Dear Sir,

You would have read this recent article by IUPAC to minimize the complications in the naming of MOFs and CPs entitled "Coordination polymers, metal–organic frameworks and the need for terminology guidelines". Link is

http://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlepdf/2012/ce/c2ce06488j

http://www.iupac.org/fileadmin/user_upload/databases/2009-012-2-200-short-review.pdf

In these review articles they have explained the difference between polymers and coordination polymers as well..

Also please go through the attached articles herewith.

Regards:

Pradip Pachfule

Coordination polymer means, a polymer substance in which the monomers are some metal complexes (coordination complexes) with bridging ligands. The bridging ligands like carboxylic acids will usually forms coordination polymers.

Coordination polymer is a coordination compound, usually containing metal centers connected by ligands. They are obtained as crystalline solid compounds and have definite melting (or decomposition) points. The structure is similar to that of 'classical polymer, in other words, infinite. The term "coordination polymer" is used to distingush it from other organic and inorganic polymers.

I agree with whats already been said, but add another perspective for thought. Normally a polymer contains a covalent backbone and fragmentation typically requires breakage of strong bonds whether C-C or C-O for organic polymers or Si-O (as an example) for inorganic polymers so the polymers have well defined molecular weights in solution because typically the bonds are not readily cleaved. In a coordination polymer the metal-ligand bond (M-L) is often dative covalent (a 'coordinate bond') and M-L bonding is often weaker so that the polymer may dissociate in solution into smaller units. The extent to which this occurs depends on the strength of the M-L bond and the rate of dissociation which is sensitive to the electronic configuration of the transition metal.

Dear Sir,

You would have read this recent article by IUPAC to minimize the complications in the naming of MOFs and CPs entitled "Coordination polymers, metal–organic frameworks and the need for terminology guidelines". Link is

http://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlepdf/2012/ce/c2ce06488j

http://www.iupac.org/fileadmin/user_upload/databases/2009-012-2-200-short-review.pdf

In these review articles they have explained the difference between polymers and coordination polymers as well..

Also please go through the attached articles herewith.

Regards:

Pradip Pachfule

Let me add some details related to spectroscopic (NMR, XRD, and FTIR) data. Polymers can exist even with phase change (e.g. from solid to liquid, from liquid to vapor, etc.), nevertheless coordination polymers could break their metallic or semimetallic coordination sphere while changing from solid to liquid or from liquid to vapor due to solvation of coordination monomers or breaking of labile coordinative bonding thus also forming coordinative monomers. In order to track these differences just follow NMR chemical shift changes in shielding-deshielding due to coordinative changes. E.g. a metallic center with coordination number of seven or six measured in XRD or CPMAS-NMR changes to five in solution of non-coordinating solvents. For examples of this regarding tin chemistry please see the following contributions, use chemical analogy ion order to explain your own results:

Use of bis-aminoalcohol benzoquinones and dihydroxybenzoquinones in the formation of mono and polymeric structures of diorganotin(IV) derivatives

Journal of Organometallic Chemistry, vol. 696, no. 10, pp. 1949–1956, 2011

Structure and conformational motion of seven-coordinate diorganotin(IV) complexes derived from salen and salan type ligands

Journal of Organometallic Chemistry, vol. 694, no. 24, pp. 3965–3972, 2009

Sequence of metal-organic oligomer-polymer exchange equilibria in solution: Supramolecular isomerism, self-assembly dynamics and carboxylate shift of di-n-butyltin cis-1,4-cyclohexanedicarboxylate

European Journal of Inorganic Chemistry, no. 8, pp. 1200–1204, 2008

A bis(di-n-butyltin)-quinone derivative as a simultaneous chemo- and bioactive corrosion inhibitor

European Journal of Inorganic Chemistry, no. 7, pp. 927–930, 2007

Structural and conformational analysis of neutral dinuclear diorganotin(IV) complexes derived from hexadentate Schiff base ligands

Journal of Organometallic Chemistry, vol. 692, no. 4, pp. 731–739, 2007

The difference is that a coordination polymer is sustained by means of coordinate bonds as It is build of metal centers and bridging ligands coordinated to them. Polymer, although being a common denomination for all infinite systems, is generally used for those sustained by covalent bonds (infinite organic molecules).

As a continuation to Dr. Pradip's comments, I want to add a paper that appeared in CGD.

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/cg801381p

My concern is that if the molecular weight of polymer is for the entire macromolecular system, for coordination polymer it is that of the asymmetric unit. Though it is a polymer in a sense, is it of worth to call it as 'a polymer' with a molecular weight of ~400 or so... which is the molecular weight of a monomer itself.

With the help of coordination polymer we can prepare the bulk solution which can not be obtained in case of simple polymer.

Are the coordination polymers same as molecular organic framework....?