Ion Electronic Configurations

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

dontbeanegaton

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2012
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
Hi folks,
I'm struggling to understand why the correct electronic configuration for Fe3+ is [Ar]3d5. Kaplan's explanation says, "Compared to the 3d orbital, the 4s orbital has a higher energy and will be stripped first."
However, I have been operating on the principle that energy is proportional to n+l. If so, 3d would "equal" 5, and 4s would "equal" 4 (s = 0). Furthermore, the 3d orbital is filled after 4s.
This is endlessly frustrating to me. 😕
How do I answer these questions consistently?

Members don't see this ad.
 
Just always remember that the 4s shell is the outer most shell and electrons will be removed from them first. This is a question the MCAT loves to ask, 1st to see if you can determine the number of ions, then to determine if you understand the structure of the atom and how electrons are removed. There will always be two answer choices with the same amount of electrons but one will have the electrons removed from the d orbital and the other with them removed from the 4s.
 
Just always remember that the 4s shell is the outer most shell and electrons will be removed from them first. This is a question the MCAT loves to ask, 1st to see if you can determine the number of ions, then to determine if you understand the structure of the atom and how electrons are removed. There will always be two answer choices with the same amount of electrons but one will have the electrons removed from the d orbital and the other with them removed from the 4s.

Regardless, the energy statement must be either true or false. If energy does correlate to n+l, then 4s cannot be > 3d in energy. If they're right, then n+l must not be correct.

EDIT: I found this paragraph on Wikipedia about this topic:
The naive application of the Aufbau principle leads to a well-known paradox (or apparent paradox) in the basic chemistry of the transition metals. Potassium and calcium appear in the periodic table before the transition metals, and have electron configurations [Ar] 4s1 and [Ar] 4s2 respectively, i.e. the 4s-orbital is filled before the 3d-orbital. This is in line with Madelung's rule, as the 4s-orbital has n+l = 4 (n = 4, l = 0) while the 3d-orbital has n+l = 5 (n = 3, l = 2). However, chromium and copper have electron configurations [Ar] 3d5 4s1 and [Ar] 3d10 4s1 respectively, i.e. one electron has passed from the 4s-orbital to a 3d-orbital to generate a half-filled or filled subshell. In this case, the usual explanation is that "half-filled or completely filled subshells are particularly stable arrangements of electrons".
The apparent paradox arises when electrons are removed from the transition metal atoms to form ions. The first electrons to be ionized come not from the 3d-orbital, as one would expect if it were "higher in energy", but from the 4s-orbital. The same is true when chemical compounds are formed. Chromium hexacarbonyl can be described as a chromium atom (not ion, it is in the oxidation state 0) surrounded by six carbon monoxide ligands: it is diamagnetic, and the electron configuration of the central chromium atom is described as 3d6, i.e. the electron which was in the 4s-orbital in the free atom has passed into a 3d-orbital on forming the compound. This interchange of electrons between 4s and 3d is universal among the first series of the transition metals.[16]
The phenomenon is only paradoxical if it is assumed that the energies of atomic orbitals are fixed and unaffected by the presence of electrons in other orbitals. If that were the case, the 3d-orbital would have the same energy as the 3p-orbital, as it does in hydrogen, yet it clearly doesn't. There is no special reason why the Fe2+ ion should have the same electron configuration as the chromium atom, given that iron has two more protons in its nucleus than chromium and that the chemistry of the two species is very different. When care is taken to compare "like with like", the paradox disappears.[17]

It seems I'm striking out. The answer seems to be, "just remember it."
 
Last edited:
Top