1 / 17

Molecular Theories

Molecular Theories. CHEM 210 SPRING 2014. Molecular Theories. Valance Shell Electron Pair Repulsion-VSEPR Ligand Close Packing Theory-LCP Valance Bond Theory-VBT Molecular Orbital Theory-MOT Crystal Field Theory-CFT Ligand Field Theory-LFT. Molecular Theories.

delila
Download Presentation

Molecular Theories

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Molecular Theories CHEM 210 SPRING 2014

  2. Molecular Theories • Valance Shell Electron Pair Repulsion-VSEPR • Ligand Close Packing Theory-LCP • Valance Bond Theory-VBT • Molecular Orbital Theory-MOT • Crystal Field Theory-CFT • Ligand Field Theory-LFT

  3. Molecular Theories • Theories are not exclusive of one another • Theories are not inclusive • They are all complementary • In some cases one theory may not be needed

  4. VSEPR • Widely adopted as the theory used to determine molecular shape in the early 1960’s • Initially introduced in 1940 by NevilSidgwick as the Theory of Valency • Refined by Ronald Gillespie and Ronald Nyholm

  5. VSEPR • Prior to VSEPR molecular shapes were determined by bonded atoms • BF3 and PF3 were assumed to have the same shape • VSEPR takes into account not only the bonded atoms but also any unshared pairs • Shapes are determined using the AXE method to assign a molecular class

  6. VSEPR

  7. VSEPR

  8. LCP • Very similar to VSEPR but used mostly in coordination chemistry • Recently (1997) developed by Ronald Gillespie • In VSEPR the electron pairs repeal each other to shape the molecule • In LCP the strength of the Ligand is the cause of the repulsion/shape

  9. VBT • Bridges the chasm between Atomic Orbitals and Molecular Orbitals • Assumes that electrons are donated from each atom (covalent bonds) • No electrons are unpaired in Oxygen • Assumes localized bonds • Coordinate covalent bonds (ligands)

  10. VBT • The idea of sharing electrons is introduced by Gilbert Lewis in 1916 • 1925-1926 Schrodinger Publishes his Wavemechanics work • 1927 Heitler and London successfully apply the SE to describe the properties of H2 • 1928-1930 Linus Pauling introduces Resonance and Hybridization

  11. MOT • Used to describe the stability of a molecule • Accurately describes the properties of a molecular bond • It does not provide any information about hybridization of atomic orbitals • It does not assign electrons to any given atom (remember… they are clouds)

  12. MOT • Much harder to comprehend than VBT • Fully accepted as a valid Theory in in 1950 • Based on work done by • FriederichHund (Hund’s Rule) • Robert Mulliken (Orbitals) • John Slater (LCAO) • John Lennard-Jones (L-J potential) • Charles Coulson (H2 molecule)

  13. MOT • Molecular orbitals are a “mixture” of atomic orbitals from participating atoms • Since orbitals are described by functions • You get positive and negative mixing • To obtain the “true” identity of the molecular orbital… • Apply the Hartree-Fock Method (SCF approach) • Based on a Linear Combination of Atomic Orbitals

  14. MO Diagram for O2

  15. CFT • Developed by Hans Bethe and John Hansbrouck van Vleck in the 1930’s • to explain the effects of ligand on Metal centers (ligand strength) • As a consequence it can also explain… • the color of inorganic compounds • molecular shape preferred by a metal’s complexes • Magnetic properties (high spin vs low spin) • DOES NOT explain bonding • Combined with MOT to create LFT

  16. LFT • It expands MOT to Coordination Chemistry • It is said to be more “accurate” than CFT • It actually describes bonding • Electrostatic interactions between Ligand e-s and d-electrons on the metal.

More Related