This question threw me for a loop because I believe that BR in the past said that shorter bonds are stronger bonds. Perhaps this only applied to comparing sp3 versus sp2 or sp bonds between same atoms. If so, that is unfortunate because now it's stuck in my head that shorter bonds are stronger. It turns out that you have to use table data to answer the question. Just a warning to anyone else that might fall into same trap - bond length can only be compared between same sets of atoms (I'm assuming) since the "shorter-stronger" rule doesn't work out when comparing bond strengths of halogen-halogen bonds, in the case of this question. In other words, which is stronger: Cl-Cl or F-F? Not the shortest bond!
BR Orgo Ch. 4 #11
- Thread starter dougkaye
- Start date
- Joined
- May 10, 2010
- Messages
- 78
- Reaction score
- 1
I remember reading that the discrepancy with F-F arises because the bond is so short that the lone pairs on flourine repel each other.
The shorter bond = stronger rule definitely holds true when comparing the haloacids. H-F > H-Cl > H-Br > H-I in terms of bond strength (H-F being the shortest bond and H-I being the longest).
The shorter bond = stronger rule definitely holds true when comparing the haloacids. H-F > H-Cl > H-Br > H-I in terms of bond strength (H-F being the shortest bond and H-I being the longest).
Last edited:
