Bond length = Bond strength ?

  • Thread starter Dr. Nick
  • Start date
  • #1
28
0
Bond length, Bond strength, relationship ?

Is this always true ? And why? My answer to this question would be, having larger electron density between two nuclei, thus attraction, allows them to position more closely.

But somehow I think that there could be some exceptions of this rule, maybe in molecules of heavy atoms with many subvalece orbital not allowing them to be at close range, but still having strong bonds with good overlap.

Or, if this rule is absolutely and always true, I would say that bond strength decrease as atomic number increases (throughout period system), and molecules of atoms with larger number of orbital and electrons are less stabile.


edit:i've fixed the title
... :) well i've tried
 
Last edited:

Answers and Replies

  • #2
movies
Science Advisor
283
1
No, this is not always the case. Take for example F2 and Cl2; the bond lengths are 142 and 199 pm, respectively. The bond energies, however, are 158 and 243 kJ, respectively.

Another example (where one atom is kept constant) would be a C-N and a C-Cl bond. The C-N bond is 147 pm, the C-Cl, 177 pm. The energies are 308 and 330 kJ, respectively.

Data are from here.
 
  • #3
Gokul43201
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,051
18
For anyone that is confused by the title, I'm quite sure the OP is talking about the usual inverse relationship between bond-length and bond strength.
 

Related Threads on Bond length = Bond strength ?

  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
34K
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
7K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
12
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
1K
Top