Close-Packing of Identical Spheres

The essential difference here is that any marble within the interior of the square-packed array is in contact with four other marbles, while this number rises to six in the hexagonal-packed arrangement. It should also be apparent that the latter scheme covers a smaller area (contains less empty space) and is therefore a more efficient packing arrangement. If you are good at geometry, you can show that square packing covers 78 percent of the area, while hexagonal packing yields 91 percent coverage.

If we go from the world of marbles to that of atoms, which kind of packing would the atoms of a given element prefer?

If the atoms are identical and are bound together mainly by dispersion forces which are completely non-directional, they will favor a structure in which as many atoms can be in direct contact as possible. This will, of course, be the hexagonal arrangement.

Directed chemical bonds between atoms have a major effect on the packing. The version of hexagonal packing shown at the right occurs in the form of carbon known as graphite which forms 2-dimensional sheets. Each carbon atom within a sheet is bonded to three other carbon atoms. The result is just the basic hexagonal structure with some atoms missing.

The coordination number of 3 reflects the sp²-hybridization of carbon in graphite, resulting in plane-trigonal bonding and thus the sheet structure. Adjacent sheets are bound by weak dispersion forces, allowing the sheets to slip over one another and giving rise to the lubricating and flaking properties of graphite.

مواضيع ذات صلة

Crystal Defects

Properties of Solids

Molecular Solids

Covalent Network Solids

Metallic Solids

Ionic Solids

The Fundamental Types of Crystalline Solids

Interstitial Void Spaces

The FCC unit cell

The cubic close-packed structure

The Hexagonal closed-packed structure

Two choices for the third layer lead to two different close-packed lattice types