Posts Tagged ‘Atomic orbital’
Monday, August 8th, 2016
The previous post contained an exploration of the anomeric effect as it occurs at an atom centre X for which the effect is manifest in crystal structures. Here I quantify the effect, by selecting the test molecule MeO-X-OMe, where X is of two types:
- A two-coordinate atom across the series B-O and Al-S, and carrying the appropriate molecular charge such that X carries two lone pairs of electrons (thus the charge is 0 for O, but -3 for B).
- A four-coordinate atom across the series B-O and Al-S, with X-H bonds replacing the lone pairs on this centre in the previous example, and again with appropriate molecule charges (e.g. +2 for SH2).
The donor in the anomeric interaction always originates on the oxygen of the MeO group attached to X. The acceptor is always the X-O σ* empty orbital. The results (table below, ωB97XD/Def2-TZVPP calculation, NBO E(2) in kcal/mol) confirm that as X gets more electronegative, the X-O σ* empty orbital becomes a better acceptor, and so the NBO E(2) interaction energy which quantifies the anomeric interaction gets larger. Eventually (with X=OH2) the donation of electrons into the X-O σ* empty orbital becomes so effective that the X-O bond (in this case O-O) dissociates fully and the NBO perturbation cannot be computed. Also for reference, a “normal” anomeric interaction (such as is found in e.g. sugars) is around 18 kcal/mol. Anything larger than this could be considered especially strong, and anything less than ~10 kcal/mol would be regarded as weak.
| X[1]* |
| BH2 |
CH2 |
NH2 |
OH2 |
| 12.5 |
17.7 |
18.5 |
dissociates |
| AlH2 |
SiH2 |
PH2 |
SH2 |
| 6.9 |
12.9 |
21.9 |
31.3 |
| B |
C |
N |
O |
| 8.3 |
11.7 |
12.9 |
14.2 |
| Al |
Si |
P |
S |
| 4.8 |
6.6 |
11.2 |
18.2 |
For the entry X=S, the E(2) term is actually larger than for the oxygen. I should note that the Me group itself is not passive in this process. The C-H bonds can also act as significant electron donors, but here I am not going to analyse this additional complexity.
This table reveals that there is nothing special about carbon as an anomeric centre, and here also the normal intimate association with the term anomeric and heterocyclohexanes such as found in sugars.
* Here I introduce a refinement to my normal process of citing the data produced for any specific calculation. Rather than including 16 individual citations for each cell in the table, I have gathered all these calculations into a collection and cite here only the DOI of that collection. When resolved, the individual members of that collection can then be inspected for the actual data.
References
- H. Rzepa, "Anomeric interactions at atom centres", 2016. https://doi.org/10.14469/hpc/1221
Tags:Anomer, Anomeric effect, Atomic orbital, Carbohydrate chemistry, Carbohydrates, Chemical bond, chemical bonding, Chemistry, Hydrogen bond, interaction energy, Lone pair, Physical organic chemistry, Quantum chemistry
Posted in Interesting chemistry | No Comments »
Saturday, August 6th, 2016
In the last few posts, I have explored the anomeric effect as it occurs at an atom centre X. Here I try to summarise the atoms for which the effect is manifest in crystal structures.
The effect is defined by X bearing two substituents, one of which Z is a centre bearing a “lone pair” of electrons (or two electrons in a π-bond), and another Y in which the X-Y bond has a low-lying acceptor or σ* empty orbital into which the lone pair can be donated. This donation will only occur if the Z-lone pair and the X-Y bond vectors align antiperiplanar. Here is the summary so far.
As required of a good periodic table, it has gaps that need completing, in this case X=N and X=S. Firstly N, for which the small molecule below is known (FUHFAP).
A ωB97XD/Def2-TZVPP calculation[1] yields an electron density distribution, which can be collected into monosynaptic basins using the ELF technique. There are two oxygen lone pairs (17 and 20) that are close to antiperiplanar to the adjacent N-O bond, having E(2) interaction energies obtained using the NBO method of 15.1 and 15.8 kcal/mol, typical of the anomeric range. The basin labelled 13 on X=N1 below is also perfectly aligned antiperiplanar with the adjacent O3-C2 bond, but its E(2) interaction energy is only 7.3 kcal/mol. Thus a strong anomeric interaction on the anomeric atom itself does not seem to occur. The same effect was noted for X=O in the previous post; the explanation remains unidentified.

With the X=S gap, we have lots of opportunity with polysulfide compounds, a good example of which is the C2-symmetric and helical S8 dianion TEGWAF[2]

Each of the 8 sulfur atoms exhibits antiperiplanar orientation of an S lone pair with an adjacent S-S acceptor σ* orbital;
1:2-3=23.7 kcal/mol;
2:3-4=18.5;
3:4-8=11.7, 3:2-1=7.4;
4:8-7=11.4, 4:3-2=9.2.
This just surveys the central main group elements, and it is possible that this little mini-periodic table may yet grow.
References
- H.S. Rzepa, "C 2 H 7 N 1 O 2", 2016. https://doi.org/10.14469/ch/195294
- Rybak, W.K.., Cymbaluk, A.., Skonieczny, J.., and Siczek, M.., "CCDC 880780: Experimental Crystal Structure Determination", 2012. https://doi.org/10.5517/ccykj88
Tags:Acetals, Alkane stereochemistry, Anomer, Anomeric effect, Atomic orbital, Carbohydrate chemistry, Carbohydrates, Chemical bond, Chemistry, interaction energy, Lone pair, Physical organic chemistry, Stereochemistry
Posted in crystal_structure_mining, Interesting chemistry | No Comments »
Sunday, February 21st, 2016
Hypervalency is defined as a molecule that contains one or more main group elements formally bearing more than eight electrons in their valence shell. One example of a molecule so characterised was CLi6[1] where the description "“carbon can expand its octet of electrons to form this relatively stable molecule“ was used. Yet, in this latter case, the octet expansion is in fact an illusion, as indeed are many examples that are cited. The octet shell remains resolutely un-expanded. Here I will explore the tiny molecule CH3F2- where two extra electrons have been added to fluoromethane.
Two such electrons added to e.g. such a methane derivative can be in principle accommodated in two ways:
-
The electrons on carbon could expand the octet shell by populating molecular orbitals constructed using 3s or 3p atomic orbitals (AOs) as well as the normal 2s and 2p shells. This is also the normal "explanation" for expanded octets, the assumption being that as one moves down the rows of the periodic table (e.g. P, S, Cl, etc) these shells become energetically more accessible (e.g. the 3d or 4s shell for P, S, Cl etc). In fact, for e.g. PF5, the occupancy of such "Rydberg" shells is only ~0.2 electrons, not a significant octet expansion.
-
The electrons can instead or as well as populate the antibonding molecular orbitals (MOs) formed from just the 2s/2p AOs. For a methane derivative, there are four bonding MOs (into which the octet of electrons are placed) and four anti-bonding MOs all constructed from the total of eight AOs. Well known examples of populating antibonding MOs are the series N≡N, O=O (singlet), F-F, Ne…Ne where the additional electrons are added to anti-bonding MOs and have the effect of reducing the bond orders from 3 to 2 to 1 to 0. And of course all core shells contain populated bonding and antibonding pairs.
Here are some ωB97XD/Def2-TZVPPD/scrf=water calculations. All these species are molecules with all-real vibrations, being stable toward dissociation to e.g. CH3– + H– or CH3– + F–. A transition state for this latter dissocation with IRC[2] can be characterised. In all cases the energy of the highest occupied MO or NBO is -ve, meaning that the electrons are bound, at least in part due to the solvent field applied.
|
Molecule
|
Wiberg CH order
|
Wiberg CF order
|
Natural Populations
|
E HONBO, au
|
dataDOI
|
|
CH42-
|
0.773
|
–
|
C:[core]2S(1.98)2p(3.82)3S( 0.15)4d( 0.01)
H:1S( 1.00)
|
-0.144
|
[3]
|
|
CH3F2-
|
0.980
|
1.213
|
C:[core]2S(1.05)2p( 3.20)3S(1.26)4p( 0.01)4d( 0.01)
H:1S( 0.84)2S( 0.01)2p( 0.02)
F:[core]2S(1.88)2p( 5.61)3S( 0.30)3p( 0.04)3d( 0.01)4p( 0.01)
|
-0.068 Click for 3D
|
[4]
|
|
CH2F22-
|
0.871
|
0.897
|
C:[core]2S(1.60)2p( 2.64)3S(0.39)3p( 0.01)4d( 0.01)
H:1S(1.19)2S( 0.06)
F:[core]2S(1.86)2p( 5.52)3S( 0.01)3p( 0.01)4p( 0.01)
|
-0.281 Click for 3D
|
[5]
|
|
CF42-
|
–
|
0.801
|
C:[core]2S(1.94)2p( 1.96)3S( 0.19)3p( 0.04)5d( 0.01)
F:[core]2S(1.89)2p( 5.54)3p( 0.01)3d( 0.02)
|
-0.148
|
[6]
|
-
CH42- shows only small Rydberg occupancy (< 0.2e), but a significantly reduced bond order for the four C-H bonds (each C-H bonding NBO also has some antibonding character for the other three CHs) and hence the molecule is not truly hypervalent.
-
CH3F2- in contrast shows quite different behavour. The C-H bond order is almost 1 and the C-F bond order is actually >1. Of the two extra electrons, ~1.28 now occupy carbon Rydberg AOs and the fluorine also has significant Rydberg population (~0.36e). So this is a real hypervalent system, in which the total valencies exceed that expected from an octet.
-
CH2F22- is somewhere inbetween the previous two systems. The carbon has modest Rydberg occupancy (~0.4e) but there is also significant occupation of the antibonding MOs. Both the C-H and C-F bond orders are <1.
-
CF42- shows a further reduction in the C Rydberg occpancy (<0.2) and the C-F bond order is also reduced. This reduction in bond order is also seen in other so-called hypervalent systems such as PF5.
So of these systems, CH3F2- can be reasonably called hypervalent, whilst the others have much less such character. It does appear that there is a fine balance between placing extra electrons into Rydberg orbitals to expand the "octet" and hence valencies, and placing them in anti-bonding orbitals where the individual valencies are actually reduced. It seems that substituting methane with just one fluorine encourages population of the Rydberg orbitals, but that more fluorines encourage instead population of the antibonding orbitals. What is remarkable is that CH3F2- actually has a (small) barrier to dissociation. The challenge now is to try to design a system which has a significant Rydberg population, a low antibonding population AND is stable to dissociation; this will require some inspiration. So do not hold your breaths!
References
- H. Kudo, "Observation of hypervalent CLi6 by Knudsen-effusion mass spectrometry", Nature, vol. 355, pp. 432-434, 1992. https://doi.org/10.1038/355432a0
- https://doi.org/
- H.S. Rzepa, "C 1 H 4 -2", 2016. https://doi.org/10.14469/ch/191837
- H.S. Rzepa, "C 1 H 3 F 1 -2", 2016. https://doi.org/10.14469/ch/191919
- H.S. Rzepa, "C 1 H 2 F 2 -2", 2016. https://doi.org/10.14469/ch/191918
- H.S. Rzepa, "C 1 F 4 -2", 2016. https://doi.org/10.14469/ch/191916
Tags:Antibonding molecular orbital, Atomic orbital, Block, chemical bonding, Covalent bond, energy, Hypervalent molecule, hypervalent systems, Molecular orbital, Molecular orbital diagram, Octet rule, Periodic table, Valence
Posted in Bond slam, Hypervalency | 1 Comment »