Many transition metal complexes are characterized by the presence of an open shell. Thus an octahedral Ti(III) complex is likely to have one unpaired electron in the 3d shell of Ti, and have the state 2T2g. For example, the complex [TiIII(H2O)6]3+ is expected to have a ground state 2Tg, and this is, in fact, correctly predicted.
Calculation of metal complexes is made difficult for several reasons:
The following table shows the results of PM6 calculations of the ground state of various high symmetry transition metal complexes. Where the calculated heat of formation is zero, the calculated state is the same as the state expected. Where the calculated ΔHf is positive, the state expected is calculated to be an excited state, and the value is the energy of that state, in kcal.mol-1, above the calculated ground state, in other words, it is a measure of the error.
Complex |
ΔHf (Calc.) |
Sc(II)(H2O)6 2Tg | |
Scandium(ii) hexafluoride 2T2g | |
Ti(III)(H2O)6 2Tg | |
Ti(II)(H2O)6 3Tg | |
Titanium(III) hexafluoride 2T2g | |
Titanium(II) hexafluoride 3T1g | |
Titanium(II) hexachloride 3T1g | |
Titanium(III) hexachloride 2T2g | |
V(III)(H2O)6 3Tg | |
Vanadium(III) hexafluoride 3T1g | |
Vanadium(III) hexachloride 3T1g | |
Cr(III)(CN)6 4A2g | |
Cr(IV)(H2O)6 3Tg | |
Cr(III)(H2O)6 4Ag | |
Chromium(0) hexacarbonyl 1A1g | |
Chromium(III) hexafluoride 4A2g | |
Chromium(III) hexachloride 4A2g | |
Fe(III)(CN)6 2T2g | |
Fe(III)(H2O)6 2Tg | |
Fe(II)(H2O)6 5Tg | |
Iron(III) hexafluoride 2T2g | |
Iron(II) hexafluoride 1A1g | |
Iron(III) hexachloride 6A1g | |
Iron(II) hexachloride 5T2g | |
Ni(II)(H2O)6 3Ag | |
Nickel(II) hexafluoride 3A2g | |
Nickel(II) hexachloride 3A2g | |
Zr(III)(H2O)6 2Tg | |
Zirconium(III) hexafluoride 2T2g | |
Zirconium(III) hexachloride 2T2g | |
Mo(III)(H2O)6 4Ag | |
Molybdenum(0) hexacarbonyl 1A1g | |
Molybdenum (VI) hexafluoride 1A1g | |
Molybdenum (VI) hexachloride 1A1g |
The following table shows the results of PM6 calculations of the energy of excitation, in kcal.mol-1, from one state to another of various high symmetry transition metal complexes, and the comparison with the values observed by experiment..
Complex |
Energy of Excitation (kcal/mol) |
||
Exp. | Calc. |
Diff. |
|
V(III)(H2O)6 3Tg (F) -> 3Tg |
49.32 |
||
V(III)(H2O)6 3Tg (F) -> 3Tg (P) |
71.47 |
||
Vanadium(III) hexafluoride 3T1g -> 1Eg |
29.16 |
||
Vanadium(III) hexafluoride 3T1g -> 1T2g |
29.16 |
||
Vanadium(III) hexafluoride 3T1g -> 3T2g |
42.31 |
||
Vanadium(III) tetrachloride 3A2 -> 3T1 (P) |
42.88 |
||
Cr(III)(CN)6 4A2g -> 2Eg |
35.51 |
||
Cr(III)(CN)6 4A2g -> 2T1g |
37.36 |
||
Cr(III)(CN)6 4A2g -> 2T2g |
52.58 |
||
Cr(III)(CN)6 4A2g -> 4T1g |
93.62 |
||
Cr(III)(CN)6 4A2g -> 4T2g |
76.33 |
||
Chromium(III) hexafluoride 4A2g -> 2Eg |
44.87 |
||
Chromium(III) hexafluoride 4A2g -> 2T1g |
46.88 |
||
Chromium(III) hexafluoride 4A2g -> 2T2g |
62.88 |
||
Chromium(III) hexafluoride 4A2g -> 4T1g(1) |
64.89 |
||
Chromium(III) hexafluoride 4A2g -> 4T1g(2) |
98.14 |
||
Mn(II)(H2O)6 6Ag -> 4Ag |
72.33 |
||
Mn(II)(H2O)6 6Ag -> 4Eg |
71.39 |
||
Mn(II)(H2O)6 6Ag -> 4Eg (D) |
84.91 |
||
Mn(II)(H2O)6 6Ag -> 4Tg |
54.03 |
||
Mn(II)(H2O)6 6Ag -> 4Tg (G) |
66.04 |
||
Mn(II)(H2O)6 6Ag -> 4Tg (D) |
80.05 |
||
Ni(II)(H2O)6 3Ag -> 3Tg |
24.3 |
||
Ni(II)(H2O)6 3Ag -> 3Tg (F) |
39.45 |
||
Ni(II)(H2O)6 3Ag -> 3Tg (P) |
72.33 |
||
Nickel(II) hexafluoride 3A2g -> 1Eg |
44.14 |
||
Nickel(II) hexafluoride 3A2g -> 3T1g |
35.82 |
||
Nickel(II) hexafluoride 3A2g -> 3T1g |
68.07 |
||
Nickel(II) hexafluoride 3A2g -> 3T2g |
20.73 |
||
Zr(III)(H2O)6 2Tg -> 2Ag |
40 |
||
Zr(III)(H2O)6 2Tg -> 2Eg |
30 |
||
Zr(III)(H2O)6 2Tg -> 2Tu |
40 |
In almost all cases, the crystal field splitting is too small. This appears to be a fault in the set of approximations used.