Qualification > Sciences
CIE A2 chemistry doubts
ruby92:
Quote:Tin and lead have mettalic bonding which is easier to breakdown with heat energy than covanlent bonding.
this is from As and A level chemistry, brian ratcliff among other authors.
my question is why/how are mettalic bonds easier to break down than covalent bonds? shouldnt it be the other way around.seeing as how the positive ions in a metal atom are held togather by electrostatic forces between them and the sea of mobile electrons?
Twinkle Charms:
--- Quote from: ruby92 on September 29, 2010, 05:52:04 pm ---Quote:Tin and lead have mettalic bonding which is easier to breakdown with heat energy than covanlent bonding.
this is from As and A level chemistry, brian ratcliff among other authors.
my question is why/how are mettalic bonds easier to break down than covalent bonds? shouldnt it be the other way around.seeing as how the positive ions in a metal atom are held togather by electrostatic forces between them and the sea of mobile electrons?
--- End quote ---
hi ruby,
it will be great if you delete this topic n copy-paste ur ques. in CIE chemistry doubts. , solely made for this purpose, others may be benefited too (=
Deadly_king:
Does not really matter.......Twinkle Charms :)
--- Quote from: ruby92 on September 29, 2010, 05:52:04 pm ---Quote:Tin and lead have mettalic bonding which is easier to breakdown with heat energy than covanlent bonding.
this is from As and A level chemistry, brian ratcliff among other authors.
my question is why/how are mettalic bonds easier to break down than covalent bonds? shouldnt it be the other way around.seeing as how the positive ions in a metal atom are held togather by electrostatic forces between them and the sea of mobile electrons?
--- End quote ---
NOTE : You do not need to know the reason according to the syllabus. You just need to know the trends. However I had once been curious myself about this :P But do not get too much engrossed by this as it may confuse you throughout your studies.
Anyway there is no such thing about pure ionic or pure metallic bondings. It's more appropriate to say that Tin and Lead form ionic bonds with minimal covalent characteristics. It's a very complex matter and I would advice not to lose your time trying to understand that.
But if you really want to know, here is a link which might be helpful :
http://www.diffen.com/difference/Covalent_Bonds_vs_Ionic_Bonds
ruby92:
The link you gave me is about ionic and covalent.
i was asking about metallic and covalent.
Deadly_king:
--- Quote from: ruby92 on October 01, 2010, 12:43:27 pm ---The link you gave me is about ionic and covalent.
i was asking about metallic and covalent.
--- End quote ---
Yupz.......I know. It seems you really want to know.
But first you need to know more about covalent bonds. Normally there are two forms of covalent bondings namely simple molecular covalent bondings and giant covalent bondings.
Simple molecular structures consisting of bonds which are quite weak. However giant covalent structures consist of huge number of covalent bonds which together require loads of energy to break these bonds. This causes a dramatic rise in the strength of the covalent bonds.
examples of simple molecules : Carbon dioxide
Example of giant molecules : diamond
Hence metallic bonds are stronger than covalent bonds in simple molecular structure but weaker than those in giant covalent structures.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version