Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
substantial extent by the 4f' subshell, i.e., these are "outermost" electrons. 2 The contraction of the atoms or ions is a consequence of the angular part of the 4f wavefunctions. The first of these is a little surprising when the small size of the experimentally observedcontr&tion is considered, but, much more seriously, there is an inconsistency with the interpretation usually given to the magnetic and spectroscopic properties of the ions LIP, that the 1f electrons are well shielded from the chemical environment of the ion bv the 5s2 5p6 configuration. If this is so, and the experiment& evidence ~ o i n t in s this direction. then im~lication (1) must be incorrect, and the implied connectionkith d-orbital effects in the transition series is suspect. Implication (2) has a similar incongruity, a t least in the discussion of effects on the third transition series, where the 4f shell is complete. Since the closed shell 4p4 configuration has spherical symmetry, there can be no angular effect here; any effects must he due to the radial part of the appropriate wavefunctions. A very elementary approach to point (i) can he made by using Slater's rules to calculate the radius R, of the maxim& in a spherical charge density function (3). as R, = ~L*~Z'-' X 52.9 pm (Z* is the effective nuclear charge, n* the effective quantum number). Taking Gd3+ as an example, this gives values of R, as (5p6) 69 pm and (457) 24 pm. This supports the idea that the 4f configuration is "deep inside" the ion. 502 Journal of Chemical Education
The name "scandinide contraction" has been suggested, though not entirely seriously, by E. A. V. Ebsworlh, to emphasize that the contraction of the lanthanides is not unique. the Shannon-Prewiti radii (2)are used: 2F~liowing Huheey (0. values quoted are those for 6-coordination. The calculations o f ref 5are relativistic; values quoted for fshells have been averaged appropriately, though the difference between the f,,, and fi12 radii i s not significant in the argument presented here. * A statement o f this point is made explicitly in the text by Day and Selbin (6).
'
significant shielding is that for the (5s25 p 6 ) configuration and not that for the other 4f electrons. In contrast to the situation in the lanthanides, in the first transition series 3d" electrons make a ven, substantial contribution LO the ionic radius. R,values forihe Bdn configuration aresliehtlv ereater than those for the 30"et at the start " .of the series, and both sets contract, but the 3d set contracts faster so that the ~ o s i t i o n is reversed for the later members (4). In the second transition series the more expanded 4d orbitals extend slightly beyond the 4p configuration throughout (4).Thus in the series of transition elements it is reasonable to ascribe part of the observed contractions to poor shielding of one electron by another in the same suhshell, but here also i t should be realized that contraction of the outer core electrons is significant
Conclusions I t can be shown from the literature that the radius of the lanthanide ions is mainly determined by the outer ( 5 9 5 p 6 ) configuration and that the 4f electrons make very little direct contribution to "size". The observed contraction across thelanthanide series is a contraction of the (5.9 5p6)configuration brought ahout by penetration of these outer electrons
inside the 4f radial maximum, and is not an effect of the contraction nf the 4f shell itself. However, the contractions ohserved in the transition series, such as the "scandinide" contraction in the first series, are due t o contractions of both the outer core electrons and the partially filled d shell; the commonly discussed effect of poor shielding of one electron by another in the same subshell is significant here, hut not for the lanthanides.
Acknowledgment The impetus for this note comes from students who have driven me to clarify my own thoughts, the presentation here has been improved by discussion with several colleagues, particularly D. J. Cardin and M. E. Bridge.
(1)
(2)
Huheey, J. E. "lnownie C h e m i W , 3rdsd.j Hsvpsr & Rosv: New York. 1983;p 72. Shannon,R.D.; Preett. C. T. Acta Cryat. B25,1969,926.Sb-on, R.D. A d o C v t .
,176 rO9 --..,..--, 711
(3) Purcell. K. F.: KO*.J. C. "borganio Chemiatry";Saundna:New York, 1917; p 42. (4) Waber,J. T . ; Cromer, D.T. J. Chem.Phys. I%&,42,4116. (5) Herman. F.: Skillman, S. "Atomic Structure Cdeulationa": Prentiee-Hall: Enphood Cliffs. NJ. 1963.
Volume 63
Number 6
June 1986
503