Coordination Compounds (Bonding)

Bonding In Coordination Compounds

---

Understanding the bonding in coordination compounds has evolved over time, with several theories contributing to our current knowledge.

Valence Bond Theory (VBT)

Developed by: Linus Pauling.

Key Postulates:

1. Hybridization: The central metal atom/ion undergoes hybridization of its atomic orbitals (s, p, and d orbitals) to form a set of new hybrid orbitals. These hybrid orbitals are directed in space to form coordinate covalent bonds with the ligands. The type of hybridization and the resulting geometry depend on the coordination number and the nature of the ligands.
2. Coordinate Bond Formation: Ligands donate a lone pair of electrons to the empty hybrid orbitals of the central metal atom/ion, forming coordinate covalent bonds.
3. Inner vs. Outer Orbital Complexes:
• Inner Orbital Complexes: If the inner $d$ orbitals (e.g., $(n-1)d$ orbitals) of the central metal atom are involved in hybridization, the resulting complexes are called inner orbital complexes (or $\textit{low spin}$ complexes if they have low magnetic moment). These complexes are usually formed when strong field ligands are present, causing pairing of electrons.
• Outer Orbital Complexes: If the outer $nd$ orbitals are involved in hybridization, the resulting complexes are called outer orbital complexes (or $\textit{high spin}$ complexes if they have high magnetic moment). These are formed when weak field ligands are present, and pairing of electrons does not occur or is minimal.
4. Magnetic Properties: The number of unpaired electrons in the hybrid orbitals and the d-orbitals of the central metal atom determines the magnetic properties (paramagnetic or diamagnetic) of the complex.

Examples:

• Octahedral Complexes (Coordination Number 6): $sp^3d^2$ (outer orbitals) or $d^2sp^3$ (inner orbitals) hybridization.
• Square Planar Complexes (Coordination Number 4): $dsp^2$ (inner orbitals) or $sp^3$ (outer orbitals). $dsp^2$ hybridization leads to square planar geometry, while $sp^3$ leads to tetrahedral geometry.
• Tetrahedral Complexes (Coordination Number 4): $sp^3$ hybridization.

Magnetic Properties Of Coordination Compounds

Source of Magnetism: Magnetism in coordination compounds arises from the presence of unpaired electrons in the d-orbitals of the central metal ion.

Types of Magnetic Behavior:

• Paramagnetism: Compounds with one or more unpaired electrons are attracted by a magnetic field. The magnetic moment ($\mu$) is measured in Bohr magnetons (BM).
• Diamagnetism: Compounds with all electrons paired are weakly repelled by a magnetic field.

VBT Explanation: VBT predicts the magnetic properties based on the number of unpaired electrons in the central metal ion after hybridization and ligand bonding.

• If all d-electrons are paired (due to strong field ligands causing hybridization involving inner d-orbitals), the complex is diamagnetic.
• If there are unpaired d-electrons, the complex is paramagnetic. The magnitude of the magnetic moment depends on the number of unpaired electrons.

Limitations Of Valence Bond Theory

Despite its success in explaining geometry and magnetic properties, VBT has limitations:

• Quantitative Explanation: It does not provide a quantitative explanation for the colors of coordination compounds.
• Ligand Strength: It does not explain why certain ligands are strong field and others are weak field.
• Relative Stability: It does not explain the relative stability of different complexes.
• Detailed Bonding: It treats metal-ligand bonds as purely covalent, failing to account for the partial ionic character and the contribution of ligand d-orbitals in bonding.
• Inner vs. Outer Orbital Complexes: The distinction between inner and outer orbital complexes is not always clear-cut and depends on the ligand field strength, which VBT doesn't fully address.

Crystal Field Theory (CFT)

Developed by: Hans Bethe and John Hasbrouck van Vleck.

Key Postulates:

1. Ionic Model: CFT treats the metal-ligand bonds as purely ionic, arising from electrostatic attraction between the metal ion and the charged ligands (or polar ligands).
2. Ligand Field Interaction: Ligands are considered point charges or point dipoles that create an electrostatic field around the central metal ion.
3. d-orbital Splitting: This ligand field causes the degeneracy (equal energy) of the d-orbitals of the central metal ion to be lifted, meaning the d-orbitals split into different energy levels.

Splitting in Octahedral Complexes:

• In an octahedral crystal field, the five degenerate d-orbitals split into two sets:
• $t_{2g}$ set: Lower energy orbitals ($d_{xy}$, $d_{yz}$, $d_{zx}$).
• $e_g$ set: Higher energy orbitals ($d_{z^2}$, $d_{x^2-y^2}$).
• The energy difference between these two sets is called the crystal field splitting energy ($\Delta_o$).

Splitting in Tetrahedral Complexes:

• In a tetrahedral field, the d-orbitals split into two sets:
• $e$ set: Lower energy orbitals.
• $t_2$ set: Higher energy orbitals.
• The splitting energy is smaller than in octahedral fields ($\Delta_t \approx \frac{4}{9}\Delta_o$).

CFT Explanation of Properties:

• Magnetic Properties: CFT can explain the magnetic properties by considering the filling of split d-orbitals, distinguishing between high-spin and low-spin complexes based on the ligand field strength and pairing energy.
• Color: The color of coordination compounds arises from the d-d electronic transitions. When visible light passes through the complex, electrons absorb specific frequencies (energies) corresponding to the energy difference ($\Delta_o$ or $\Delta_t$) between the split d-orbitals, promoting them to higher energy levels. The light that is transmitted or reflected is complementary to the absorbed light, giving the compound its observed color.

Colour In Coordination Compounds

Origin of Color: The color observed in many coordination compounds is due to electronic transitions of electrons within the central metal ion's d-orbitals, specifically the d-d transitions.

CFT Explanation:

• In the presence of ligands, the degenerate d-orbitals of the central metal ion split into different energy levels ($t_{2g}$ and $e_g$ in octahedral fields).
• When visible light interacts with the coordination compound, electrons in the lower energy d-orbitals can absorb photons of specific energies that match the energy difference ($\Delta_o$) between the split levels.
• This absorption promotes electrons to the higher energy d-orbitals.
• The color we observe is the complementary color of the light that has been absorbed.

Factors Affecting Color:

• Nature of the Central Metal Ion: The identity of the metal influences the d-electron configuration and thus the splitting energy.
• Oxidation State of the Metal Ion: Higher oxidation states generally lead to larger splitting energies and different colors.
• Nature of the Ligands: Ligands exert different strengths of electrostatic fields, affecting the magnitude of $\Delta_o$. A spectrochemical series lists ligands in order of increasing field strength (and increasing $\Delta_o$).
• Coordination Geometry: The splitting pattern differs for octahedral, tetrahedral, and square planar complexes, resulting in different colors.

Examples:

• $[Ti(H_2O)_6]^{3+}$ is violet because the $d^1$ electron absorbs yellow-green light.
• $[Cu(H_2O)_4]^{2+}$ is blue because it absorbs orange-red light.
• $[Ni(en)_3]^{2+}$ is violet.

Colorless Complexes: Complexes that do not have unpaired electrons in the d-orbitals (e.g., $d^0$ or $d^{10}$ configurations) or complexes with ligands that cause very small splitting energies (e.g., $F^-$, $H_2O$) may appear colorless or white, as they absorb light outside the visible region.

Limitations Of Crystal Field Theory

CFT is a highly successful model but has its limitations:

• Purely Ionic Model: It assumes metal-ligand bonds are purely ionic, neglecting the covalent character and the contribution of ligand orbitals to bonding.
• Ligand Donor Atoms: It doesn't explain the spectrochemical series quantitatively based on ligand properties.
• Charge Transfer Spectra: Fails to explain colors arising from charge transfer transitions (where electrons move between metal and ligand orbitals), which are often very intense.
• Covalency: Ignores the covalent nature of metal-ligand bonds and the ligand field stabilization energy (LFSE) based on covalency.
• Inorganic Complexes: The purely ionic model is less applicable to complexes involving ligands with significant covalent character.

These limitations led to the development of Ligand Field Theory (LFT) and Molecular Orbital Theory (MOT), which provide a more comprehensive description of bonding in coordination compounds.