Raziel2701
- 128
- 0
If FCC and HCP are the ones with the highest atomic packing factor, why would there be metals with BCC structures?
The discussion revolves around the atomic packing factor of body-centered cubic (BCC) metals compared to face-centered cubic (FCC) and hexagonal close-packed (HCP) structures. Participants explore the reasons for the existence of BCC structures, particularly in transition metals, and consider factors such as magnetic characteristics and electron configurations.
Participants express multiple competing views regarding the reasons for the existence of BCC metals, including magnetic characteristics, electron configurations, and bonding influences. The discussion remains unresolved with no consensus reached.
Participants mention various factors such as magnetic ordering, electron configurations, and the nature of metallic bonds, but do not resolve the implications of these factors on the stability of BCC structures. There are also references to specific texts on solid state theory that may provide additional context.
This discussion may be useful for those interested in materials science, solid state physics, and the properties of metals, particularly in understanding the complexities of crystal structures and their influences.
Not magnetic characteristics, but probably electron configuration.Raziel2701 said:So the reason for the existence of BCC metals has to do with magnetic characteristics? Ok that is definitely a good thing to think about. Unfortunately I don't know much about those. In any case, thanks for showing me this.
It seems that all the metals that have a bcc structure are transition metals.
Correct.Studiot said:Actually the alkali metals (group1) and barium and radium(group2) also have a BCC structure.
I echo Vanadium's comment and further ask is the packing difference (68 as opposed to 74%) so very large?