Professional Documents
Culture Documents
O2
* 2p
2p
*2p
2p
2p
larger E
2s
2s
2s O O2 O
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
N2
*2p
*2p
2p
2p
2p
Very strong NN bond Unlike O2, the 2p and 2p orbitals are switched in energy (see next page)
smaller E
2p *2s 2s N N2 N
2s
Chemistry 3820 (Fall 2006) Ordering of MOs in O2 is 2p , 2p, *2p , *2p but in N2 and CO, the order is 2p, 2p , *2p , *2p
Reason - O2 - larger E between s and p orbitals less orbital mixing - larger E because across the period (B,C,N,O,F) more protons added to the nucleus, which pulls the electrons in closer to the nucleus (lower in energy). This effect is felt more strongly by the s-orbitals than the p -orbitals, so the energy of the s-orbitals drops more rapidly than that of the p-orbitals. - N2 and CO - mixing between the 2p and the *2s orbitals raises the energy of the 2p above the 2p.
Changes in the energy of the MOs of homonuclear diatomic molecules in the 2 nd period
MO Diagram for CO
2p
*2p 2p
LUMO
2p
2p
2s
* 2s 2s C CO O
2s
- CO is isoelectronic with N2 (C has one less electron than N, O has one more) MO diagram is very similar to that of N2. - Diamagnetic, Bond order of 3 (C= O) - Important: HOMO = 2p (weakly antibonding), LUMO = *2p (strongly antibonding) - Since O is far more electronegative than C, would expect a large dipole moment with - on O. However, CO actually has only a small dipole moment (0.1 Debye) with the - on Carbon! Usually electronegativities are a good indication of the direction and magnitude of the dipole on a molecule, but especially in molecules where orbitals with antibonding character are occupied, things are not so straightforward.
In an octahedral environment, the metal orbitals (3d, 4s, 4p for a 1st row TM) divide by symmetry into 4 sets: s = a1g , p = t1u , axial d = eg , inter-axial d = t 2g. The orbitals of the six ligands can be combined to give six symmetry-adapted linear combinations which are of the correct symmetry to interact with the s, 3 x p and 2 x axial-d orbitals, but not the inter-axial d orbitals. The result is that 3 orbitals (the inter-axial d-orbitals) are non-bonding, while the rest (6 metal orbitals and 6 ligand orbitals) combine to form six bonding and six anti-bonding MOs. See next page. This is a much more correct approach than crystal field theory, but is not as easy to use.
4p (t1u)
a1g*
(a 1g + t1u + e g) eg
TM
6L t1u a1g
The six bonding orbitals are filled with 12 electrons from the six ligands Orbitals shown in red (t2g and eg *) are the frontier orbitals where d-electrons reside (which is why TM MOs are often simplified to show only t 2g and eg * orbitals). 2006 - Dr. Paul G. Hayes University of Lethbridge
-bonding ligands (the above MO diagram does not take into account -bonding)
M L M L filled orbital -donor NH3 , CH3 -, H M L M L M L empty orbital
-donor Cl-, OH -, NR 2- , OH 2
For -acceptor ligands, the bonding is SYNERGIC: -donation to the metal strengthens -backbonding to the ligand, and -donation from the metal to the ligand strengthens the -donor component of bonding. This is because -donation leads to increased electron density on the metal, which allows increased -backdonation. Conversely, -backdonation reduces the amount of electron density on the metal, which allows more -donation from the ligand to the metal.
MO energy levels for an octahedral complex with -acceptor ligands (e.g. [Cr(CO)6])
t1u*
4p (t1u)
a1g*
4s (a1g)
t2g* eg*
* orbitals of CO (t2g)
3d (eg + t2g)
large O
Cr
6 CO t1u a 1g
-backdonation to CO from the t2g orbitals (which are non-bonding in the absence of -interactions between the metal and the ligands). The 3 t2g orbitals and 3 high lying * orbitals of the CO ligands form 3 bonding MOs and 3 antibonding MOs. Since the CO * orbitals are empty, the d -electrons occupy the bonding MO from this interaction. The result is (1) a very large o , so the e g* orbital is likely to remain empty. (2) the t2g orbital is strongly bonding (wants to be filled with 6 electrons) complexes of strong -acceptor ligands are the most likely to obey the 18 electron rule 2006 - Dr. Paul G. Hayes University of Lethbridge
10
Simplified picture of how -acceptor and -donor interactions affect the MO diagram - Only the frontier orbitals are shown
t 2g *
eg*
eg * L large O
* (t2g)
eg *
eg * small O t 2g*
t 2g
-donor ligands -donation from the ligands to the t2g orbitals the 3 t2g metal orbitals and 3 low lying, filled ligand orbitals of -symmetry form 3 bonding MOs and 3 antibonding MOs (thus t g is 2 lowered and o increases). Since the interacting ligand orbitals are full, these electrons occupy the bonding MO from this interaction, and the d-electrons occupy the antibonding MO. The result is (1) a small o (2) the t2g orbital is weakly antibonding 2006 - Dr. Paul G. Hayes University of Lethbridge
11
4p (t 1u)
a 1*
4s (a1g) t2*
t ~ 4/9 o
3d (eg + t2g) e
Ni
4 PPh 3
t2
12