Insights Blog
-- Browse All Articles --
Physics Articles
Physics Tutorials
Physics Guides
Physics FAQ
Math Articles
Math Tutorials
Math Guides
Math FAQ
Education Articles
Education Guides
Bio/Chem Articles
Technology Guides
Computer Science Tutorials
Forums
Chemistry
Biology and Medical
Earth Sciences
Computer Science
Computing and Technology
DIY Projects
Trending
Featured Threads
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Chemistry
Biology and Medical
Earth Sciences
Computer Science
Computing and Technology
DIY Projects
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Other Sciences
Chemistry
Coordination Chemistry of Transitional Metals, Periods
Reply to thread
Message
[QUOTE="Horseb0x, post: 3222317, member: 280240"] For example cobalt, rhodium and iridium. I know that Co(II) and the Co(III) ions have a coordination number of 6 and that Co(II) is more common because cobalt is usually more stable in the 2+ oxidation state but when it coordinates NH3 ligands the 3+ oxidation state becomes more stable. Is this a trend among the group 9 elements or are things different for rhodium and iridium? Also I read that the smaller the ligand, the greater the coordination number of the metal since there's more ligands can fit in the coordination sphere. Does that mean the larger the metal, the more ligands it can coordinate? For example the atomic radius of rhodium should be a fair bit greater than that of cobalt. Does that mean rhodium can coordinate more than 6 NH3 ligands? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Post reply
Forums
Other Sciences
Chemistry
Coordination Chemistry of Transitional Metals, Periods
Back
Top