Why is there a difference in atomic and ionic radii for Ca and Zn?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the differences in atomic and ionic radii between Calcium (Ca) and Zinc (Zn). Calcium has an atomic radius of 1.74 Å and a Ca2+ ionic radius of 0.99 Å, while Zinc has an atomic radius of 1.31 Å and a Zn2+ ionic radius of 0.74 Å. The greater difference in atomic radii (0.43 Å) compared to ionic radii (0.25 Å) is attributed to Zinc's higher nuclear charge, which exerts a stronger pull on its electrons, resulting in a smaller ionic radius. The electron configurations of both elements further illustrate the impact of electron loss on their respective sizes.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of atomic structure and electron configurations
  • Familiarity with concepts of atomic and ionic radii
  • Knowledge of nuclear charge and its effects on electron behavior
  • Basic principles of periodic trends in chemistry
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the concept of nuclear charge and its influence on atomic size
  • Study the electron configurations of transition metals and their implications
  • Explore periodic trends in atomic and ionic radii across the periodic table
  • Learn about the role of suborbitals in determining atomic properties
USEFUL FOR

Chemistry students, educators, and anyone interested in understanding the factors influencing atomic and ionic radii, particularly in the context of transition metals like Calcium and Zinc.

siriuswishbear
hey guys!
I was just wondering if anyone could help me out a bit on this.
I have the following radii (in angstroms...not that it really matters)
Ca: 1.74 Ca 2+: .99
Zn: 1.31 Zn 2+: .74
Does anyone have any idea why the difference between the atomic radii of the two elements is greater than the ionic radii of the two ions? (atomic difference is .43 and the ionic diff is .25)
I've asked a bunch of people (friends in my class, parents, parents of friends etc.) and no one has any ideas
Can you help?
thanks!
lar
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
That is not so difficult, since both ions have a positive charge of 2, they lost two electrons and thus are smaller.

I'd have to know the electron configuration to comment why the loss of two electrons for one results in a different size difference than the other.
 
Ca= 1s^2 2s^2 2p^6 3s^2 3p^6 4s^2
Ca 2+= 1s^2 2s^2 2p^6 3s^2 3p^6 (aka [Ar])
Zn= 1s^2 2s^2 2p^6 3s^2 3p^6 4s^2 3d^10
Zn 2+= 1s^2 2s^2 2p^6 3s^2 3p^6 4s^2 3d^8
Does that help?
 
20Ca: [Ar] 4s2
30Zn: [Ar] 4s24d10

I guess the best explanation in the \inline\Delta radius would be that Zn has a larger nuclear charge than Ca, it thus pulls the electrons in its shells stronger inward.
 
Thanks Monique! I've been trying to find the answer for a couple of days, you're the first person that's come up w/ a logical reason (i got a lot of "just cuz..." and "i have no idea, go ask ___"
Thanks!
 
Originally posted by siriuswishbear
Ca= 1s^2 2s^2 2p^6 3s^2 3p^6 4s^2
Ca 2+= 1s^2 2s^2 2p^6 3s^2 3p^6 (aka [Ar])
Zn= 1s^2 2s^2 2p^6 3s^2 3p^6 4s^2 3d^10
Zn 2+= 1s^2 2s^2 2p^6 3s^2 3p^6 4s^2 3d^8
Does that help?
Thanks sirius :) I was thinking that the answer would lie in the suborbitals, since they have a different shape and all, but it also depends on the number of protons that pull the electrons towards the nucleus.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
14K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
831
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
8K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K