Coordination Chemistry
1. Crystal Field Theory
1.1 The Crystal Field Concept
Definition 1 (Crystal Field Theory): A model in which ligands are treated as point charges (or point dipoles) that interact electrostatically with the orbitals of the central metal ion.
1.2 Octahedral Complexes
In an octahedral field, the five orbitals split into two groups:
Theorem 1 (Octahedral Crystal Field Splitting):
- orbitals (, ): Higher energy, point directly at ligands.
- orbitals (, , ): Lower energy, point between ligands.
The barycenter (weighted average) is preserved: .
Example 1: For (), the single electron occupies . The absorption at 20,300 cm gives cm = 243 kJ/mol.
1.3 Tetrahedral Complexes
Theorem 2 (Tetrahedral Crystal Field Splitting):
The splitting is inverted and smaller:
- orbitals (lower): ,
- orbitals (higher): , ,
1.4 Square Planar Complexes
Derived from octahedral by removing the two axial ligands. The -orbital energies:
Square planar complexes are common for metals (Ni, Pd, Pt, Au).
| Geometry | Most stable -electron count | Common metals |
|---|---|---|
| Octahedral | , (low-spin) | Cr, Co |
| Tetrahedral | , (high-spin) | Zn, Fe |
| Square planar | Ni, Pd, Pt |
2. Spectrochemical Series and
2.1 The Spectrochemical Series
Definition 2 (Spectrochemical Series): Ranking of ligands by their ability to split orbitals (weak-field to strong-field):
Spectrochemical series of metals:
Higher oxidation states and heavier metals produce larger .
2.2 Factors Affecting
where is the metal charge, is the ligand charge, and is the metal-ligand distance.
- Higher metal oxidation state → larger .
- Stronger ligand field → larger .
- 4d and 5d metals → larger (diffuse orbitals interact more with ligands).
3. High-Spin vs Low-Spin Complexes
3.1 The Decision
Theorem 3 (High-Spin vs Low-Spin): When pairing energy is compared to :
- : High-spin (weak field). Electrons fill all orbitals singly before pairing.
- : Low-spin (strong field). Electrons pair in lower orbitals before occupying upper orbitals.
Only octahedral – complexes have a high-spin/low-spin choice.
3.2 Electron Configurations
| High-spin (weak field) | Low-spin (strong field) | |
|---|---|---|
| (4 unpaired) | (2 unpaired) | |
| (5 unpaired) | (1 unpaired) | |
| (4 unpaired) | (0 unpaired) | |
| (3 unpaired) | (1 unpaired) |
Example 2: (, cm): High-spin (), , 4 unpaired electrons.
(, cm): Low-spin (), , 0 unpaired electrons.
4. Crystal Field Stabilization Energy (CFSE)
4.1 Calculation
Definition 3 (CFSE): The net energy lowering of a complex relative to the barycenter:
where and are electron counts, is the pairing energy, and is the number of extra electron pairs relative to the high-spin configuration.
Example 3: CFSE for low-spin octahedral:
For high-spin:
4.2 CFSE and Thermodynamic Properties
CFSE contributes to:
- Lattice energies (hydrated transition metal ions).
- Hydration enthalpies (dip in the series at , due to extra stabilization).
- Ligand substitution rates (low-spin is inert; high-spin is labile).
5. Ligand Field Theory
5.1 Beyond Crystal Field Theory
Definition 4 (Ligand Field Theory): An extension of CFT that includes covalent bonding (sigma and pi interactions between metal and ligand orbitals) alongside electrostatic effects.
5.2 Sigma Bonding
Ligand donor orbitals overlap with metal , , , , , to form bonding and antibonding molecular orbitals.
5.3 Pi Bonding
Pi-donor ligands (e.g., F, O, Cl):
- Donate electron density into empty metal orbitals.
- Decrease (weak field).
- Examples: halides, oxide, hydroxide.
Pi-acceptor ligands (e.g., CO, CN, NO):
- Accept electron density from filled metal orbitals into empty ligand orbitals.
- Increase (strong field).
- Examples: CO, CN, phosphines (PR).
This explains the spectrochemical series: -acceptors > no interaction > -donors.
6. The Jahn-Teller Effect
6.1 Statement
Theorem 4 (Jahn-Teller Theorem): Any nonlinear molecular system in a degenerate electronic state will undergo distortion to remove the degeneracy.
6.2 Octahedral Jahn-Teller Distortion
High-spin (): One electron in — the complex elongates along one axis to lower the energy of the singly occupied orbital.
Low-spin (): Same degeneracy — elongation.
(): One hole in — strong Jahn-Teller effect (e.g., Cu).
Examples:
- : Two long axial bonds (~2.4 Å) and four short equatorial bonds (~2.0 Å).
- (, high-spin): Elongated octahedral.
6.3 Consequences
- Splitting of -orbital degeneracy leads to additional spectroscopic transitions.
- Structural distortions lower symmetry.
- , (high-spin), and (low-spin) have no Jahn-Teller distortion (no degeneracy in or ).
7. Magnetism
7.1 Spin-Only Formula
Theorem 5 (Spin-Only Magnetic Moment):
where is the number of unpaired electrons and J/T is the Bohr magneton.
| Unpaired Electrons | () |
|---|---|
| 1 | 1.73 |
| 2 | 2.83 |
| 3 | 3.87 |
| 4 | 4.90 |
| 5 | 5.92 |
7.2 Magnetic Properties
- Diamagnetic: All electrons paired; ; repelled by magnetic field.
- Paramagnetic: Unpaired electrons; attracted to magnetic field.
- Spin crossover: Some complexes switch between high-spin and low-spin with temperature.
8. Stability Constants
8.1 Stepwise and Overall Formation Constants
Definition 5 (Formation Constant): For the reaction :
Overall formation constant:
8.2 Chelate Effect
Theorem 6 (Chelate Effect): Multidentate ligands form more stable complexes than equivalent monodentate ligands:
Explanation:
- Entropy: One chelate replaces several monodentate ligands, increasing the number of free particles ().
- Ring size: 5-membered chelate rings are most stable (en, acac). 3-membered rings are strained; 7+ membered rings are floppy.
8.3 Irving-Williams Series
Theorem 7 (Irving-Williams Series): The stability of M complexes with a given ligand:
Explained by a combination of CFSE (peaks at Ni) and Jahn-Teller effects (extra stabilization for Cu, ).
9. Ligand Substitution Reactions
9.1 Inert and Labile Complexes
Definition 6 (Labile): Complexes that undergo rapid ligand substitution (half-life < 1 minute). Definition 7 (Inert): Complexes with slow ligand substitution (half-life > 1 minute).
Theorem 8: Low-spin complexes (e.g., , ) are inert. High-spin complexes and are labile.
9.2 Octahedral Substitution Mechanisms
S1 (Dissociative): First, a ligand leaves, creating a 5-coordinate intermediate; then the new ligand enters.
Rate: (independent of incoming ligand).
S2 (Associative): The incoming ligand attacks to form a 7-coordinate intermediate; then a ligand leaves.
Rate: .
9.3 Trans Effect (Square Planar)
Definition 8 (Trans Effect): In square planar complexes, some ligands labilize the ligand trans to them, accelerating its substitution.
Trans effect series:
This is exploited in the synthesis of square planar Pt complexes (e.g., cisplatin).
10. Electronic Spectra and Color
10.1 d–d Transitions
Definition 9 (d–d Transition): An electron is promoted from a lower-energy orbital to a higher-energy orbital, absorbing light in the visible or near-UV region.
- The absorbed wavelength determines the color (complementary color is observed).
- Selection rules: Laporte forbidden ( not satisfied), but weakly allowed by vibronic coupling or low symmetry.
10.2 Orgel Diagrams
Definition 10 (Orgel Diagram): Qualitative diagrams showing the energy of -orbital states as a function of (field strength ratio).
For octahedral , the Orgel diagram shows which transitions are spin-allowed and their approximate positions.
10.3 Charge Transfer Transitions
Definition 11 (Charge Transfer): Intense transitions involving electron transfer between metal and ligand:
- LMCT (Ligand to Metal Charge Transfer): Electron transfers from ligand to metal (e.g., , purple color from O → Mn).
- MLCT (Metal to Ligand Charge Transfer): Electron transfers from metal to ligand (e.g., , MLCT absorption in visible).
Charge transfer transitions are much more intense (–) than d–d transitions (–).
Common Pitfalls
- Confusing and pairing energy units. is in most cases in cm (wavenumbers) or kJ/mol; is in the same units. Fix: Always compare in the same units.
- Wrong tetrahedral splitting direction. is inverted relative to : is lower, is higher. Fix: Tetrahedral has fewer ligands and less direct overlap, so the splitting is smaller () and inverted.
- Assuming all octahedral complexes can be high-spin or low-spin. Only – have this choice. Fix: – and – have only one configuration regardless of field strength.
- Ignoring the chelate effect for stability. EDTA forms extremely stable complexes not because of bond strength but because of entropy. Fix: for chelates is much larger than for monodentate analogs.
- Wrong trans effect vs trans influence. Trans effect is a kinetic phenomenon (rate of substitution); trans influence is a thermodynamic phenomenon (bond weakening). Fix: Trans effect relates to substitution rates; trans influence relates to ground-state bond lengths.
- Misassigning spectrochemical series positions. The spectrochemical series ranks ligands, not metals. Fix: Memorize the ligand series; also note that higher oxidation state metals produce larger .
- Ignoring orbital contributions to magnetic moments. The spin-only formula works for first-row transition metals but fails for heavier metals where orbital contributions are significant. Fix: Use when orbital angular momentum is not quenched.
Summary
- CFT: -orbital splitting in ligand fields; (octahedral), (tetrahedral).
- Spectrochemical series: I < Cl < F < HO < NH < CN < CO.
- High-spin vs low-spin: Determined by vs ; only – octahedral.
- CFSE: Net stabilization from -orbital splitting; explains hydration enthalpies.
- Jahn-Teller: Degenerate states distort; most important for (high-spin) and .
- Magnetism: ; spin-only formula for first-row metals.
- Stability: Irving-Williams series; chelate effect (entropy-driven).
- Color: d–d transitions (weak, ) and charge transfer (strong, ).
Worked Examples
Example 1: CFSE Calculation
Problem: Calculate the crystal field stabilisation energy for [CoF6]^3- (high-spin, octahedral) and [Co(CN)6]^3- (low-spin, octahedral). Co^3+ has d^6 configuration. Delta_o for F- is 15,000 cm^-1 and for CN- is 33,000 cm^-1. Solution: High-spin [CoF6]^3-: t2g^4 eg^2. CFSE = 4(-0.4 Delta_o) + 2(0.6 Delta_o) = -1.6 + 1.2 = -0.4 Delta_o = -0.4 x 15,000 = -6,000 cm^-1 = -71.8 kJ/mol. Low-spin [Co(CN)6]^3-: t2g^6 eg^0. CFSE = 6(-0.4 Delta_o) + 0 = -2.4 Delta_o = -2.4 x 33,000 = -79,200 cm^-1 = -947.5 kJ/mol. The low-spin complex is much more stabilised.
Example 2: Isomer Counting
Problem: How many geometric isomers does [Co(NH3)2(en)2]^2+ have, and how many are optically active? (en = ethylenediamine, bidentate) Solution: The bidentate ligands occupy two coordination sites each. Possible arrangements: cis and trans for the NH3 pairs relative to each other. In the cis form, the two en ligands can be arranged as fac (with N atoms on a triangular face) or mer (with N atoms in a meridian). Total geometric isomers: 3 (cis-fac, cis-mer, trans). The cis-fac and cis-mer forms are chiral (no plane of symmetry), so there are 2 pairs of enantiomers.
Cross-References
| Topic | Site | Link |
|---|---|---|
| Atomic Structure | WyattsNotes | View |
| Main-Group Chemistry | WyattsNotes | View |
| Solid-State Chemistry | WyattsNotes | View |
| Coordination Chemistry — MIT 5.03 | MIT OCW | View |