Why isn't ClF3 trigonal planar?

  • Thread starter Thread starter prakhargupta3301
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Structural
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
3 replies · 12K views
prakhargupta3301
Messages
58
Reaction score
1
JTvl45.png

I know ClF3 has triagonal bi-pyramidal arrangement and T-shape molecular geometry. (as shown in first diag.). However, it can also be 2nd case. In this one, the shape will be triagonal planar. Also, electrons will be farthest. So why isn't ClF3 like second case?
 

Attachments

  • JTvl45.png
    JTvl45.png
    955 bytes · Views: 19,147
Chemistry news on Phys.org
In VSEPR theory, non-bonding electron pairs are sterically more demanding than bound electron pairs. In the first formula, each non-bonding electron pair has only two neighbours in a 90 degree separation while in the 2nd one, each has 3. Whether the distance between the two non-bonding pairs is 120 or 180 degrees will be rather irrelevant compared to the next neighbour repulsion.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: prakhargupta3301
I get what you mean. Thank you.
But would you be kind enough to explain what
DrDu said:
'sterically more demanding than bound electron pairs'
means?
[I did look up the meaning of steric but the meaning still isn't clear]
Thanks.