Thermodynamics

3 Jun 2017

Literature Discussion of "A stable compound of helium and sodium at high pressure"

Submitted by Katherine Nicole Crowder, University of Mary Washington
Evaluation Methods: 

Students could be evaluated based on their participation in the in-class discussion or on their submitted written answers to assigned questions.

Evaluation Results: 

This LO has not been used in a class at this point. Evaluation results will be uploaded as it is used (by Spring 2018 at the latest).

Description: 

This paper describes the synthesis of a stable compound of sodium and helium at very high pressures. The paper uses computational methods to predict likely compounds with helium, then describe a synthetic protocol to make the thermodynamically favored Na2He compound. The compound has a fluorite structure and is an electride with the delocalization of 2e- into the structure.

This paper would be appropriate after discussion of solid state structures and band theory.

The questions are divided into categories and have a wide range of levels.

Dong, X.; Oganov, A. R.; Goncharov, A. F.; Stavrou, E.; Lobanov, S.; Saleh, G.; Qian, G.-R.; Zhu, Q.; Gatti, C.; Deringer, V. L.; et al. A stable compound of helium and sodium at high pressure. Nature Chemistry 2017, 9 (5), 440–445 DOI: 10.1038/nchem.2716.

Corequisites: 
Learning Goals: 

After reading and discussing this paper, students will be able to

  • Describe the solid state structure of a novel compound using their knowledge of unit cells and ionic crystals
  • Apply band theory to a specific material
  • Describe how XRD is used to determine solid state structure
  • Describe the bonding in an electride structure
  • Apply periodic trends to compare/explain reactivity
Implementation Notes: 

The questions are divided into categories (comprehensive questions, atomic and molecular properties, solid state structure, electronic structure and other topics) that may or may not be appropriate for your class. To cover all of the questions, you will probably need at least two class periods. Adapt the assignment as you see fit.

CrystalMaker software can be used to visualize the compound. ICE model kits can also be used to build the compound using the template for a Heusler alloy.

Time Required: 
2 class periods
3 Jun 2017

An ion exchange method to produce metastable wurtzite metal sulfide nanocrystals

Submitted by Janet Schrenk, University of Massachusetts Lowell
Evaluation Methods: 

Evaluation methods are at the discretion of the instructor. For example, you may ask students to provide written answers to the questions, evaluate whether they participated in class discussion, or ask students to present their answers to specific questions to the class.

Description: 

In this literature discussion, students use a paper from the literature to explore the synthesis, structure, characterization (powder XRD, EDS and TEM) and energetics associated with the production of a metastable wurtzite CoS phase. Students also are asked define key terms and acronyms used in the paper; identify the goal of the experiments and determine if the authors met their goal. They examine the fundamental concepts around the key crystal structures available.  

 

Preserving Both Anion and Cation Sublattice Features during a Nanocrystal Cation-Exchange Reaction: Synthesis of a Metastable Wurtzite-Type CoS and MnS

Powell, A.E., Hodges J.M., Schaak, R.E. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2016, 138, 471-474.

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jacs.5b10624

 

There is an in class activitiy specifically written for this paper. 

Corequisites: 
Prerequisites: 
Learning Goals: 

In answering these questions, a student will be able to…

  • define important scientific terms and acronyms associated with the paper;

  • describe the rocksalt, NiAs, wurtzite, and zinc blende in terms of anion packing and cation coordination;

  • differentiate between the structure types described in the paper;

  • explain the difference between thermodynamically stable and metastable phases and relate it to a free energy diagram; and

  • describe the structural and composition information obtained from EDS, powder XRD, and TEM experiments.

Implementation Notes: 

This learning object was created at the 2017 IONiC Workshop on VIPEr and Literature Discussion. It has not yet been used in class.

Time Required: 
50 minutes
3 Jun 2017
Evaluation Methods: 

This LO was craeted at the pre-MARM 2017 ViPER workshop and has not been used in the classroom.  The authors will update the evaluation methods after it is used.

Description: 

This module offers students in an introductory chemistry or foundational inorganic course exposure to recent literature work. Students will apply their knowledge of VSEPR, acid-base theory, and thermodynamics to understand the effects of addition of ligands on the stabilities of resulting SiO2-containing complexes. Students will reference results of DFT calculations and gain a basic understanding of how DFT can be used to calculate stabilities of molecules.

 
Prerequisites: 
Corequisites: 
Learning Goals: 

Students should be able to:

  1. Apply VSEPR to determine donor and acceptor orbitals of the ligands

  2. Identify lewis acids and lewis bases

  3. Elucidate energy relationships

  4. Explain how computational chemistry is beneficial to experimentalists

  5. Characterize bond strengths based on ligand donors

Course Level: 
Implementation Notes: 

Students should have access to the paper and have read the first and second paragraphs of the paper. Students should also refer to scheme 2 and table 2.

 

This module could be either used as a homework assignment or in-class activity. This was created during the IONiC VIPEr workshop 2017 and has not yet been implemented.

 
Time Required: 
50 min
3 Jun 2017
Evaluation Methods: 

This learning object was created at the pre-MARM workshop in 2017 and as such has not been used in a classroom setting. The authors will update the learning object once they have used it in their classes.

Description: 

This module offers students in an introductory chemistry or foundational inorganic course exposure to recent literature. Students will apply their knowledge of Lewis dot structure theory and basic thermodynamics to compare and contrast bonding in SiO2 and CO2.

Corequisites: 
Course Level: 
Prerequisites: 
Learning Goals: 

Students should be able to:

  1. Describe the bonding in SiO2 and related compounds (CO2)

  2. Use Lewis dot structure theory to predict bond orders

  3. Apply bonding models to compare and contrast bond types and bond energies (sigma, pi)

  4. Characterize bond strengths based on ligand donors

Implementation Notes: 

Students should read the first paragraph of the paper prior to completing this learning object. They can be encouraged to read more of the paper, but the opening paragraph is the focus of this learning object.

Time Required: 
50 min
11 Apr 2017

Johnson Matthew Catalytic Reaction Guide

Submitted by Sheila Smith, University of Michigan- Dearborn
Evaluation Methods: 

No evaluation yet

Evaluation Results: 

No results yet

Description: 

This guide, available in print, online and in an app, allows users to look up appropriate catalysts and conditions to accomplish a wide variety of reactions.

 

Prerequisites: 
Course Level: 
Learning Goals: 

A student should be able to use the Catalytic Reaction Guide (CRG) to identify appopriate reaction conditions and catalysts to accomplish a wide variety of reactions.

Implementation Notes: 

I have not yet used this... I just picked up a copy at ACS, but will add to this as I implement it in my classroom.

 

Time Required: 
variable
10 Apr 2017

Redox Chemistry and Modern Battery Technology

Submitted by Zachary Tonzetich, University of Texas at San Antonio
Evaluation Methods: 

I do not grade this activity, but if I did, I would look for class participation in the discussion or assign several of the questions to be turned in at a later date.

Evaluation Results: 

My impression of this activity is that it really helps students see the value of redox chemistry. In my experience, the aspects of redox chemistry we teach students (balancing equations, calculating cell potentials, etc.) seem both difficult and esoteric. This activity reinforces these concepts while demonstrating their importance to modern life. One of the biggest realizations the students come to is the relationship between cell voltage and the mass of the materials involved in the redox reaction.

Description: 

This In-Class Activity is a series of instructor-guided discussion questions that explore lithium-ion batteries through the lens of simple redox chemistry. I use this exercise as a review activity in my Descriptive Inorganic Chemistry course to help prepare for examinations. However, my primary purpose with this exercise is to impress upon students how basic concepts in redox chemistry and solid-state structure are directly relevant to technologies they use everyday. I do not focus too heavily on the design or operation of the batteries themselves, as other exercises published on VIPEr already do a very good job of that. My intention is to demonstrate how a basic knowledge of redox chemistry is the first step in understanding seemingly complex technologies.

Learning Goals: 

The primary goal of this In-Class Activity is for students to solidify their understanding of redox reactions, cell voltages and the relationship between electrical energy and potential. The exercise is also designed to show students how these considerations are part of the design of modern batteries. A secondary aspect of the activity explores the solid-state structure of metal-oxides and how these materials are important to the operation of the battery. At the conclusion of the activity, the student should be familiar enough with calculaing cell voltages and free energy changes that they can critically evaluate the components of a standard battery.

Equipment needs: 

None.

Course Level: 
Prerequisites: 
Corequisites: 
Implementation Notes: 

I display the pdf file on screen and use the white board to work out simple arithmetic aspects of the exercise, while soliciting responses from the class.

Time Required: 
45 minutes
21 Feb 2017
Evaluation Methods: 

Graded problems students turned in.

Informal evaluation during discussion.

Evaluation Results: 

Graded assignments: mean of 84, std dev of 12, so a fairly broad range of understandings

Informal: Students really enjoyed getting to evaluate published work critically and were quite engaged in discussions, which helped to bring some of the students who didn't understand the paper as well up to speed.  After the paper, students have felt much more comfortable questioning what is stated in papers, particularly if little or no support is given.

I will definitely use this again!  Unfortunate to find a paper with several important oversights in the literature, but it is a good learning opportunity.

Description: 

This LO is a problem-set-style literature discussion that leads students through a critical analysis of an interesting but flawed paper from the recent chemical literature.  Students use the questions to help them work through the paper prior to class, providing plenty of raw material for an in-class discussion about various aspects of the work from a mechanistic organometallic perspective.  The questions help students critically analyze substrate tables, spectroscopic data, and computational results from DFT.

Corequisites: 
Course Level: 
Learning Goals: 
  • Students will be able to pull out important mechanistic information from substrate tables in an organometallic paper
  • Students will be able to use knowledge of organometallic mechanisms and organic chemistry to rationalize findings in a catalysis paper
  • Students will be able to use knowledge of spectroscopy, particularly NMR, to understand structure and bonding arguments in an organometallic paper
  • Students will critically analyze a paper and learn to feel comfortable questioning assertions by authors, including the major findings of a paper
Implementation Notes: 

I had students prepare answers to these questions ahead of class and bring the answers with them.  To add incentive, I collected them as a homework assignment (though I graded some of the harder ones fairly leniently).  The questions helped prepare them for a class discussion of the paper, which I led with a few slides containing information from the paper and some other useful tidbits (I am happy to send those to you if you like, just contact me).

Time Required: 
1-2 hours student prep (reading paper); 45 minutes in class discussion
4 Jan 2017
Description: 

This is a great new textbook by George Luther III from the University of Delaware.  The textbook represents the results of a course he has taught for graduate students in chemical oceanography, geochemistry and related disciplines.  It is clear that the point of the book is to provide students with the core material from inorganic chemistry that they will  need to explain inorganic processes in the environment.  However the material is presented in such a clear, logical fashion and builds so directly on fundamental principles of physical inorganic chemistry that the book is actually applicable to a much broader audience.  It provides a very welcome presentation of frontier orbital theory as a guide to predicting and explaining much inorganic chemical reactivity.  There are numerous very  helpful charts and tables and diagrams.  I found myself using the book for a table of effective nuclear charges when I was teaching general chemistry last semester.  The examples are much more interesting that the typical textbook examples and would be easy to embellish and structure a course around.  There is also a helpful companion website that provides powerpoint slides, student exercises and answers.  The book covers some topics not typically seen in inorganic textbooks like the acidity of solids but the presentation of this information makes sense in light of the coherent framework of the text.  We so often tell our students "structure dictates function".  This text really make good on that promise.  My only complaint is that I wish the title were something more generic so that I could use it for a second semester of introductory-esque material that we teach after students have taken a single semester of intro chem and two semesters of organic chemistry.  So much of what is covered in this textbook is precisely what a second semester sophomore chemistry major should know before proceeding on in the major.  But the title makes the book hard to sell to chemistry majors and that is regrettable. 

Prerequisites: 
Course Level: 
3 Jan 2017
Description: 

This Guided Literature Discussion was assigned as a course project, and is the result of work originated by students Stefanie Barnett and Katelyn Yowell.  It is based on the article “Synthesis, Electrochemistry, and Reactivity of Half-Sandwich Ruthenium Complexes Bearing Metallocene-Based Bisphosphines”, Shaw, A.P.; Norton, J.R.; Bucella, D.; Sites, L.A.; Kleinbach, S.S.; Jarem, D.A.; Bocage, K.M.; Nataro, C. Organometallics 2009, 28, 3804-3814. It includes a Reading Guide that will direct students to specific sections of the paper emphasized in the discussion.  This article presents the study of an array of metallocene-based bisphosphine ligands.

Course Level: 
Corequisites: 
Learning Goals: 

After reading and discussing this article, a student should be able to…

-       Understand the nomenclature of metallocene-based bisphosphine ligands.

-       Apply the CBC electron-counting method in the presence of metallocene-based bisphosphine ligands, which may be in an oxidized form.

-       Appreciate the role of phosphine cone angles in organometallic synthesis.

-       Understand the effect of a ligand’s electron donor ability on a metal’s redox potential.

-       Appreciate how synthetic methods may emphasize either the kinetic or thermodynamic product.

-       Understand how 1H NMR can help differentiate dihydride/dihydrogen isomers.

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - Thermodynamics