# Reticular design: building units, linkers and nets

> Reticular design of metal–organic frameworks on one page: MOF-5 from Zn₄O units and BDC on the pcu net, HKUST-1 deconstructed into the tbo net, UiO-66 on fcu, the library of inorganic SBUs and organic linkers by their points of extension, and the RCSR nets of well-known MOFs. Every statement and number is quoted from the cited papers.

- Page: https://www.labcanvas.com/templates/mof-guides/reticular-design-building-units-linkers-nets
- Open in the LabCanvas editor (LabCanvas account): https://www.labcanvas.com/editor.html?template=mof-reticular-design-topology
- Updated: 2026-10-14
- Category: MOF guides
- Method: Reticular design and topology
- Product: Frameworks designed from building units and nets: MOF-5, HKUST-1, UiO-66 and their relatives
- Key result: Building units, nets and frameworks drawn by LabCanvas from the cited structures and RCSR nets; net drawings are idealised embeddings, and no panel is a crystal structure refinement
- Figure: 1920 × 1080 px, 45 editable layers (6 generated objects with settings)

## Steps

1. **Building units to MOF-5**: Secondary building units direct the assembly of ordered frameworks, reticular synthesis, giving materials designed to have predetermined structures, compositions and properties (Yaghi 2003). The geometric and chemical attributes of the SBUs and linkers lead to prediction of the framework topology (Eddaoudi 2001). Links have two points of extension, nodes three or more; for a given set of building units the edge-transitive nets, the default topologies, are the most likely to form (Kalmutzki 2018). MOF-5 is built from octahedral Zn–O–C clusters and benzene links (Eddaoudi 2002); pcu MOFs are isoreticular to MOF-5 (Wang 2025)
2. **Deconstructing HKUST-1**: A MOF can be represented as a periodic net: its polyatomic groups act as the vertices and edges (O’Keeffe 2008). The simple net does not distinguish vertices of the same connectivity but different geometry; the augmented net keeps the building units’ shapes, angles and distances (Kalmutzki 2018). Known MOFs can be deconstructed into more elaborate building units, polyhedra or layers, related to edge-transitive nets (Guillerm 2014). [Cu₃(TMA)₂(H₂O)₃]ₙ joins [Cu₂(O₂CR)₄] units into channels with a pore size of 1 nm (Chui 1999); HKUST-1 has the tbo topology (Kong 2013)
3. **UiO-66 on fcu**: UiO-66 is built from 12-c Zr₆ SBUs connected by linear ditopic BDC linkers (Kalmutzki 2018); MOFs isoreticular to the UiO MOFs have 12-connected Zr₆O₄(OH)₄(CO₂)₁₂ clusters and the fcu topology (Stewart 2017). Zr₆ clusters and the porphyrin TCPP give 12-connected MOF-525 (ftw) and 6-connected PCN-224 (she) at room temperature, and at 145 °C 8-connected PCN-222 (csq), the data suggesting PCN-222 is the thermodynamic product (Gong 2019)
4. **Inorganic SBUs**: Secondary building units are molecular complexes and cluster entities that polytopic linkers join into extended porous networks (Eddaoudi 2001); the geometries, connectivity and composition of 131 metal carboxylate SBUs were catalogued from the Cambridge Structural Database (Tranchemontagne 2009). Cu(II) paddlewheels are bridged by four carboxylates (Lin 2009); trigonal-prismatic Fe₃O(CO₂)₆ clusters build MOF-235 (Sudik 2005); Zr₆ clusters are six-connected in PCN-224 (Feng 2013), 8-c in PCN-222 (Gong 2019), and Zr₆ clusters linked by porphyrins gave MOF-525 and MOF-545 (Morris 2012); rod-shaped SBUs (Rosi 2005) are found, for example, in the MOF-74 family (Kalmutzki 2018)
5. **Organic linkers**: BDC is a linear ditopic linker and BTC a trigonal planar one; TCPP and the rectangular TBAPy are tetratopic (Kalmutzki 2018). BTB is triangular (Zhang 2015); BPTC gave MOF-501 and MOF-502 (Chen 2005); a trigonal tri-isophthalate hexacarboxylate is the trigonal building block of rht-MOFs (Luebke 2012)
6. **Nets of well-known MOFs**: The RCSR database collects about 1600 nets, each with a symbol (O’Keeffe 2008). Examples: pcu, MOF-5 (Wang 2025); sod, ZIF-8 (Tan 2012); tbo, HKUST-1 (Kong 2013); fcu, UiO-66 (Stewart 2017); nbo, MOF-505 (Gao 2014); acs, MOF-235 (Sudik 2005); qom, MOF-177 (Zhang 2015); csq, PCN-222 (Gong 2019); rht, rht-MOF (Luebke 2012). Heated in solution, MOF-501 (NbO net) turns into the more thermodynamically favoured MOF-502 (PtS net) (Chen 2005)

## Strengths

- The geometric and chemical attributes of the SBUs and linkers lead to prediction of the framework topology (Eddaoudi 2001)
- For a given set of building units the edge-transitive nets are the most likely to form (Kalmutzki 2018)
- Reticular synthesis gives materials designed to have predetermined structures, compositions and properties (Yaghi 2003)

## Limitations

- The simple net does not distinguish vertices of the same connectivity but different geometry (Kalmutzki 2018)
- MOF-177 joined Zn₄O and BTB units on the qom net, where pyrite and rutile nets had been expected (Zhang 2015)
- Zr₆ clusters and TCPP give several frameworks depending on the conditions (Gong 2019)

## References

1. Yaghi et al., “Reticular synthesis and the design of new materials”, Nature 2003. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01650 (primary)
2. Eddaoudi et al., “Modular chemistry: secondary building units as a basis for the design of highly porous and robust metal–organic carboxylate frameworks”, Acc. Chem. Res. 2001. https://doi.org/10.1021/ar000034b (primary)
3. Kalmutzki, Hanikel & Yaghi, “Secondary building units as the turning point in the development of the reticular chemistry of MOFs”, Sci. Adv. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aat9180 (primary)
4. Eddaoudi et al., “Systematic design of pore size and functionality in isoreticular MOFs and their application in methane storage”, Science 2002. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1067208 (primary)
5. Wang et al., “Machine learning-assisted exploration of chemical space of MOF-5 analogs for enhanced C₂H₆/C₂H₄ separation”, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.202500783 (primary)
6. O’Keeffe et al., “The Reticular Chemistry Structure Resource (RCSR) database of, and symbols for, crystal nets”, Acc. Chem. Res. 2008. https://doi.org/10.1021/ar800124u (primary)
7. Guillerm et al., “A supermolecular building approach for the design and construction of metal–organic frameworks”, Chem. Soc. Rev. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1039/c4cs00135d (primary)
8. Chui et al., “A chemically functionalizable nanoporous material”, Science 1999. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.283.5405.1148 (primary)
9. Kong et al., “Expanded organic building units for the construction of highly porous metal-organic frameworks”, Chem. Eur. J. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1002/chem.201302515 (primary)
10. Stewart et al., “A zirconium metal-organic framework with an exceptionally high volumetric surface area”, Dalton Trans. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1039/c7dt03394j (primary)
11. Gong et al., “Interrogating kinetic versus thermodynamic topologies of metal-organic frameworks via combined transmission electron microscopy and X-ray diffraction analysis”, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1021/jacs.9b01789 (primary)
12. Tranchemontagne et al., “Secondary building units, nets and bonding in the chemistry of metal-organic frameworks”, Chem. Soc. Rev. 2009. https://doi.org/10.1039/b817735j (primary)
13. Lin et al., “High capacity hydrogen adsorption in Cu(II) tetracarboxylate framework materials: the role of pore size, ligand functionalization, and exposed metal sites”, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja806624j (primary)
14. Sudik, Côté & Yaghi, “Metal-organic frameworks based on trigonal prismatic building blocks and the new "acs" topology”, Inorg. Chem. 2005. https://doi.org/10.1021/ic050064g (primary)
15. Feng et al., “Construction of ultrastable porphyrin Zr metal-organic frameworks through linker elimination”, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja408084j (primary)
16. Morris et al., “Synthesis, structure, and metalation of two new highly porous zirconium metal-organic frameworks”, Inorg. Chem. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1021/ic300825s (primary)
17. Rosi et al., “Rod packings and metal-organic frameworks constructed from rod-shaped secondary building units”, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja045123o (primary)
18. Zhang et al., “Introduction of functionality, selection of topology, and enhancement of gas adsorption in multivariate metal-organic framework-177”, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja512311a (primary)
19. Chen et al., “Transformation of a metal-organic framework from the NbO to PtS net”, Inorg. Chem. 2005. https://doi.org/10.1021/ic048612y (primary)
20. Luebke et al., “The unique rht-MOF platform, ideal for pinpointing the functionalization and CO₂ adsorption relationship”, Chem. Commun. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1039/c1cc15962c (primary)
21. Tan et al., “Exceptionally low shear modulus in a prototypical imidazole-based metal-organic framework”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.095502 (primary)
22. Gao et al., “Crystal engineering of an nbo topology metal-organic framework for chemical fixation of CO₂ under ambient conditions”, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.201309778 (primary)

Credit: Drawn by LabCanvas after Yaghi et al., Nature 2003 (doi:10.1038/nature01650), Eddaoudi et al., Acc. Chem. Res. 2001, Kalmutzki, Hanikel & Yaghi, Sci. Adv. 2018 and O’Keeffe et al., Acc. Chem. Res. 2008, and the papers in the details.

## Questions

**What does the “Reticular design: building units, linkers and nets” template show?** Reticular design of metal–organic frameworks on one page: MOF-5 from Zn₄O units and BDC on the pcu net, HKUST-1 deconstructed into the tbo net, UiO-66 on fcu, the library of inorganic SBUs and organic linkers by their points of extension, and the RCSR nets of well-known MOFs. Every statement and number is quoted from the cited papers.

**What are the steps shown in “Reticular design: building units, linkers and nets”?** 1. Building units to MOF-5: Secondary building units direct the assembly of ordered frameworks, reticular synthesis, giving materials designed to have predetermined structures, compositions and properties (Yaghi 2003). The geometric and chemical attributes of the SBUs and linkers lead to prediction of the framework topology (Eddaoudi 2001). Links have two points of extension, nodes three or more; for a given set of building units the edge-transitive nets, the default topologies, are the most likely to form (Kalmutzki 2018). MOF-5 is built from octahedral Zn–O–C clusters and benzene links (Eddaoudi 2002); pcu MOFs are isoreticular to MOF-5 (Wang 2025). 2. Deconstructing HKUST-1: A MOF can be represented as a periodic net: its polyatomic groups act as the vertices and edges (O’Keeffe 2008). The simple net does not distinguish vertices of the same connectivity but different geometry; the augmented net keeps the building units’ shapes, angles and distances (Kalmutzki 2018). Known MOFs can be deconstructed into more elaborate building units, polyhedra or layers, related to edge-transitive nets (Guillerm 2014). [Cu₃(TMA)₂(H₂O)₃]ₙ joins [Cu₂(O₂CR)₄] units into channels with a pore size of 1 nm (Chui 1999); HKUST-1 has the tbo topology (Kong 2013). 3. UiO-66 on fcu: UiO-66 is built from 12-c Zr₆ SBUs connected by linear ditopic BDC linkers (Kalmutzki 2018); MOFs isoreticular to the UiO MOFs have 12-connected Zr₆O₄(OH)₄(CO₂)₁₂ clusters and the fcu topology (Stewart 2017). Zr₆ clusters and the porphyrin TCPP give 12-connected MOF-525 (ftw) and 6-connected PCN-224 (she) at room temperature, and at 145 °C 8-connected PCN-222 (csq), the data suggesting PCN-222 is the thermodynamic product (Gong 2019). 4. Inorganic SBUs: Secondary building units are molecular complexes and cluster entities that polytopic linkers join into extended porous networks (Eddaoudi 2001); the geometries, connectivity and composition of 131 metal carboxylate SBUs were catalogued from the Cambridge Structural Database (Tranchemontagne 2009). Cu(II) paddlewheels are bridged by four carboxylates (Lin 2009); trigonal-prismatic Fe₃O(CO₂)₆ clusters build MOF-235 (Sudik 2005); Zr₆ clusters are six-connected in PCN-224 (Feng 2013), 8-c in PCN-222 (Gong 2019), and Zr₆ clusters linked by porphyrins gave MOF-525 and MOF-545 (Morris 2012); rod-shaped SBUs (Rosi 2005) are found, for example, in the MOF-74 family (Kalmutzki 2018). 5. Organic linkers: BDC is a linear ditopic linker and BTC a trigonal planar one; TCPP and the rectangular TBAPy are tetratopic (Kalmutzki 2018). BTB is triangular (Zhang 2015); BPTC gave MOF-501 and MOF-502 (Chen 2005); a trigonal tri-isophthalate hexacarboxylate is the trigonal building block of rht-MOFs (Luebke 2012). 6. Nets of well-known MOFs: The RCSR database collects about 1600 nets, each with a symbol (O’Keeffe 2008). Examples: pcu, MOF-5 (Wang 2025); sod, ZIF-8 (Tan 2012); tbo, HKUST-1 (Kong 2013); fcu, UiO-66 (Stewart 2017); nbo, MOF-505 (Gao 2014); acs, MOF-235 (Sudik 2005); qom, MOF-177 (Zhang 2015); csq, PCN-222 (Gong 2019); rht, rht-MOF (Luebke 2012). Heated in solution, MOF-501 (NbO net) turns into the more thermodynamically favoured MOF-502 (PtS net) (Chen 2005).

**Which papers is “Reticular design: building units, linkers and nets” based on?** Yaghi et al., “Reticular synthesis and the design of new materials”, Nature 2003 (doi:10.1038/nature01650); Eddaoudi et al., “Modular chemistry: secondary building units as a basis for the design of highly porous and robust metal–organic carboxylate frameworks”, Acc. Chem. Res. 2001 (doi:10.1021/ar000034b); Kalmutzki, Hanikel & Yaghi, “Secondary building units as the turning point in the development of the reticular chemistry of MOFs”, Sci. Adv. 2018 (doi:10.1126/sciadv.aat9180); Eddaoudi et al., “Systematic design of pore size and functionality in isoreticular MOFs and their application in methane storage”, Science 2002 (doi:10.1126/science.1067208); Wang et al., “Machine learning-assisted exploration of chemical space of MOF-5 analogs for enhanced C₂H₆/C₂H₄ separation”, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2025 (doi:10.1002/anie.202500783); O’Keeffe et al., “The Reticular Chemistry Structure Resource (RCSR) database of, and symbols for, crystal nets”, Acc. Chem. Res. 2008 (doi:10.1021/ar800124u); Guillerm et al., “A supermolecular building approach for the design and construction of metal–organic frameworks”, Chem. Soc. Rev. 2014 (doi:10.1039/c4cs00135d); Chui et al., “A chemically functionalizable nanoporous material”, Science 1999 (doi:10.1126/science.283.5405.1148); Kong et al., “Expanded organic building units for the construction of highly porous metal-organic frameworks”, Chem. Eur. J. 2013 (doi:10.1002/chem.201302515); Stewart et al., “A zirconium metal-organic framework with an exceptionally high volumetric surface area”, Dalton Trans. 2017 (doi:10.1039/c7dt03394j); Gong et al., “Interrogating kinetic versus thermodynamic topologies of metal-organic frameworks via combined transmission electron microscopy and X-ray diffraction analysis”, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2019 (doi:10.1021/jacs.9b01789); Tranchemontagne et al., “Secondary building units, nets and bonding in the chemistry of metal-organic frameworks”, Chem. Soc. Rev. 2009 (doi:10.1039/b817735j); Lin et al., “High capacity hydrogen adsorption in Cu(II) tetracarboxylate framework materials: the role of pore size, ligand functionalization, and exposed metal sites”, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009 (doi:10.1021/ja806624j); Sudik, Côté & Yaghi, “Metal-organic frameworks based on trigonal prismatic building blocks and the new "acs" topology”, Inorg. Chem. 2005 (doi:10.1021/ic050064g); Feng et al., “Construction of ultrastable porphyrin Zr metal-organic frameworks through linker elimination”, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2013 (doi:10.1021/ja408084j); Morris et al., “Synthesis, structure, and metalation of two new highly porous zirconium metal-organic frameworks”, Inorg. Chem. 2012 (doi:10.1021/ic300825s); Rosi et al., “Rod packings and metal-organic frameworks constructed from rod-shaped secondary building units”, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005 (doi:10.1021/ja045123o); Zhang et al., “Introduction of functionality, selection of topology, and enhancement of gas adsorption in multivariate metal-organic framework-177”, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2015 (doi:10.1021/ja512311a); Chen et al., “Transformation of a metal-organic framework from the NbO to PtS net”, Inorg. Chem. 2005 (doi:10.1021/ic048612y); Luebke et al., “The unique rht-MOF platform, ideal for pinpointing the functionalization and CO₂ adsorption relationship”, Chem. Commun. 2012 (doi:10.1039/c1cc15962c); Tan et al., “Exceptionally low shear modulus in a prototypical imidazole-based metal-organic framework”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2012 (doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.095502); Gao et al., “Crystal engineering of an nbo topology metal-organic framework for chemical fixation of CO₂ under ambient conditions”, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2014 (doi:10.1002/anie.201309778).

**Can I edit the “Reticular design: building units, linkers and nets” template?** Yes. Open it in the LabCanvas editor: all 45 layers are editable, including 6 generated objects (structures, plots, equipment) with their own settings. Change the text, colours and layout, then export PNG, TIFF, SVG or PDF.

**Do I need an account to use this template?** Not to view it here. To open and edit it, sign in to LabCanvas or create a free account (the free plan keeps up to 3 designs). Downloading the figure is part of LabCanvas Pro (US$19 a month or US$199 a year).