Order C-I, C-Br, C-Cl, & C-F Bonds by Length

  • Thread starter Thread starter henry3369
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bonds Length
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on ordering carbon-halogen bonds (C-I, C-Br, C-Cl, C-F) by increasing bond length. Participants argue that electronegativity and atomic radii are key factors in determining bond length, with the consensus that bond length decreases as electronegativity increases. The reasoning is based on the relationship between atomic size and electronegativity, where smaller atoms with higher electronegativity form shorter bonds. The conclusion is that C-F has the shortest bond length, followed by C-Cl, C-Br, and C-I.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of atomic radii and their impact on bond length
  • Knowledge of electronegativity and its role in chemical bonding
  • Familiarity with carbon-halogen bond characteristics
  • Basic principles of molecular orbital theory
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the relationship between atomic radii and bond length in halogens
  • Study electronegativity trends across the periodic table
  • Explore the concept of bond order and its influence on bond strength
  • Learn about molecular orbital diagrams and their applications in bond length determination
USEFUL FOR

Chemistry students, educators, and professionals interested in understanding the factors influencing bond lengths in carbon-halogen compounds.

henry3369
Messages
194
Reaction score
0
Arrange these bonds in order of increasing bond length.
C-I, C-Br, C-Cl, C-F

Is there a way to figure this out without drawing molecular orbital diagrams and determining the bond order?
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
its been a while since chemistry, but won't electronegativity do it , shortest being carbon with the most electronegative (flourine)?
 
What about radii of the atoms involved? Aren't they enough to predict the outcome? These are all very similar bonds, carbon-halogen, no need for any more advanced approach when you can safely solve the problem assuming "all other factors are being equal".
 
The radii and the electronegativity follow the same pattern in this case, one is because of the other but its amazing how much you forget in a year (i can't remember off hand why size decreases as number increases across a row, I am sure with a little thinking I'd get it)

but if either of s are right both of us are right in the context of your question and I'm pretty sure we are
 
I am not convinced following electronegativity is a good idea. I can't think of good examples of molecules where the electronegativity is the only thing changing (or at least where all other changes are negligible) which is an important condition for such comparisons.
 
you may be right, as I said its been a year and I can't get into my chemistry brain right now, but I'm sure electronegativity goes down with increasing radius so our answers would be the same in this context.

personally I feel just looking at the size of the atoms isn't conceptually enough, it happens to work here but the haogens sharing with carbon in the first place cause it wants those electrons bad and carbon doesn't want to give them up.
how bad the halogen wants them would be its electronegativity and changes with the halogen choosen
how much carbon wants to keep them would be its electron affinity, and is constant

sooo, how hard there pulled together should be to some degree a function of electronegativity right? like I said its been a minute and my brains in physics world atm. so any misinformation is possible and accidental
 
Jediknight said:
I feel just looking at the size of the atoms isn't conceptually enough

In general it is not, but this is a very specific question.
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
10K
Replies
12
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
20K
Replies
2
Views
2K