How would you compare the three types of bonds based on what happens to the valence electrons of the atoms?

Answer 1

So we compare #"covalent bonding"# to #"ionic bonding"# to #"metallic bonding."#

The modern covalent bond is conceived to be a region of high electron density between 2 positively charged atomic nuclei such that internuclear repulsion (on the basis of the electrostatic repulsion of like charges) is NEGATED, and a net attractive force results. Covalent bonds are thus highly directional, and if we map electron density between the bound nuclei, there is maximum density along the direction of the bond.

I am not entirely happy with this diagram, as it does not reflect the the maximized electron density between the hydrogen atoms.....Here is another attempt:

The point I wish to illustrate is that there is high electron density BETWEEN the nuclei.

On the other hand, #"ionic bonding"# results from the transfer of electrons between a metal (a reducing agent), and a non-metal (an oxidizing agent), such that discrete charged particles, #"ions"#, result, which are held together in an electrostatic lattice. In an ionic structure, which is strongly NON-MOLECULAR, every cation, every positively charged particle, is electrostatically to every other anion, every negatively charged particle in the ionic lattice.

Of course, cations, and anions, are electrostatically repelled by every cation, and anion is the lattice, but if you sum up attractive versus repulsive interactions across the lattice, which can certainly be done quantitatively, a net attractive force operates over the entire lattice. And thus ionic solids have high melting and boiling points, which reflects their molecularity (which is ZERO), and tend to be brittle solids, while having very high melting points. Solutions of ionic solids, when they can be dissolved in a solvent, thus also exhibit electrical conductivity.

And lastly we come to #"metallic bonding"#, which is observed for metals. Here each atom in the metallic lattice contributes one or two (or more) valence electrons to the overall lattice, to leave a structure which is often described as #"positive ions in a sea of electrons"#. Because the electrons are delocalized over the entire lattice, the metal nuclei can move with respect to each other, while still maintaining a chemical bond. Metals thus tend to be #"(i) malleable"#, meaning that they can be beaten out into a sheet, #"(ii) ductile"#, meaning that they can be drawn out into a wire, and (generally) #"(iii) electrically conducting"#. That is they can conduct an electric charge on the basis of the delocalized electrons.

And in this way the properties of metals, covalent solids, molecular gases and liquids can be rationalized on the basis of their peculiar electronic structure.

Sign up to view the whole answer

By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy

Sign up with email
Answer 2

Covalent bonds involve sharing valence electrons between atoms to achieve a stable electron configuration; metallic bonds involve the delocalization of valence electrons among a lattice of metal atoms, creating a "sea" of electrons that hold the metal atoms together. Ionic bonds involve the transfer of valence electrons from one atom to another, resulting in the formation of positively and negatively charged ions that are attracted to each other.

Sign up to view the whole answer

By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy

Sign up with email
Answer from HIX Tutor

When evaluating a one-sided limit, you need to be careful when a quantity is approaching zero since its sign is different depending on which way it is approaching zero from. Let us look at some examples.

When evaluating a one-sided limit, you need to be careful when a quantity is approaching zero since its sign is different depending on which way it is approaching zero from. Let us look at some examples.

When evaluating a one-sided limit, you need to be careful when a quantity is approaching zero since its sign is different depending on which way it is approaching zero from. Let us look at some examples.

When evaluating a one-sided limit, you need to be careful when a quantity is approaching zero since its sign is different depending on which way it is approaching zero from. Let us look at some examples.

Not the question you need?

Drag image here or click to upload

Or press Ctrl + V to paste
Answer Background
HIX Tutor
Solve ANY homework problem with a smart AI
  • 98% accuracy study help
  • Covers math, physics, chemistry, biology, and more
  • Step-by-step, in-depth guides
  • Readily available 24/7