Screen MOF libraries at R²>0.998, one calibration per material.

Academic labs · PMC-1 / EMC-2 (paramagnetic)

The indirect method

Three places the by-difference number lets you down.

01
Library screening throttled by per-sample method development.
02
Liquid-phase uptake hard to measure cleanly at scale.
03
Reviewers want direct evidence, not by-difference inference.

The direct read

Screen the whole library on evidence a reviewer will accept.

Calibrate once per material, then read liquid-phase loading directly across the whole library. The data holds up under review, because it is weighed rather than inferred.

One screening pass across the whole library, shaded by directly-read loading.

The proof

Anchored to granted IP and peer-reviewed work.

The peer-reviewed work behind this field, linked so you can read it yourself. The patents covering the method live on the science page.

10.5772/intechopen.1013520 10.1039/D2QI01994A

How we start

A feasibility check, then a use case defined with you.

Start a feasibility check

1Send 3–5 samples
2We run direct liquid-phase tests
3You get loading / release + ranking
4Together we define the use case

Ready when you are

See what's really on the solid for academic labs.

Start with a feasibility check. We tell you whether the method fits your material, and work out the use case together.

Book a sorption study Talk to the lab