Coordination Chemistry

Crystal Field Theory and its applications

Spectroscopic, magnetic, functional properties… J-T distortion, Chelate effect,

 Bonding in coordination compounds
• Alfred Werner - 1893
• VBT
• Crystal Field Theory (CFT)
Jorgensen
• Modified CFT, known as Ligand Field Theory 1837-1914

• MOT

Sophus Mads Jorgensen Alfred Werner

Alfred Werner
1866-1919
1893-1899 Nobel prize 1913
 Bonding in transition metal complexes – a quick glance
Valance Bond Theory
A covalent bond forms when the orbtials of two atoms overlap and are occupied by
a pair of electrons that have the highest probability of being located between the
nuclei.
Ligand = Lewis base
Linus Carl Pauling
Metal = Lewis acid (1901-1994)
s, p and d orbitals give hybrid orbitals with specific geometries Nobel prizes: 1954, 1962
Number and type of M-L hybrid orbitals determines geometry of the complex
Based on the concept of hybridization sp3, dsp2, dsp3, d2sp3 & sp3d2 :
Predicts shapes of complexes very efficiently

Limitations of VB theory
Cannot account for colour of complexes
May predict magnetism wrongly Octahedral Complex

Cannot account for spectrochemical series e.g. [Cr(NH3)6]3+

 TM complex: Variable valence

Sc +3

Ti +1 +2 +3 +4
V +1 +2 +3 +4 +5
Cr +1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6 Cu is the only element which affords
Mn +1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6 +7 CuI compounds without -acceptor
Fe +1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6 ligands
Co +1 +2 +3 +4 +5

Ni +1 +2 +3 +4

Cu +1 +2 +3

Zn +2
How & Why?
Crystal Field Model
 Crystal Field Model

A purely ionic model for transition metal complexes.

Ligands are considered as point charges.
Predicts the pattern of splitting of d-orbitals.
Used to rationalize spectroscopic and magnetic properties.
 d-orbitals: look attentively along the axis

Linear combination of
dz2-dx2 and dz2-dy2

d2z2-x2-y2
Octahedral Field
• We assume an octahedral array of negative charges placed around the metal ion (which
is positive).
• The ligand and orbitals lie on the same axes as negative charges.
– Therefore, there is a large, unfavorable interaction between ligand (-) and these
orbitals.
– These orbitals form the degenerate high energy pair of energy levels.
• The dxy, dyz, and dxz orbitals bisect the negative charges.
– Therefore, there is a smaller repulsion between ligand and metal for these orbitals.
– These orbitals form the degenerate low energy set of energy levels.
eg

t2g
 Splitting of the d-orbitals in an octahedral field
d - orbitals splitting in an
octahedral crystal field
eg

d - orbitals in a spherical d x2 – y2 d z2
field of six ligands
+0.6o
o or
Energy

10Dq
-0.4o
d - orbitals stabilized by
metal- ligand electrostatic
attraction d xy d yz d xz

t2g

t2g : triply degenerate set of orbitals

symmetric with respect to a vertical mirror
eg doubly degenerate set of orbitals
plane perpendicular to the principal axis g= gerade: symmetric with respect to the centre of inversion
u= ungerade : antisymmetric w. r. t the centre of inversion
anti-symmetric with respect to a vertical
mirror plane perpendicular to the principal Barycenter: A point between objects where they balance each other
axis
 High Spin Vs. Low Spin (d1 to d10)
When does a complex prefer High Spin/ low spin arrangement of electrons?

o < Pairing energy : High Spin o > Pairing Energy : Low Spin

o P
[Fe(H2O)6 ]2+ d6 9350 19150 High Spin o < P
[Fe(CN)6 ]4- d6 32200 19150 Low Spin o > P
 What is Pairing Energy, P?

The pairing energy is not an experimentally obtained value like o and is the same for a metal ion
irrespective of the ligands. It is made up of two terms.
1) The inherent coulombic repulsion that must be overcome when two electrons are forced to
occupy the same orbital. (Destabilizing energy contribution of Pc for each doubly occupied
orbital).
2) Loss of exchange energy ( based on Hund's rule) that occurs as two electrons with parallel
spin () are forced to become antiparallel () in an orbital. (contribution of Pe for each pair
having same spin and same energy)

P = sum of all Pc and Pe interactions

 Significance of o and its physical measurement
494 nm = 20,300 cm-1
Electronic spectrum of [Ti(H2O)6 ]3+

eg

3d14s0

t2g

UV –Visible Spectroscopy
1 kj = 83.7 cm-1
[Ti(H2O)6]3+ o = 20,300 cm-1 = 243 kj/mol
Since an electron in the t2g set is stabilized by -0.4 o
243 X -0.4 = -97 kj/mol
The complex is stabilized to the extent of 97 kj/mol compared to a
hypothetical spherical field due to the splitting of the d orbitals; This extra
stabilization of the complex is called crystal field stabilization energy
t2g1eg0 t2g0eg1 (CFSE)

Because the sample absorbs most strongly around the green region of the visible spectrum, it appears purple.
 The crystal field stabilization energy (CFSE)
The stability that results from placing a transition metal ion in the crystal field generated by a set of
ligands.

It arises due to the fact that when the d-orbitals are split in a ligand field, some of them become lower in
energy than before with respect to a spherical field in which all five d-orbitals were degenerate.

For example, in an octahedral case, the t2g set becomes lower in energy with respect to the barycenter. As
a result, if there are any electrons occupying these t2gorbitals, the metal ion is more stable in the ligand
field relative to the barycenter by an amount known as the CFSE.

Conversely, the eg orbitals (in the octahedral case) are higher in energy with respect to the barycenter, so
having electrons in these orbitals reduces the amount of CFSE.
 dn Elec. Config. CFSE
d1 t2g1 -0.4 o
d2 t2g2 -0.8 o
d3 t2g3 -1.2 o
d4 t2g3 eg1 -0.6 o
d4 LS t2g4 -1.6 o +P
d5 t2g3 eg2 0
d5 LS t2g5 -2.0 o +2P
d6 t2g4 eg2 -0.4 o
d6 LS t2g6 -2.4 o +2P
d7 t2g5 eg2 -0.8 o
d7 LS t2g6 eg1 -1.8 o+ P
d8 t2g6 eg2 -0.1.2 o
d9 t2g6 eg3 -0.6 o
d10 t2g6 eg4 0
 Factors affecting the magnitude of crystal field splitting, 

1. Nature of metal ion (row to which it belongs)

Going from the first row to second row there is an increase in o :
Larger the metal  larger is the 

2. Oxidation state of the metal ion (higher the oxidation state more is the o)
3. Number of ligands and shape of complex
(Octahedral, tetrahedral, square planar….)

4. Relative strength of the ligand (Spectrochemical Series)

 Factors Affecting the Magnitude of Crystal Field Splitting 

Size of the metal ion / Row to which the metal ion belong
Larger the size (row to which it belongs) larger the  value

[Co(en)3]3+ 23,200 cm-1

3d<4d<5d
[Rh(en)3]3+ 34,600 cm-1

[Ir(en)3]3+ 41,000 cm-1

Consequence:
Second and third row transition metals will have greater tendency to form low spin complexes

Reason:
Around a large metal ion, a given set of ligands experience less steric crowding and therefore can
approach closer to the metal ion. More closer- larger will be the splitting
 Factors Affecting the Magnitude of Crystal Field Splitting 

Charge on the metal ion / Oxidation state of the metal ion

Greater the charge larger the  value

[Co(NH3)6]2+ 10,000 cm-1 [Cr(H2O)6]2+ 14,000 cm-1

[Co(NH3)6]3+ 22,900 cm-1 [Cr(H2 O)6]3+ 17,400 cm-1

Reason:
The higher the charge on the metal, the ligands are pulled in towards the metal more and
therefore the ligands split the energies of the metal d orbitals to a greater extent
Factors Affecting the Magnitude of Crystal Field Splitting 
Number of ligands around the metal and shape of complex
(Octahedral, tetrahedral, square planar….)

SP  1.74 O
 Splitting of d-orbitals by a tetrahedral field and a square planar field of ligands

t2

e
tetrahedral square planar

Tetrahedron is related to cube in

Square planar is related to octahedral splitting:
splitting of energy levels
Removing the axial ligands of an octahedron to
t  1/2 C
infinity results in a square plane
Same arrangement of orbitals
Factors affecting  - Strength of the Ligand

The effect of different ligands on the degree of  splitting is

understood from the UV-Vis absorption spectra of complexes of
the same metal-ion with different ligands

There is an increase in the frequency of the 1 (o) absorption

band as the ligands on Cr3+ is changed from
F  O based N based ligands
tetrahedral
Tetrahedral field

t2

tetrahedral
Tetrahedral field:
only high spin complexes t  O

Tetrahedron is related to cube in

e
splitting energy levels
t  1/2 C
Same arrangement of orbitals
Distortion of some octahedral complexes

All six Ni-O bonds two long axial

equal at 2.05 Å Cu-O bonds
= 2.45 Å

four short
in-plane
Cu-O bonds
= 2.00 Å
[Ni(H2O)6]2+
[Cu(H2O)6]2+
no distortion
distortion lengthens axial Cu-O’s
Tetragonal Distortion

The elongation along the z axis causes the d

orbitals with density along the axis to drop in
energy. As a result, the dxz and dyz orbitals lower in
energy.
 Orbital Degeneracy versus Electronic Degeneracy

Orbital degeneracy: The 5 d orbitals are of the same energy in

Energy
spherical field. This orbital degeneracy is lifted (reduced) in an
octahedral field (to t2g and eg ) 5 d orbitals in a
spherical field

Electronic Degeneracy : Case of t2g1 Electronic Degeneracy : Case of t2g3

Here there are three different ways by which the single electron Here there is only one way by which the three
can occupy the t2g orbitals. There are three possible electronic electron can occupy the t2g orbitals. So there is
configurations which are of the same energy. Electronic no electronic degeneracy
degeneracy is present

eg eg eg eg

t2g t2g
t2g t2g
 Ni(II) Cu(II)

High-spin Ni(II) – only one way

Cu(II) – two ways of filling the eg level
of filling the eg level
– it is electronically degenerate
– not electronically degenerate
Cu(II) d9
Ni(II) d8

eg eg
eg
Energy

t2g t2g t2g

What is the consequence of ELECTRONIC DEGENERACY ?

 Distortion of the shape of complexes:
The Jahn-Teller Effect
Hermann Arthur Jahn
English Scientist of German Origin Edward Teller
father of the hydrogen bomb
Director of Lawrence Livermore
The Jahn–Teller theorem states that any nonlinear molecule with an National Laboratory

electronic degenerate ground state will undergo a geometrical distortion

that removes the degeneracy, lowers the symmetry because the
distortion lowers the overall energy of the species.

The Jahn-Teller effect predicts which structures will distort. It does

not predict the nature or extent of the distortion. The effect is more
significant when the electronic degeneracy is in the orbitals that point
directly towards the ligands.

" H. Jahn and E. Teller (1937). "Stability of Polyatomic Molecules in Degenerate Electronic States. I. Orbital
Degeneracy". Proceedings of the Royal Society A 161 (905): 220–235.
d-Electron configurations which show Jahn Teller distortions

NO electronic degeneracy:
NO Jahn Teller Distortion

Normal Jahn Teller Distortion

Degeneracy in t2g

Significant Jahn Teller Distortion

Degeneracy in eg
• For complexes with 2 electrons in the eg set of orbitals, a d8 configuration, a
severe distortion may occur, resulting in a 4-coordinate square planar shape,
with the ligands along the z axis no longer bonded to the metal.

• Square planar complexes are quite common for the d8 metals in the 4th and 5th
periods: Rh(I), Ir(I), Pt(II), Pd(II) and Au(III). The lower transition metals have
large ligand field stabalization energies, favoring four-coordinate complexes.

• Square planar complexes are rare for the 3rd period metals. Ni(II) generally
forms tetrahedral complexes. Only with very strong ligands such as CN-, is
square planar geometry seen with Ni(II).
Tetragonal z out distortion extended : The Square Planar Case
 Applications of Crystal Field theory
Variation of some physical properties across a period

Lattice Energies (1st Row Divalent

1. Lattice energy of transition metal ions in a complex Transition Metal Halides and Main
2. Ionic radii of transition metal ions in a complex group halides)
3. Enthalpy of hydration of transition metal ions
Compound Lattice energy (KJ/mol) Differences

Lattice Energy: Energy released when one mole of an ionic Measured Calculated (KJ/mol)
solid is formed from isolated gaseous ions
NaCl -764 -764 0

MgF2 -2908 -2915 +7

The discrepancy for a six- coordinate transition metal ion MnF2 -2770 -2746 +24
can be explained by CFSE
FeF2 -2912 -2752 -160

CuF2 -3042 -2885 -157

NiF2 -3046 -2917 -129

•According to the Born –Lande Equation one can expect a smooth increase in lattice energies as we go from
left to right due to decrease in ionic radius of the metal ions
•As anticipated a smooth curve is not seen: instead a double hump shaped curve is obtained
•Ca2+ (d0), Mn2+(d5 HS) and Zn2+ (d10) which in common have CFSE =0 lie almost on the expected line.
•Ions such as V2+ which show high CFSE in a weak field situation with high lattice energy values show
significant deviation from the calculated lattice energies
 Ionic radii of transition metal ions in the presence of weak field and strong field ligands

One can expect decrease the ionic radii of the M 2+ ions smoothly from Ca2+ to Zn 2+ due to the increase in nuclear charge

But the plot shown below (left) for weak field ligands indicate that the expected regular decrease is absent expect for
Ca2+, Mn 2+ and Zn 2+

For strong field ligands like CN- a different trend in variation is observed with a steady decrease till d6 (t2g6)

+3 Oxidation
+2 Oxidation
state
state
Ionic radii of transition metal ions in the presence of weak field and strong field ligands

Why does the ionic radii decreases and then increases??

Ti2+ (d2) electron occupy only t2g

V2+ (d3) electrons occupy only t2g
Cr2+ (d4HS) electrons start occupying the eg orbitals

As the eg orbitals point directly towards the ligands, the

repulsion between the metal electrons and ligand electrons
will be higher than normal leading to the eventual increase
in the ionic radius.

In the case of strong field ligand such as cyanide there will

be a steady decrease in ionic radii till t2g6 is reached.

The same tend is observed also for M3+ transition metal

complexes
 Enthalpy of hydration of transition metal ions

It is the heat exchange involved when 1 mole of gaseous ions become hydrated
M(g)2+ + excess H2O [M(H2O)6]2+
The amount of energy released when a mole of the ion dissolves in a large amount of water forming an infinite
dilute solution in the process.

Higher the charge on the ions and smaller the size, more exothermic will be the hydration energy. So it is
expected to increase smoothly on going from left to right of the transition metals (green line in the graph)

The heats of hydration show two “humps” consistent with the

expected CFSE for the metal ions. The values for d5 and d10
are the same as expected with a CFSE equal to 0.
Magnetic properties of transition metal complexes

Magnet on:
Magnet off
Paramagnetic

Gouy balance to measure the magnetic

susceptibilities

Magnet on:
diamagnetic

48
 Magnetic properties of metal complexes
Magnetism is caused by moving charged electrical particles (Faraday,
1830s). These particles can be the current of electrons through an
electric wire, or the movement of charged particles (protons and
electrons) within an atom. These charged particles move much like
planets in a solar system:

nucleus spin around its own axis, causing a very weak magnetic field.
electrons orbit around the nucleus, causing a weak magnetic field.
electrons spin around their own axis, causing a significant magnetic
field .
Spinning electrons generate the bulk of the magnetism in an atom.

Within each orbit, electrons with opposite spins pair together,

resulting in no net magnetic field. Therefore only unpaired
electrons lead to magnetic moment
• The magnetic moment  of a complex with total spin quantum
number S is:
•  = 2{S(S+1)}1/2 B (B is the Bohr magneton)
• B = eh/4me = 9.274 10-24 J T-1
• Since each unpaired electron has a spin ½,
• S = (½)n, where n = no. of unpaired electrons
•  = {n(n+2)}1/2 B
• In d4, d5, d6, and d7 octahedral complexes, magnetic
measurements can very easily predict weak versus strong field.
• Tetrahedral complexes - only high spin complexes result, for t
 O.
 Magnetic properties: Spin only and effective
The spin-only formula (μs) applies reasonably well to metal ions from the first
row of transition metals: (units = μB,, Bohr-magnetons)

Metal ion dn configuration μs(calculated) μeff (observed)

Ca2+, Sc3+ d0 0 0
Ti3+ d1 1.73 1.7-1.8
V3+ d2 2.83 2.8-3.1
V2+, Cr3+ d3 3.87 3.7-3.9
Cr2+, Mn3+ d4 4.90 4.8-4.9
Mn2+, Fe3+ d5 5.92 5.7-6.0
Fe2+, Co3+ d6 4.90 5.0-5.6
Co2+ d7 3.87 4.3-5.2
Ni2+ d8 2.83 2.9-3.9
Cu2+ d9 1.73 1.9-2.1
Zn2+, Ga3+ d10 0 0