pp 1-36 | Cite as

Synthesis and Properties of Zeolite Materials Guided by Periodic Considerations

  • Luis Gómez-Hortigüela
  • Joaquín Pérez-ParienteEmail author
Part of the Structure and Bonding book series


Since their discovery, zeolite materials were destined to become a relevant topic of fundamental research as well as to have a great impact on the chemical industry because of their specific properties, combining (1) their characteristic shape selectivity imposed by their microporous long-range ordered structures and (2) the availability of a wide number of active sites for multitude of important catalytic reactions, making them excellent heterogeneous catalysts. Both chemical properties are to some extent controlled by the isomorphous substitution of the Si, Al, and P atoms in the basic tetrahedral framework by other elements from different parts of the periodic table. On the one hand, incorporation of certain elements such as Al, Ga, or B generates Brønsted acid sites with varying strengths, while incorporation of tetravalent elements such as Ti or Sn produces interesting Lewis acid sites. On the other hand, introduction of some elements can exert specific structure-directing roles leading to exotic framework microporous structures that could not be produced otherwise. We analyze and rationalize the chemical and structural changes resulting from the incorporation of elements into the zeolitic materials using principles based on the periodic table.


Aluminophosphates Brønsted acidity Isomorphous substitution Lewis acidity Zeolites 



The authors acknowledge funding from the Spanish State Research Agency (Agencia Española de Investigación, AEI) and the European Regional Development Fund (Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional, FEDER) through the Project MAT2016-77496-R (AEI/FEDER, UE).


  1. 1.
    Marcolli M (2017) Lumen naturae: visions of space in art and mathematics. Springer, ChamGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    de Ory JA (2014) Chillida, el desocupador del espacio. Escritura e imagen 10:366–371Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Moliner M, Corma A (2018) General aspects on structure and reactivity of framework and extraframework metals in zeolite materials. Struct Bond 178:53–90Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ziolek M, Sobczak I, Trejda M et al (2018) Structure and reactivity of zeolites containing group five elements (V, Nb, Ta). Struct Bond 178:179–250Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sankar G, Sánchez-Sánchez M (2018) Metal-substituted microporous aluminophosphates. Struct Bond 178:251–304Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Armor JN (1998) Metal-exchanged zeolites as catalysts. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 22:451–456Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rabo JA (ed) (1976) Zeolite chemistry and catalysis, ACS monograph 171, American Chemical Society, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jacobs PA (1977) Carboniogenic activity of zeolites. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jacobs PA, Uytterhoeven JB (1973) Assignment of the hydroxyl bands in the infrared spectra of zeolites X and Y. J Chem Soc Faraday Trans I 69:359–372Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Barthomeuf DJ (1977) Description of a characteristic infrared frequency for acidic hydroxy-groups in zeolites. J Chem Soc Chem Commun. 743–744Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mortier WJ (1978) Zeolite electronegativity related to physicochemical properties. J Catal 55:138–145Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pauling L (1948) The nature of the chemical bond. Cornell University Press, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sanderson RT (1976) Chemical bonds and bond energy, 2nd edn. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jacobs PA, Mortier WJ, Uytterhoeven JB (1978) Properties of zeolites in relation to their electronegativity: acidity, carboniogenic activity and strength of interaction in transition metal complexes. J Inorg Nucl Chem 40:1919–1923Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jacobs PA, Mortier WJ (1982) An attempt to rationalize stretching frequencies of lattice hydroxyl groups in hydrogen-zeolites. Zeolites 2:226–230Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chu TW, Chang CD (1985) Isomorphous substitution in zeolite frameworks. 1. Acidity of surface hydroxyls in [B]-, [Fe]- [Ga]-, and [Al]-ZSM-5. J Phys Chem 89:1569–1571Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Scholle KFMGJ, Veeman WS (1985) The influence of hydration on the coordination state of boron in H-boralite studied by 11B magic angle spinning n.m.r. Zeolites 5:118–122Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Datka J, Kawalek M (1993) Strength of Bronsted acid sites in boralites. J Chem Soc Faraday Trans 89:1829–1831Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vorbeck G, Jänchen J, Parlitz B et al (1994) Synthesis and characterization of crystalline indosilicates with the MFI structure. Chem Commun 123–124Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Berndt H, Martin A, Kosslick H et al (1994) Comparison of the acidic properties of ZSM-5 zeolites isomorphously substituted by Ga, In, B and Fe. Microporous Mater 2:197–204Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Han S, Schmitt KD, Chang CD (2000) Why In3+ is not isomorphously substituted into zeolite ZSM-5: reaction of ZSM-5 with aqueous InF3. Inorg Chim Acta 304:297–300Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wang Y, Zhou D, Yang G et al (2004) A DFT study on isomorphously substituted MCM-22 zeolite. J Phys Chem A 108:6730–6734Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Meepraseert J, Jungsuttiwong S, Namuangruk S (2013) Location and acidity of Bronsted acid sites in isomorphously substituted LTL zeolite: a periodic density functional study. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 175:99–106Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kang L, Deng W, Zang T et al (2008) Theoretical studies of IM-12 zeolite for acidic catalysis. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 115:261–266Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Patet RE, Koehle M, Lobo RF et al (2017) General acid-type catalysis in the dehydrative aromatization of furans to aromatics in H-[Al]-BEA, H-[Fe]-BEA, H-[Ga]-BEA, and H-[B]-BEA zeolites. J Phys Chem C 121:13666–13679Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Vitvarová D, Kurfiřtová L, Kubů M et al (2014) Catalytic applications and FTIR investigation of zeolite SSZ-33 after isomorphous substitution. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 194:174–182Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pearson RG (1988) Absolute electronegativity and hardness: application to inorganic chemistry. Inorg Chem 27:734–740Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sanderson RT (1986) The “inert-pair” effect on electronegativity. Inorg Chem 25:1856–1858Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sanderson RT (1986) Electronegativity and bonding of transitional elements. Inorg Chem 25:3518–3522Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Langenaeker W, Coussement N, De Proft F et al (1994) Quantum chemical study of the influence of isomorphous substitution on the catalytic activity of zeolites: an evaluation of reactivity indexes. J Phys Chem 98:3010–3014Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Geerlings P, De Proft F, Langenaeker W (2003) Conceptual density functional theory. Chem Rev 103:1793–1873Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Parr RG, Pearson RG (1983) Absolute hardness: companion parameter to absolute electronegativity. J Am Chem Soc 105:7512–7516Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Villaescusa L, Barrett P, Camblor MA (1999) A new pure silica polymorph with a three-dimensional system of large pore channels. Angew Chem Int Ed 38:1997–2000Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Cantin A, Corma A, Díaz-Cabañas M et al (2004) A new synthesis route or the tridirectional 12 ring channel zeolite ITQ-7. Stud Surf Sci Catal 154:481–488Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Skorpa R, Bordiga S, Bleken F et al (2011) Assessing the surface sites of the large pore 3-dimensional microporous material H-ITQ-7 using FT-IR spectroscopy and molecular probes. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 141:146–156Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Chakarova K, Andonova S, Dimitrov L et al (2016) FTIR study of CO and N2 adsorption on [Ge]FAU zeolites in their Na- and H-form. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 220:188–197Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Moliner M, Diaz-Cabañas MJ, Fornes V et al (2008) Synthesis methodology, stability, acidity, and catalytic behavior of the 18 × 10 member ring pores ITQ-33 zeolite. J Catal 254:101–109Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Zwijnenburg MA, Huenerbein R, Bell RG et al (2006) A computational study into the (tetrahedral) distortion of TX2 α-quartz materials: the effect of changing the chemical composition away from SiO2. J Sol State Chem 179:3429–3436Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Taramasso M, Perego G, Notari B (1983) US Patent 4 410 501Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Bellussi G, Millini R (2018) Background and recent advances in Ti-containing zeolite materials. Struct Bond 178:1–52Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Camblor MA, Corma A, Martinez A et al (1992) Synthesis of a titaniumsilicoaluminate isomorphous to zeolite beta and its applications as a catalyst for the selective oxidation of large organic molecules. J Chem Soc Chem Commun (8):589–590Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Corma A, Nemeth LT, Renz M et al (2001) Sn-zeolite beta as a heterogeneous chemoselective catalyst for Baeyer-Villiger oxidations. Nature 412:423–425Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Roman-Leshkov Y, Moliner M, Labinger JA et al (2010) Mechanism of glucose isomerization using a solid Lewis acid catalyst in water. Angew Chem Int Ed 49:8954–8957Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Berlier G, Crocellà V, Signorile M et al (2018) Characterization of metal centers in zeolites for partial oxidation reactions. Struct Bond 178:91–154Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Boronat M, Corma A, Renz M et al (2005) A multisites molecular mechanism for Baeyer-Villiger oxidations on solid catalysts using environmentally friendly H2O2 as oxidant. Chem Eur J 11:6905–6915Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Boronat M, Corma A, Renz M et al (2006) Predicting the activity of single isolated Lewis acid sites in solid catalysts. Chem Eur J 12:7067–7077Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Yan G, Zhou L, Han X (2012) Lewis and Brönsted acidic sites in M4+-doped zeolites (M = Ti, Zr, Ge, Sn, Pb) as well as interactions with probe molecules. A DFT study. J Mol Cat A Chem 363–364:371–379Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Shannon RD (1976) Revised effective ionic radii and systematic studies of interatomic distances in halides and chalcogenides. Acta Cryst A 32:751–767Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Gunther RW, Michaelis VK, Griffin RG et al (2016) Interrogating the Lewis acidity of metal sites in beta zeolites with 15N pyridine adsorption coupled with MAS NMR spectroscopy. J Phys Chem C 120:28533–28544Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Wilson ST, Lok BM, Flanigen EM (1982) US Patent 4 310 440Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Corà F, Catlow CRA (2001) Ionicity and framework stability of crystalline aluminophosphates. J Phys Chem B 105:10278–10281Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Corà F, Alfredsson M, Barker CM et al (2003) Modelling the framework stability and catalytic activity of pure and transition metal-doped zeotypes. J Solid State Chem 176:496–529Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Li J, Yu J, Xu R (2012) Progress in heteroatom-containing aluminophosphate molecular sieves. Proc R Soc A 468:1955–1967Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Liu X, Yan N, Wang L et al (2019) Landscape of AlPO-based structures and compositions in the database of zeolite structures. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 280:105–115Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Flanigen EM, Lok BM, Patton RL et al (1986) Aluminophosphate molecular sieves and the periodic table. Stud Surf Sci Catal 28:103–112Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Maurelli S, Vishnuvarthan M, Chiesa M et al (2011) Elucidating the nature and reactivity of Ti ions incorporated in the framework of AlPO-5 molecular sieves. New evidence from 31P HYSCORE spectroscopy. J Am Chem Soc 133:7640–7343Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Maurelli S, Vishnuvarthan M, Berlier G et al (2012) NH3 and O2 interaction with tetrahedral Ti3+ ions isomorphously substituted in the framework of TiAlPO-5. A combined pulse EPR, pulse ENDOR, UV-Vis and FT-IR study. Phys Chem Chem Phys 14:987–995Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Alfayate A, Sánchez-Sánchez M, Pérez-Pariente J (2014) Incorporation of Ti(III) into the AlPO-5 framework by direct synthesis. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 190:334–345Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Arends IWCE, Sheldon RA, Wallau M et al (1997) Oxidative transformations of organic compounds mediated by redox molecular sieves. Angew Chem Int Ed 36:1144–1163Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Thomas JM, Raja R, Sankar G et al (1999) Molecular-sieve catalysts for the selective oxidation of linear alkanes by molecular oxygen. Nature 398:227–230Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Hartmann M, Ernst S (2000) Selective oxidations of linear alkanes with molecular oxygen on molecular sieve catalysts – a breakthrough? Angew Chem Int Ed 39:888–890Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Modén B, Oliviero L, Dakka J et al (2004) Structural and functional characterization of redox Mn and Co sites in alpo materials and their role in alkane oxidation catalysis. J Phys Chem B 108:5552–5563Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Thomas JM, Raja R, Sankar G et al (2001) Molecular sieve catalysts for the regioselective and shape-selective oxyfunctionalization of alkanes in air. Acc Chem Res 34:191–200Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Saadoune I, Corà F, Alfredsson M et al (2003) Computational study of the structural and electronic properties of dopant ions in microporous AlPOs. 2. Redox catalytic activity of trivalent transition metal ions. J Phys Chem B 107:3012–3018Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Gómez-Hortigüela L, Corà F, Sankar G et al (2010) Catalytic reaction mechanism of Mn-doped nanoporous aluminophosphates for the aerobic oxidation of hydrocarbons. Chem Eur J 16:13638–13645Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Gómez-Hortigüela L, Corà F, Catlow CRA (2013) Complementary mechanistic properties of Fe- and Mn-doped aluminophosphates in the catalytic aerobic oxidation of hydrocarbons. Phys Chem Chem Phys 15:6870–6874Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Wang C-M, Brogaard RY, Xie Z-K et al (2015) Transition-state scaling relations in zeolite catalysis: influence of framework topology and acid-site reactivity. Catal Sci Technol 5:2814–2820Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Mortén M, Mentel L, Lazzarini A et al (2018) A systematic study of isomorphically substituted H-MAlPO-5 materials for the methanol-to-hydrocarbons reaction. ChemPhysChem 19:484–495Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Wang Y, Li Y, Yan Y et al (2013) Luminiscent carbon dots in a new magnesium aluminophosphate zeolite. Chem Commun 49:9006–9008Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Harrison WTA, Gier TE, Stucky GD et al (1996) NaZnPO4·H2O, an open-framework sodium zincophosphate with a new chiral tetrahedral framework topology. Chem Mater 8:145–151Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Lin L, Slater B, Yan Y et al (2019) Necessity of heteroatoms for realizing hypothetical aluminophosphate zeolites: a high-throughput computational approach. J Phys Chem Lett 10:1411–1415Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Chen J, Jones RH, Natarajan S et al (1994) A novel open-framework cobalt phosphate containing a tetrahedrally coordinated cobalt(II) center: CoPO4·0.5C2H10N2. Angew Chem Int Ed 33:639–640Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Walter F (1992) Weinebeneite, CaBe3(PO4)2(OH)2·4H2O, a new mineral species – mineral data and crystal structure. Eur J Mineral 4:1275–1283Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Girard S, Gale JD, Mellot-Draznieks C et al (2002) Framework stability of nanoporous inorganic structures upon template extraction and calcination: a theoretical study of gallophosphate polymorphs. J Am Chem Soc 124:1040–1051Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Estermann M, McCusker LB, Baerlocher C et al (1991) A synthetic gallophosphate molecular sieve with a 20-tetrahedral-atom pore opening. Nature 352:320–323Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Wei Y, Tian ZJ, Gies H et al (2010) Ionothermal synthesis of an aluminophosphate molecular sieve with 20-ring pore openings. Angew Chem Int Ed 49:5367–5370Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Chippindale AM, Cowley AR (1997) CoGaPO-5: synthesis and crystal structure of (C6N2H14)(2)[Co4Ga5P9O36], a microporous cobalt-gallium phosphate with a novel framework topology. Zeolites 18:176–181Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Josien L, Simon Masseron A, Gramlich V et al (2003) Synthesis and crystal structure of IM-6, a new open framework cobalt-gallium phosphate with ten- and twelve-membered pore openings. Chem Eur J 9:856–861Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Cowley AR, Chippindale AM (1999) CGS: cobalt and zinc gallophosphates with a new open-framework topology. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 28:163–172Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Lee YJ, Kim SJ, Wu G et al (1999) Structural characterization of the gallosilicate TsG-1, K10Ga10Si22O64·5H2O, with the CGS framework topology. Chem Mater 11:879–880Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Hong SB, Kim SH, Kim YG et al (1999) Synthesis of microporous gallosilicates with the CGS topology. J Mater Chem 9:2287–2289Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Bellussi G, Carati A, Rizzo C (2013) New trends in the synthesis of crystalline microporous materials. Catal Sci Technol 3:833–857Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Brunner GO, Meier WM (1989) Framework density distribution of zeolite-type tetrahedral nets. Nature 337:146–147Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Li J, Corma A, Yu J (2015) Synthesis of new zeolite structures. Chem Soc Rev 44:7112–7127Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Corma A, Navarro MT, Rey F et al (2001) Pure polymorph C of zeolite beta synthesized by using framework isomorphous substitution as a structure-directing mechanism. Angew Chem Int Ed 40:2277–2280Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Kamakoti P, Barckholtz TA (2007) Role of germanium in the formation of double four rings in zeolites. J Phys Chem C 111:3575–3583Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Li Y, Yu J (2014) New stories of zeolite structures: their descriptions, determinations, predictions, and evaluations. Chem Rev 114:7268–7316Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luis Gómez-Hortigüela
    • 1
  • Joaquín Pérez-Pariente
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Instituto de Catálisis y Petroleoquímica (ICP-CSIC)MadridSpain

Personalised recommendations