Chapter 1shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/975/7/07_chapter 1.pdfcorrection of +0.0023 due...
Transcript of Chapter 1shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/975/7/07_chapter 1.pdfcorrection of +0.0023 due...
Chapter 1
Introduction
Electron Pararnuynct~c Resotlance ( t P R ) is defined as the form of
spectroscopy conccmctl tvith ~n~crowav~.- induced transitions between
m a g n c t i ~ cnurgy levels ol'clcctrons 11,rving a net spin (i.e., unpaired electrons)
anlI i ~ r h ~ [ . ~ i ; I I I ~ I I ~ ; I I I I I ~ ' I I I L , I I I L I I I I h1,1\1 C ~ I I ~ I I ~ O I I ~ ~ these systems have S = Ii?
hut 5 call be an) \aIuc li.i1111 1:2 to 7 2 i l l incrclncnta of 112. When the spin is
odd, I.c., lor CXUIIIPIC. S - 1 2 . .<:2 111. 5 2 . ipcctra are easily obtained at room
[cmperaturc. Howcvcr it ~ l i c iplli is CLCII, 1.e.. for example, S = I . 2 or 3, then
the possibil~ty of obtdlnlng speclrd u ~ l l depend upon a number of
c~rcumstnnces that arc usu~ll! 1101 I1ieV: tllus the EPR of even spin systems is a
very specializ,ed unc. E P R specrrosiopy is capable of providing molecular
structural dciails inazcc\hihle by orher ; in~l$~caI tools. EPR has been
successfully spp l~ed In suili i i ~ \ e ~ . z c Li~scipl:nrj ds biology. phys~cs, geology.
chemistry, medical sclellcc. lnattrlal science. anthropology, to name but a
few. Solids. liqulds and gtise, arc dl1 . ~ ~ i t s b ~ b l c to EPR. B) utilizing a variety
of special~zed lcchniquca (sucll as splri-rrapptng, spin-labeling, ESEEM and
ENDOR) in conjunction ~ ~ t h EPR. rcscdrchers are capable of obtaining
detailed inibrlnatlon about many Loplca of scientific interest. For example,
chemical kinetics, electroil txchangc, clcciruchemical processes, crystalline
S t U c t u ~ , fundament;ll cjuantum t1ieor.y. catalysis, and polymerization
reactions habe all bculi studied ~ ~ t h great success. Possible systems
encountered in biology are:
1. Organic radicals:
Quinones. Redox, Prusthctic groups (Flavin, amino acids).
Chlorophyll'. R~~d~at ln i l Damage (amino acids, purines and
pyriniidines). Spin L~hclh rtc..
2, Inorganic radicals (S = 112):
OX. NO
3. Rletals:
Fe S = 1 3 . [lo\\ >pin Fc(lll), FeS clusters]
S = I jFcliV))
S = 9 2 [intmnediatc spln Fe(lfl)]
S 2 [kclll)]
S - 5 2 [ll!gh >PI11 Fc. (Ill)]
Cu (11) S - I ?
Mn(I1) S = 5 7
Mu(\') S - I 2
Cu(l1) S = I 2 . 3 2
Ki(1, Ill) S= I 2
The detection of EPR sgnals from !metal-ions in proteins can provide the
ibllowing infurniat~un:
1 ) Identiiicnt~on iifrlic prcsence til'a mcral ioc: Confirmation that the EPR
signal bclongs ti) a ~xirhcula~ metal ion can 5ometimes he done by
mcusurcnicnl ~>l'riucIt.ar 1i)pc1 l int a l i .n .d (see h r l o ~ ) .
2 ) By t b l l o ~ iny the ch.ingus in l l i ~ , ~~xidntion stalc of rhe metal ion.
3) Identification of the metal ion and the surrounding ligands.
4) Quantifying the concentration of paramagnetic centre.
The technique of' ciectron param~gnetic resonance was discovered in
1944 by Zavo~sky [I j In thc coursc ~il'invesligation of electron paramagnetic
energy absorption by pararnagnetlc oieral salts. Since its discovery, EPR
spectroscopy has becomc a most important and dominant tool for quantitative
structural infonnat~on o i the elrctron~c and spatial configuration of
pararnagnetlc centers. Thc maln advantage of this spectroscopy is that a small
percentage of paramagner~c impurity present in a bulk diamagnetic host lattice
can bc studied In dctail. Thc appli~~ition and theory of t h ~ s spectroscopy is
discussed in detail in a nuniber of text books [2-81. Nowadays, EPR has
become an important tool In csumatiny the ages of fossils [9], in imaging etc.
Electrons in molecular systems, by virme of their spin and orbital
motion, have spin magnetic moment 11, and orbital magnetic moment PI given
by
p5 = -(2.00?3 e! 11 4mn) S
111 = - ( I el h 1 4m) L -----[I. 11
where S and L are thc spln and orb~t~ll angular momenta in units of h12n and
e is the ma~mitudc of tiit. electron~i charge. The factor 2.0023, known as
free-electron gyomagnetic ratio. ariscs out of the 'anomalous' Zeeman effect
and can be derived fi.0111 Diras's r~Iatl\~iitic wave mechanics and includes a
correction of +0.0023 due to relati\~stic mass variation [10,1 I]. The total
effectlve magnetlc moment p, whlch is the vector sum of the spln magnetlc
moment and orb~tal magnetlc moment, therefore, can be expressed as
p = pb + 1) = -[)e ( 2 0023S - L) -----[I 21
where pe - I e hi4;im, is known as the Rohr mdgneton For a free electron
(rarely found in pract~cal systems, except In cases such as conduction
electrons or In S states), the orbltal contr~but~on becomes zero. Hence, the
interaction energy, In an applled magnetlc field (B) is glven by
E = -213B.S o r - g p B S -----[I .3]
For free electrori Yyatems, thc spln iiiomenta are quantized along the apphed
field dXl5 w ~ t h 7 components Sr = t l 2b That 1s the time Independent
component$ o t the preceasirly \p:n \r i tors Ile either parallel or anti-parallel to
the direct~on of ~ h c dppl~i'd d c ilelii B Thus only two energy states are
posslble for a frec electron at i gPBSz dbout the unpenurhed energy level. as
shown In Flbure I I Transltlons berueen thcse le\els are posslble when the
system is subjected to 611 oscillat~np elrctromagnet~c field It can be eastly
shown that the net paranlagnetlc moment @resent as a result of Boltrmann
dlstnbutlon) precesses about the euterndl field axis w ~ t h an angular velocity
to glven by o = - I el B:lm, tcnned .la the Larmor precession frequency. A
smdll rotatlng mabmetlc 5eld Bl rotating In the sdrne sense as the net
rnagnetlzallon vector cdu\c\ exchange of energy between ~tself and the system
of splns causlng transitions to occur br..ween the Zeeman states I.e., at
resonance w ~ l = - el B;2m Expenmentally, microwave field replaces the
rotdtlng field B I The alternating field cdn be shown to be equ~valent to the
Energy
h
I I I
Magnetic I field [B]
_h I ,,,,ti,
Bo
Figure 1.1: Schetnatic representation of thc resonance condition in the
frequency mode.
rotatlng field as far as EPR and KMR are concerned The requirement that the
osc~llatlng field should bc appl~ed pcrpcnd~cular to the statlc external field has
been proved using qudnrum n ~ e ~ h ~ i n ~ ~ \ whlch also throws l~ght on the
select~on rules for mnbmetlc dipole translt~ons According to the well-known
result of the t~me-dependent pcnurhdt~on theory [l2], the t~me-~ndependent
transltlon probah~l~ty la pruport~onal to the q u a r e of the absolute value of the
transltlon moment P given by
P = < ~ l ' v l ! + , > ' -----[I 41
where < i+~, and 1 ~1 ; dre the in~tial dnd final state vectors and V IS the tlme-
independent part ot the p c ~ ~ u i h a ~ l o n that conneLts these states In EPR. y, and
y , ~orres~,onll ro Ms value\ dnd ~i B1, = 2Blcoccot and V = gp Bl.S, then
P = < ~ , V ~ + I , > = = <-1.2 gPBlSi+1,2>'
= gp[< -1 '2 B z S z l ~ 1/2> T c -li2BxSx+1!2> +
< -112 B ~ S ~ ~ T I ! ~ > ] ' ----[I 51
Slnce the first term in square brackets IS zero, BI parallel to the axls of
qudnt~zation will be lneffect~ve Also when B I la perpend~cular to the a x ~ s of
quantlzatlon, the operators Sx and Sy lead to w, = y,=l and hence the
s e l e ~ t ~ o n ~ u l e AMs - i l Howe~er in tnplet spln ground states, ~t can be
shown that transltlons can occur at low fields with BI parallel to the axis of
quant~zat~on In general, unpa~red electrons In transltlon metal complexes do
possess orb~tal angular momentum The cpln and orb~tal angular momenta
couple to g v c a resultant angular momentum J. w ~ t h (25-1) degeneracy The
J values range from L+S to L-S The energy levels In a magnetic field B
are glven by
The correspond~ng g-factors, known ns the Lande g- factors are gven by
with J = I L-S / for less than half-filled d-shell and J = I L r S for more than
half-filled shell
The effect~vcnesa of the coupllng of the spln and orbital motion,
however, depends of the exacr nature of the envlronment of the paramagnetic
Ion Surround~ng ionlc charges, bonded ligands e tc , produce a strong
electrostat~c field and the spin-orb11 coupling wlll breakdown due to the
'quenching' of the orbital angular niomentuin Thus EPR systems can be
divided ~ n t o three maln carcgones I c . ueali-iield, intermed~ate field and
strong field cases In the plcscnr thesis, some first row transition ions are
studled In divalent environment and ~liesc fall under the intermediate crystal-
field clas?. wherc the crystal-tield ipllttlng dnd spin-orb11 coupling compete
Thus the g-factors would be neither 2 0023 nor the one given in Lande
equation, but wlll depend on the symmetry and strength of the crystalline
electnc field and the orientation of the external tield with respect to the axes
of the crystal field
EPR 1s scnsitlve to the changes In symmetry of the envlronment.
Apart from this, a number of interact~ons modify and spllt the energy levels of
the unpalred electron The former causes a shift In the center of grav~ty of the
spectrum, where as the latter Influences the fine structure In favorable
circumstances, a detalled analyslq of thc EPR spectrum leads to a very
accurate d e t e m ~ n a t ~ o n of bondlng pmmeters and the electronic structure of
the ground state, not eastly posslble In many other types of spectroscopy A
general cons~deratlon of the Interaction involved in the case of a paramagnetic
specles (wlth panlcular emphas~s on transition metal ions) In a crystal field 1s
formulated in terms of general~zed Hamlltonlan A consequence of th~s ,
lnvolvlng only spln-operators, 1s the spln-Hamllton~an, whlch is an art~ficlal,
though pract~cai concept IS dcscnbed ~ubsequently
The spln Ham~ltonlan conslats of vanous terms. whlch have been
ansen due to d~tferenr type, u! lnteractlons between electron spln wlth elther
the applled magnetlc field or nuclear spln or another electron spln and the
nuclear s p ~ n either w ~ t h the applled maLmeric tield or another nuclear spln
The ongln and tmponance of these interactluna are ment~oned below
Zeeman Interaction: 3fiz,,
T h ~ s anses due to the interaction of the external magnetlc field with
the apln and orbltdl magnetlc momenta of the electrons and nuclear spln
magnetlc moment and IS ylven by
Z z e e = P (L + 2 5 ) B - gn P n B INI, -----[I 81
where p, 1s the nuclear mabaeton and 1, are the vanous magnetlc nuclear
spins. The first term is known as the electron Zeeman Interacbon. The
second term, which is the nuclear Zeeman interaction, causes to a high degree
of approximation, merely a constant shifi of all the energy levels and is of
minor importance in EPR. except in cases where the hyperfine coupling is
much smaller than the nuclear Zeemaii interaction.
Spin-Orbit Interaction: 21 s
This represents thc coupllng between the magnetic momenta arising
fiom the spin and orb~tal motion of the unpaired electrons and can be written
as:
'%?is = Il,i 81.1 1, S h -----[I .9]
If we neylcct the electron spin and 'other-orbit' interaction, then the above
term can be given in terms of the one-electron spin-orbit coupling constants E,,,
Within the Russel-Saunders scheme, rhc interaction reduces to
:H)Ls = 7.L.S ----[I. 111
where A is the spin-orbit coupling constant of the ion and is a function of the
effective nuclear charge. For more than half-filled shells, A is negative and
for less than half-filled shells, it is positi1.e. In the spin-Harniltonian
formalism, the effect of spin-orbit coupllng is assimilated into 'the fictitious'
spin concept (vide infra).
Spin-Spin Interaction: Xss
When more than one unpaired electrons are involved in the systems
with ground state triplet or higher spln multiplicity, direct dipole-dipole
interactions among these spins lead t o the splitting of the spin-states via the
spin-spin interaction given by
When the external ma~metlc ticid 1s niuch stronger than the magnitude of spin-
spin coupling constant. the above vector dot products can be expanded to give
Xiss = (gp)' (3cos20 -1) Sj. ~k ----[1.13] rijI
Here 6 is the angle between the external field and the vector joining Sj and Sk.
Hyperfine Interaction: :@$I
This is a zero-fieid type interadion connecting the electronic mabmetic
momenta and the asso~iatcd nuclear ma~metic momenta. This consists of an
isotropic Fermi contact term for s-type spin-densities and a pure dipole-dipole
type interaction described b) a tenhor due to unpaired p, d, f type spin-
densities. The interaction is written as:
The first tern descr~bes an interaction of two point-dipoles and the second
containing the Dirac delta function, whlch when integrated wirh the wave
function vanishes exccpt at r , = 0 corresponds to the isotropic interaction.
Thus, in the non-relativistic approximation, only s-orbitals can contribute to
isotropic coupling to the concerned nuclei.
In a more rigorous Treatment, interactions between the orbital magnetic
moment and the nuclear spin moment also have to be taken into account.
Again, this can be effectively taken into account in the spin Hamiltonian
formalism.
Nuclear Quadrupole Interaction: 3iio
This interaction is relevant only to systems having nuclei with spin I
tl and arises as a result of the interaction of the nuclear electric quadrupole
moment with thc clcctric licit1 gradient at the nucleus due to the surrounding
electrons. It is expressed as
ZQ = I,, [e2~,;21, (21,-I)] [r',,.l,.(l,+l) -3(rg.1,)*] r-',)
where Q is the nuclear electnc quadrupole moment.
Spin Hamiltonian:
Most EPK data can be described in terms of "Spin-Hamiltonian'
invoicing smaller number of tcnns by use of an effective fictitious spin
without a detalled knowledge of spin-orbit coupliny, the magnitude of crystal
field splitting, etc.
In Dyad operator notation, the Spin-Harniltonian can be expressed as
c V s = P , B , g . S + l . A . S * S . D . S + l . Q . I + ..... ----[1.16]
where g, A, D and Q are second rank tensors, whose principal axes need not
coincide. These correspond to the electronic g-tensor, hyperfine tensor, zero-
field tansor and quadrupole coupling constant tensor respectively.
The concept of fictitious spin will be discussed in a more detailed way.
Just like in the case of a quantum state described by J splits it into ( 2 J t l )
levels in an external field, a system designated with the fictitious spin S' splits
into (2S'+1) lcvcls and transitions arc allowed between these according to the
selection rules. Thc only diffcrence bctwecn the true spin S and fictitious S' is
that the latter defines the efttctive spin-angular momentum endowed due to
any orbital contribution. Whereas the spin-only g-factor would deviate from
this due to admixture of higher lying dates into the ground state via spin-orbit
coupling and hcncc cfScct~\cly t&es into account of the effect of crystal field
terms and spin-orbit tern1 of'rhe generalized Hamiltonian. Since the isotropic
g-i:dctor of a free electron is moditied into a tensor when orbital momentum is
nor completely quenched In the principal axls system of the g-tensor, the
Hamiltonian is written as
3P = P (BxgxtS, + B,vg!,S, + B,guS,) ----[I. 171
If the tensor is cylindrically symrnetnc. g,, = g, = g~ = g and B x x = B, = BU
= B, then
And ~f the tensor i, ax~ally symmetnc
Z = P[B,g S i* g,(BxS, BvS,)I
Likewise, the hyperfine terms whlch cons~st of a d~polar part and lsotroplc
part are wntten generally aa
X = Ax, I x Sx - A!, 1, S, + A n Iz S, ----[I 201
If the unpdlred elcctron 15 purely ?-type, then
2 = a 11, S, and = (8x13) gpg,P, I ~J(o)! ----[I 211
where I y ~ ( 0 ) ' 17 thc s q u a d ampl~tude of the unpalred s-electron dens~ty at
the nucleua lsotrop~c hyperfinc Interaction anses due to (a) d~rect unpalred
sp~n-dens~ty In an s-orh~tal or In a moleculdr orb~tal (M 0 ) w ~ t h s-orb~tal
contnbutlon, (b) sp~n-poldr~~atlon, due to ~sot;op~c hyperfine coupllng In an
lsolated paramdbnetlc atom or Ion. i\here the electron 1s In a p or d orb~tal
arlac? wo poldi~/dt~tin ot c o ~ c \-electrons, (c) also configuration lnteractlon
between d b~ound state M 0 orbrtdl w~th no s-orbital contnbutlon and states
uvth fin~te a-orb~tal contribution
D~polar coupllng a n x i out ot polnt d~pole lnteractlon between p or d
orblral w ~ t h the nucleus ~ n d toliows a (3 cos28-1) Xanat~on p e n by
311d - g~g,~,(3cos'0-1) ( ~ l ( r ' ) ) ----[I 221
In p' or di h ~ g h apln ~onfiguratlon, due to aphencal charge d~stnbut~on,
d~polar-couplmg van~shei Also In pdramagnetlc systems In solut~ons, where
the system tumbles rdpldiy. ~t averages to zero, helng represented by a trace-
less tensor
The s p a of the expenmental pnnc~pai values of the hyperfine tensor
cannot be Inferred from EPR apectra However, a sens~ble cho~ce (often made
easier, if the isotropic coupling can he independently determined) can always
be made with the ratio of unpaired p and s densities in simple free-radicals
depends on the hybridization and hence leads to an estimation of bond angles
[ 6 ] . Often hyperfine coupling to ligand-magnetic nuclei in transition metal
complexes, when the unpaired electron 'formally' occupies a metal orbital and
orbital can lead to an estimate of the covalence of the metal ligand bonds.
In systems wlth Inore than one unpaired electron, the spin-degeneracy
is removed even in the absence of external magnetic field by second spin-
orbital coupling known as the zero-field interaction. This is also a dipolar
type interaction and expressed in the spin Haniltonian as
ZSS = D[s,'-I/~ S(S-I)] - E(s,' - s:)
= D ~ ~ s , , ~ rD!!SP? -Dusu: ----[I ,231
The D,,'s are the principal values ot' the D-tensor and E is an asymmetry
parameter depending on rhr deviarlot~ ui' the D-tensor from axial symmetry.
The relative mayl tude of D and gpB is to be noted in any perturbation
treatment of the spin-Hamiltonlm.
The quadmpolar rcnn in the spin-Hamiltonian is quite
analogous to the zero-field terms and is give by
20 = ~ ~ ~ 1 , ' - Q ~ ~ I ! ' ~~i~
=Q'[I,! -1!3 1 (l+i)] -Q" [I,?-I,'] ----[I ,241
where Q,,'s are the principal values of the quadrupole coupling constant
tensor. Here, Q' is similar to D and Q" to E. The quadmpolar interaction
affects the EPR spectrum in two ways. Firstly, since there will be a
competition between the electric field gradient at the nucleus and the
hyperfine field to quantize the nuclear spin-angular momentum about their
respective axis, the / m p ' s are no longer good quantum numbers: hence the
selection rule AMs = ?I, Am1 = 0, is no longer valid and 'forbidden'
transitions with Am1 = 11, f2 become allowed. Secondly, q u a d ~ p o l a r effects
cause the intensities of normal transitions and hqperfine spacing to become
unequal, the latter showing progressive increase or decrease from the ends
towards the center. in slngle crystals, especially when the external field is
perpendicular to the s,mmetry axis, the analysis becomes difficult due to the
preaence of intense forbidden tranaittons [15]. In the present thesis, we have
examined some first row transition ions in tlistorted octahedral environments.
I:ro~ii our rcuulth. ~ l i c clti,~tIrt~l)olai' cl'fccts kcem to bc small and a complete
analysis of the spectra a i th the inclusion of quadrupolar terms has not been
attempted.
An important theorem. which helps to predict the observability of EPR
spectrum, is Kramer's theorem [I31 which states that a purely electrostatic
field c2n nevcr rcducc the degencracy of the system, if it has an odd number
of electrons. Such degencracy as remains (generally two-fold) can be lifted
only by an extemai magnetic field. Another concerned theorem is the one due
to Jahn and Teller [I41 according to ~ h i c h any symmetric non-linear molecule
with an orbitally degenerate ground state undergoes such a distortion as to
remove the degeneracy including spin-degeneracy, limited only by Krarner's
theorem. Excitcd states may still be only a few hundred cm" above, leading
to short spin-lattice relaxation time (vide injra). Thus octahedral complexes
with d3, high spin dS and d7 give narrow EPR lines at room temperatures. The
other dn system (S>I) must be studied at low temperatures except in cases
where ground state is orbitally non-dcyenerate.
An appropriate choice of the spin Hamiltonian based on the symmetry
of the paramagnetic species often leads to a correct solution of the spin
Hamiltonian parameters such as g, A, D, Q etc. The parameters are also
derived theoret~cally from the knowledge of the ground state molecular orbital
and optical spectroscopic data w~th the use of perturbation theory. The
methodology of obtainirig M.0, coi.i'ficients from the observed magnetic
rcsonancc porilinctcrs OULC bccn dcsc~ihcd in dctail in the literature [16,17]. It
I > possible, i n f;l\orahlu case>, thcrcfore to obtain bonding parameters for
transition metal complexes from EPR data.
Crystal field parameters for d electrons:
Both dl and d' systems have a single unpaired electron in the
outermost d-orbital and hence, give rise ro 'D in the free ion state. The energy
level splitting for dl and d" systems IS the same but the ordering of the energy
levels is inverted tbr both Ions in any symmetry like octahedral, tetrahedral,
square planar etc. In octahedral symmetry, six ligands are arranged
octahedraily around tho central d-metal ion and it is clear that the repulsive
forces exened by the ligands would be strongest along the directions of the X,
Y and Z- axes, because in Oh field all ligands are aligned along X, Y and Z-
axes. We know that dx'-i2 and d: orbitals (known as e, set) of the d-metal
ion are aligned along the X, Y and 2- axes respectively and the remaining d,,,
d, and d,, orbitals (known as tzg set) are directed along lobes between the X,
Y and Z- axes. In other words, in 01, field, the repulsion effects on orbital eg
will be more than on the tr, set. As a result, the 'D term splits into e, and tz,
levels in Oh field. Fibures 1.2 and 1.3 show the splitting of d-orbitals under
various symmetry environments of the metal ion. In the case of d9 electron,
where the t2, level is lower, then in the Oh field, the two levels have the
cnergles
< t!, I Voc, I > - - 4Dq
< c, 1 v,,, 1 e, z = 6Dq
The energy difference between thesc two levels is 10 Dq, where Dq is a
measure of the interaction of the ion with the crystal field and is usually
treated as a semi-empirical parameter wh~ch can be obtained from the
experimental results. 'The Dq value in any complex depends on the
geometrical shape, the nature of rhe central metal ion and the nature of the
ligands, The Dq value for an octahedral complex is greater that that of for a
tetrahedral complex within the same ligands, which are at the same distance
from the central ion. This is because of the geometrical shape and also the
number of ligands present in the complex 1211. Dq also depends on the
effective charge (Z,I~) and the valency of the central metal ion. This effect is
probably due to the fact that the central metal ions with higher charge will
polarize the ligands more effectively. The ligand field effects contribute more
A A (cube) = -8/9 b(oct)
& Dq(cube) = -819 Dq(oct)
A(tetr)= -4@ A ( ~ c t ) Dq (tetr) = -419 Dq (oct)
N
Octahedron Cube Tetrahedron
Figure 1.2: Schematic representation of the splitting of d-orbitals under
various crystal field s)mmerries.
Figure 1.3: Crystal field splitting of the d-orbitals in (a) octahedral (b)
octahedral with tetragonal distortion (c) square planar and (d) distorted square
planar.
to the vanatlon In D ralue for d glven central Ion and a gtven geometry A
llgand exenlng a strong field w~l l gi\e a low Dq value
Honever, many complexes seem to possess symmetry lower than
octahedrll Devlat~ons from octahcdrdl symmetry are usually treated as
perturbations on the hlgh symmetry and would cause spl~nlng In the
degenerate levels da shown In F l y r e 1 3 In the present Investlgatlon, the
symmetry of the metdl Ion\ In all the latt~ces 1s lower than octahedral In such
d \ltu~tlon, the ground hurt 15 not purclq due to a s~ngle d-orb~tal, because, the
orbital contnbutlon to the cpln Ham~ltonlnn IS due to the mixlng of the excited
stdte wdvc iunitivn with the ground ';tare through sp~n-orb11 coupllng
Therefore, in the most generdl i~tudtlon, the b~ound state IS the h e a r
ioli?hlnntion (it ,111 fi\i riihlt.ll\ k ~ t h o u t rc\ortlng to any \ynimctrq
~onalderatlons, the coetiii~enti of thc d-orbitals and hence the b~ound state
i 4 n be cal~ulnted ualng thc procedur~ de~cioped by Swalen et a1 [22] They
used the cxper~mcn~dllq ohsened g-~alues to detenn~ne the five coeffic~enta
of the Krdmers doublet There Are only three g-values dnd a normal~zat~on
cond~t~on to detcnnine f i ~ e cocitii~cnts The fifth equation 1s obtalned by
ri>su~il~~lg t l i ~ ioctt i~lcnt\ oi tlic (I, , JIKI d,, nrbltals to be c q u ~ l
Ilclaxntion [IX]:
In the spln Hamllton~an formal~sm outllned above, the paramagnet~c
entltles are considcrcd na In isolation Such Ideal system of 'non-~nteract~ng'
splns is hardly ever dttalnablc In practlce The lnteract~ons among
d # b d n g spins spoil the coherent precession of the net magnetization
vlstor &out B, leading to time-independent transitions. Also the systems of
spins an energetically coupled to the 'lattice' via spin-orbit lattice interaction
which affects the life-time of the excited state by transfemng the energy to
lattice via radiationless processes. In an exact solution of the dynamics of the
energy transfer between the microwave field and the magnetic dipoles, these
two processes have to be tnken into account [19].
The spin-lattice relaxation, or the longitudinal relaxation (TI),
measures the efficiency wtth which the spins can transfer their energy to the
surrounding medium. The energy of the magnetic dipoles is not conserved in
this process and leads to the establishment of spin populations governed by
Boltzmann distribution.
The spin-spin relaxation or transverse relaxation time (T2) is a measure
of the raae a! which the asiembly of spins comes to internal equilibrium at a
given temperature, and bears no immediate relationship to the lattice
temperature. The energy of the system is conserved in this process. The spin-
spin relaxation controls the natural width of resonance when complication
from 'saturation' does not occur.
In ideal paramagnetic systems, the Tz process leads to very broad
resonance and often these may be even beyond detection. Usually,
paramagnetic compounds are doped into isomorphous diamagnetic host-
lattices to reduce the dipolar broadening. The spin-lattice relaxation is more
of a property of the individual system and can be altered only by temperature
vanatlon Due to the presence of local tluctuatlng magnetlc d~poles, not all
the splns In an ensemble have the same Ldrmor frequency In other words,
even ~f phase coherence of all spins is achleved by some external perturbat~on,
very soon thls coherence will decay (I e , the phases of the sptn become
randomized) w ~ t h charactenstlc first order kinetlcs This process, which IS
respons~ble for natural llne w~dth or resonance absorpt~on, 1s known as the
spln-spln or transverse reldxat~on tlme, T2 NOW, we wtll ISC CUSS the factors
responsible for llne w~drh in sollds and 11qu1di
L ~ n e widths in Solid,
There are lour poss~ble tdctors thdt ~ontnbute to the Ilne w~dth of EPR
absorption llnes for solid samples
a Anisotropy of g factor and hpertine lnteractlon or spln - spln
lnteractions
b Intera~tlon v ~ t h magnetlc dlpole of netghbonng electronic and
nucledr splns
c Exc~lange InterdLtion with neighboring unpalred electrons
d Spin - l a t t ~ ~ r . dnd spln - bplll relaxation tlmes (TI and T2)
One or more of these tdctors may be major contributors to the w~dth and shape
of the absorption 11ne The first IS Important only for powder samples In
w h l ~ h the smdl ~rystdls have a random onentarton If the anlsotropy In g and
the hypertine interaction or the presence of zero field spllttmg are the main
factors In determining the llne wldth, the powder will have a wldth and shape
determined by these parameters. In this case, the method needed to obtain
narrower lines is to use single crystals rather than powder. If a single crystal
study is not possible, information about g and the hyperfine interaction can be
obtained from the broad powder spectrum.
The second factor can be a significant one, since the magnetic field
produced by an electron at a distance of 0.4 nm is approximately 60 mT.
Since the field of a magnerlc dipole depends on the third power of distance, a
si~nplc way to reducc thc broadening is to study in an isomorphic crystal,
which is dialnabmetic. The magnetic nuclear ,pin in the compound can also
produce broadening. I f the neighboring ele:tron spins are close enough to
have their orbital overlap appreciably, an exchange interaction will occur
between the splns. When this interaction is greater than kT, it primarily
influences the line shape of thc EYR spectrum. if the exchange interaction is
large, the effect is similar to what ac expect if the electrons are free to move
throughout the crystal. The electron sees an average of all local sites in the
crystal, giving rise to narroa lines in which all the interactions are averaged
out. This exchange narrowing is a common occurrence for solid free radicals,
which often have sharp EPR lines. S~nce the exchange interaction is strongly
dependent on the distance between the magnetic lines, it is not present is
magnetically dilute systcms.
The time constant associated with the role of transfer of energy of the
crystal lattice is cclllcd the spin-lattice relaxation time (TI). For the systems
where the spins are strongly coupled to the vibration modes (short TI), the
lifetime of a given magnetic state is short resulting in an uncertainty in the
energy, which manifests as a broad-spectrum line in the EPR spectrum. This
particular broadening mechanism is strongly dependent on temperature so that
line broadened in this manner can be sharpened by lowering the temperature
of the sample. Extremely short TI often occur when the ion has an electronic
excited state only a few cm-' above the ground state. In these cases, it is often
necessary to measure the EPR spectrum at liquid-helium temperatures.
Line widths in Liquids
In liquid solutions. the concentration of the transition metal ions is
kept small enough so that the magnetic dipole interaction and exchange
interaction can be minimized. Thus (a) and (d) are the only important
contributions to the absorption line width. (a) is important only when the
tumbling rate for the ion and any attached ligands is not rapid enough to
average out any aniaotropv. The frequency of the tumbling must be longer
than the width of the absorpt~on line to have all the anisotropies averaged out.
In some cases, the tumbling rate is not sufficient to obtain complete averaging
and hence one observes broad 11nes.
It is to bc notcd hcrc that space-averaged and time-averaged species
will give different EPR spectra. In the case c,f paramagnetic species in
solution, each entity exhibits a time-averaged response. This will give rise to
a narrow EPR 11ne. On the other hand, a powder can be considered as a space-
averaged species. In this case, each center contributes its own resonance
position, depending on the orientatlon and the result is a broad line.
Magnetically and chemically inequivalent sites:
A paramagnetic system with anisotropic g and A tensors will give rise
to EPR resonance depending on the orientatlon of the magnetic field B with
respect to the tensor axes. In single crystals, depending on the space group
and the number of molecules per unit cell (Z), there will be several different
spatial orientations of the paramabmetic sites. Species that are chemically
identical (i.e., they are described by identical spin Hamiltonian parameters)
but are spatially oriented differently are referred to as magnetically distinct
sites. It is also possible that due to charge compensation process [20] in the
lattice, depending upon different relative contigurations of the 'radical
vacancy' directions, there exists rnany different sets of spin Hamiltonian
parameters (although these may differ only slightly). The species themselves
would be expected to be identical H hen the charge-compensating vacancies
are not taken into account. Such sites are referred to as chemically distinct
sites. These chemically distinct sites are necessarily magnetically distinct,
whereas the converse need not necessarily hold. In the present thesis,
chenlically and mabvetically different sites in the case of powder spectrum of
VO(11) doped in cadmium sodium phosphate hexahydrate have been identified
(discussed in detail in Chapter 5).
In the present thesls, slngle irystal EPR studies of VO(l1) doped In
d~amagnetlc host lattl~os, such a. Mapeslum Ammonlum Phosphate
Hexahydrate, Cadmlum Potass~um Phosphate Hexahydrate and Cadm~um
Sodlum Phosphdre Hexahydrate ha\e been undertaken and the results are
discussed In detall In Pan .4, as Chapters 3, 4 and 5 respectively EPR results
of paramagnctrc Ion\ I I I paramngnetlc host latt~ces arc presented In Pan B,
whrch contalns Chapters 6. 7 , 8 and 9 S~ngle crystal EPR studies of VO(I1)
doped in Heialm~dazole Cobalt Sulphate are presented In Chapter 6. Chapter
7 contalns the EPR rcsulis due to Mn(I1) doped Into Cobalt Sod~um Sulphate
Hexahydrate Further, s~ngle crystal EPR results of NI(II) lmpunty In
Hrxd1m1da7ole Cobalt Y ~ t r ~ r e l'srr~hqdrate are d~scussed In Chapter 8
F~nally in Chapter 9. the results on the s~ngle crystal EPR studles of Cu(l1)
doped In Coblit Amrnc~nluni Phosphate hexhydrate have been d~scussed All
the dlamabnetlc host systems have becn studled at room temperature. whereas
\,anable temperdturc EPR ,tud~es arc a150 carned out to calculate the spln-
lattice relaxat~on tlmes for pararnapetlc host iattlces
References
I . E. Zavoisky, J. Phys, U.S.S.R., 911945) 21 I, 245.
2. A. Abragam, B. Bleaney, "Electron Paramagnetic Resonance of Transition
Metal Ions", Clarendon Press. Oxlord, ( 1970).
3. J.A. Weil, J.R. Bolton, J.E. Wcrtz. "Electron Spin Resonance: Elementary
Theory and Practical Applications", New York, (1993).
4. B. R. McGarvey, "Transition metal Chemistry", (R.L. Carlin, Ed.).
Dekker, New York., 3 (1968) 89.
5 . L. Kevan, M.K. Bowman, "Modem Pulsed and Continuous Wave Electron
Spin Rcaonancc", John Wilcy and Sons, New York, (1989).
6 . P.W. Atkins, b1.C.R. Symoni, "Structure of Inorganic Radicals", Elsevier,
Amsterdam. ( 1967).
7 . A. Canington, A.D. \lcLachlan. "lntroductlon to Magnetic Resonance".
Harper and Row, London and John 'A'eatherhill, Tokyo, (1967).
8. J .R . Pilbrow, "Transit~on ion Electron Paramagnetic Resonance",
Clarendon Press, Oxford. ( 1990)
9. M. 1ke;~a. "Ne\\ applicat~ons of Electron Spin Resonance: Daring,
Dosimetry and Microscopy". World Scient~fic. Singapore, (1993).
10. R. McU'reny. "Spins i n Chemistry". Academic Press. New York, (1970).
I I. C. P. Slitcher, "Pnnciple5 ~ ~ i b l a g e t i c Resonance". Harper and R o a , New
York, (1963).
12. H. Eying, J . Walter. G.E. Kimbdll, ,'Quantum Chemistry", John Wiley
and Sons, New Yorh. (1914).
13 H A Krdmcrs, pro^ Amsterddm c a d SCI , 33 (1930) 959
14 H A Jahn, E Teller. Proc Roy Soc (London),Alhl (1937)220
IS J R Byberg, S J K Jensen, L T Muss, J Chem Phys, 46(1967) 131
16 D K~velson, R Nelman, J Chem Phys , 3 5 (1961) 149
17 H R Gersmdm, J D Swalen, J Chem Phys , 3 6 (1962) 3221
18 N Bloembergcn. E M Pur~ell . R V Pound, Phys Rev , 73 (1948) 679
I0 F Bloch, Phys Rev 70 ( 1946) 4h0
?O P S ~ ~ n b a a ~ \ a Rdo. S Subramman, Mol Phys 39 (1980) 935, P
Sdmb~sl id Kdo 5 Subra~ndnldn. Clol Phba 54 (1985) 415
21 B X f ~ y y l a Inrrodu~t~on to L~gdnd Fleid Theory", lntersc~ence
Publ~shcra. Yew 'I orh ( 1967)
21 J D $w,llen B John\iin H \I Gladney. J Chem Phys . 52 (1970) 4078