How come the trend doesn't stand for Barium to Radium

  • Thread starter Ed Aboud
  • Start date
  • #1
199
0
The trend in ionization energies going down a group is that it decreases between each element. How come the trend doesn't stand for Barium to Radium. Barium has an ionization energy of 502 kilojoules per mole but Radium has an ionization energy of 510 kilojoules per mole. Why is this?
Thanks for any help.

edit:
Just noticed it occurs for La to Ac, Mo to W, Tc to Re, Ru to Os, Rh to Ir, Pd to Pt, Ag to Au, Cd to Hg, In to Tl, Sn to Pb as well.
 
Last edited:

Answers and Replies

  • #2
Redbelly98
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
12,121
160
I'd guess it has to do either with the appearance of all those extra elements in the Lanthanide series, or with the appearance of F orbitals, in between the pairs of elements you mention.

But more specifically, why this would cause a higher I.E. I don't know.
 
  • #3
chemisttree
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
3,587
622
I'd guess it has to do either with the appearance of all those extra elements in the Lanthanide series, or with the appearance of F orbitals, in between the pairs of elements you mention.

But more specifically, why this would cause a higher I.E. I don't know.

It is because f orbitals are less effective at shielding than d orbitals which are less effective than p and ultimately s orbitals. The nuclear charge increases but the shielding effect is lessened resulting in a greater ionization energy.
 
  • #4
199
0
Ah makes sense now. Thanks for the help.
 

Related Threads on How come the trend doesn't stand for Barium to Radium

  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
12K
Replies
1
Views
9K
Replies
4
Views
5K
Replies
5
Views
7K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
26K
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
13
Views
10K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Top