm-1	—	+/- 13.4	SI Table Exact Reported	p015 · Table S3 · Table S3
Pt@Cu3(HHTP)2 equilibrium constant at 298 KMarked as a best value within this paper	758.8 +/- 13.7 ppm-1	—	+/- 13.7	SI Table Exact Reported	p015 · Table S3 · Table S3
Cu3(HHTP)2 NO2 adsorption rate constant at 298 K	2.43 x 10-2 +/- 2.20 x 10-3 ppm-1 s-1	—	+/- 2.20 x 10-3	SI Table Exact Reported	p015 · Table S3 · Table S3
Cu3(HHTP)2 NO2 adsorption rate constant at 323 K	2.46 x 10-2 +/- 1.70 x 10-3 ppm-1 s-1	—	+/- 1.70 x 10-3	SI Table Exact Reported	p015 · Table S3 · Table S3
Cu3(HHTP)2 NO2 adsorption rate constant at 348 K	4.02 x 10-2 +/- 3.50 x 10-3 ppm-1 s-1	—	+/- 3.50 x 10-3	SI Table Exact Reported	p015 · Table S3 · Table S3
Pd@Cu3(HHTP)2 NO2 adsorption rate constant at 298 K	2.51 x 10-2 +/- 7.50 x 10-4 ppm-1 s-1	—	+/- 7.50 x 10-4	SI Table Exact Reported	p015 · Table S3 · Table S3
Pd@Cu3(HHTP)2 NO2 adsorption rate constant at 323 K	5.27 x 10-2 +/- 9.50 x 10-4 ppm-1 s-1	—	+/- 9.50 x 10-4	SI Table Exact Reported	p015 · Table S3 · Table S3
Pd@Cu3(HHTP)2 NO2 adsorption rate constant at 348 KMarked as a best value within this paper	9.14 x 10-2 +/- 8.35 x 10-3 ppm-1 s-1	—	+/- 8.35 x 10-3	SI Table Exact Reported	p015 · Table S3 · Table S3
Pt@Cu3(HHTP)2 NO2 adsorption rate constant at 298 KMarked as a best value within this paper	5.54 x 10-2 +/- 2.50 x 10-3 ppm-1 s-1	—	+/- 2.50 x 10-3	SI Table Exact Reported	p015 · Table S3 · Table S3
Pt@Cu3(HHTP)2 NO2 adsorption rate constant at 323 KMarked as a best value within this paper	5.62 x 10-2 +/- 1.90 x 10-3 ppm-1 s-1	—	+/- 1.90 x 10-3	SI Table Exact Reported	p015 · Table S3 · Table S3
Pt@Cu3(HHTP)2 NO2 adsorption rate constant at 348 K	6.01 x 10-2 +/- 3.95 x 10-3 ppm-1 s-1	—	+/- 3.95 x 10-3	SI Table Exact Reported	p015 · Table S3 · Table S3
Cu3(HHTP)2 NO2 desorption rate constant at 298 K	5.03 x 10-5 +/- 6.67 x 10-6 s-1	—	+/- 6.67 x 10-6	SI Table Exact Reported	p015 · Table S3 · Table S3
Pd@Cu3(HHTP)2 NO2 desorption rate constant at 298 K	5.10 x 10-5 +/- 1.75 x 10-6 s-1	—	+/- 1.75 x 10-6	SI Table Exact Reported	p015 · Table S3 · Table S3
Pt@Cu3(HHTP)2 NO2 desorption rate constant at 298 KMarked as a best value within this paper	7.30 x 10-5 +/- 5.25 x 10-6 s-1	—	+/- 5.25 x 10-6	SI Table Exact Reported	p015 · Table S3 · Table S3

Dynamic chemiresistive NO2 sensing

Cu3(HHTP)2, Pd@Cu3(HHTP)2, and Pt@Cu3(HHTP)2 powder comparison set · Powder

NO2 exposure in dry air at room temperature; response defined as (DeltaR/R0) x 100%.

Temperature: room temperature
Atmosphere: dry air, about 5% relative humidity
Geometry: Drop-coated sensing layer on Au/Al2O3 chemiresistor.
Context: Pristine control compared with Pd- and Pt-loaded sensors.
Measurement source: p005 · Results and Discussion · Figure 4a,b; Figure S6

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
NO2 response at 1 ppm for Cu3(HHTP)2	-5.0%	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005 · Results and Discussion · Figure 4b; Figure S6
NO2 response at 1 ppm for Pd@Cu3(HHTP)2Marked as a best value within this paper	-13.5%	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005 · Results and Discussion · Figure 4b; Figure S6
NO2 response at 1 ppm for Pt@Cu3(HHTP)2	-12.1%	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005 · Results and Discussion · Figure 4b; Figure S6
NO2 response at 5 ppm for Cu3(HHTP)2	-29.95%	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005 · Results and Discussion · Figure 4a
NO2 response at 5 ppm for Pd@Cu3(HHTP)2Marked as a best value within this paper	-62.11%	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005 · Results and Discussion · Figure 4a
NO2 response at 5 ppm for Pt@Cu3(HHTP)2	-57.38%	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005 · Results and Discussion · Figure 4a
Limit of detection for Pd@Cu3(HHTP)2Marked as a best value within this paper	1 ppm	—	—	SI Table Exact Reported	p014 · Table S2 · Table S2
Limit of detection for Pt@Cu3(HHTP)2Marked as a best value within this paper	1 ppm	—	—	SI Table Exact Reported	p014 · Table S2 · Table S2
Response time to 1 ppm NO2 for Cu3(HHTP)2	18 min	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005 · Results and Discussion · Figure S7
Response time to 1 ppm NO2 for Pd@Cu3(HHTP)2Marked as a best value within this paper	13.8 min	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005 · Results and Discussion · Figure S7
Response time to 1 ppm NO2 for Pt@Cu3(HHTP)2	14 min	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005 · Results and Discussion · Figure S7

Chemiresistive selectivity test

Cu3(HHTP)2, Pd@Cu3(HHTP)2, and Pt@Cu3(HHTP)2 powder comparison set · Powder

Exposure to 5 ppm NO2 and interfering gases NO, NH3, H2, toluene, ethanol, and acetone.

Temperature: room temperature
Atmosphere: dry air
Geometry: Drop-coated sensing layer on Au/Al2O3 chemiresistor.
Context: Pristine control compared with Pd- and Pt-loaded sensors.
Measurement source: p005 · Results and Discussion · Figure 4c,d

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
Maximum Pd@Cu3(HHTP)2 response to interfering gases	lower than 5.90%	—	upper bound	Text Range	p005 · Results and Discussion · Figure 4d
Normalised NO2 response for Pd@Cu3(HHTP)2 selectivity testMarked as a best value within this paper	62.11%	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005 · Results and Discussion · Figure 4d
Maximum Pt@Cu3(HHTP)2 response to interfering gases	lower than 5.03%	—	upper bound	Text Range	p005 · Results and Discussion · Figure 4d
Normalised NO2 response for Pt@Cu3(HHTP)2 selectivity test	57.38%	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p005 · Results and Discussion · Figure 4d