Electronic and Vibrational Structure of CuBr2
J. Phys. Chem. A, Vol. 106, No. 22, 2002 5433
then fluoresces into the ground state as well as into a low-lying
excited state some 1820 cm-1 higher in energy.
Electronic Structure of CuBr2 and the Absorbing State.
There is little experimental information about the triatomic
copper dihalides; also, theoretical calculations for species of
this type are difficult. The open d electron shell of transition
metals still represents a considerable challenge, and for a
molecule containing heavier halogen relativistic effects, it
become increasingly important. Although copper dibromide was
not extensively studied, about a decade ago Bauschlicher and
Roos20 carried out detailed computations for the lighter CuCl2
and CuF2 species, which we found a few years ago to be
extremely useful in interpreting our experimental laser-induced
fluorescence and absorption spectra of matrix-isolated copper
dichloride.21 Both the energies of the low-lying electronic states
and their vibrational structures proved to be very consistent with
the observed spectra. Also, the results of a recent low-resolution
photodetachment study of CuCl2 anions showed satisfactory
agreement with the results of Bauschlicher and Roos.20 Although
their computations did not extend to the isovalent dibromide,
in general its electronic structure can be expected to be quite
similar.
Figure 5. Energy levels of CuBr2. The left-hand side shows a 193-
nm photodetachment spectrum of CuBr2 that was adapted from Figure
2 of ref 24. The upward-aiming arrow denotes the E2Πu-X2Πg laser
excitation. Following nonradiative relaxation of the E state (denoted
by the wiggly arrow), probably via the D2∆g state, emission is observed
from C2∆g into both the A and X components of the 2Πg ground
electronic state.
The CuBr2 ground state and its lowest excited state should
again be the so-called ligand-field states arising formally from
an ionic Cu2+ cation with two Br- anions. Ligand-field theory
shows that depending on the orientation of the hole in the d9
value for the absorbing state, supporting its assignment to the
2
lower spin-orbit component of the Πu electronic state.
core the degeneracy will be split, resulting in Σg+, Πg, and
2∆g electronic states, with ab initio computations predicting the
X2Πg to be the ground state. In the heavy halides, the fine-
structure components of the latter two states should split far
apart because of spin-orbit coupling. Obviously, because all
these states are of gerade symmetry, transitions between them
should be strictly forbidden. It is again expected that levels
arising from a closed-shell 3d10 Cu+ configuration will be
slightly higher in energy. These levels are, perhaps somewhat
inconsistently, called charge-transfer states Because they can
be viewed as a superposition of the BrCu+Br- and Br-Cu+Br
structures, at least in a formal sense, there is less charge transfer
than in the ligand-field states. The lowest of these states will
2
2
Laser-Induced Fluorescence Spectrum and Identities of
the States Involved. Because, as already noted and in contrast
with CuCl2,22 no emission from the E2Πu state back to the X2Πg
ground state is observed despite the fully allowed character of
the transition, apparently E2Πu must efficiently relax nonradia-
tively. The intense fluorescence starting more than 2000 cm-1
further into the infrared must then be assigned to emission from
electronic states populated by this relaxation process. Because
no states other than the ligand-field states discussed above are
expected below the E state, it is clear that transitions between
these states must be involved even though these are, as already
mentioned, forbidden.
According to a standard treatment23 that can be found in most
physical chemistry textbooks, one writes for a transition moment
between two electronic states
2
be a Πu state, with a fully allowed transition into the ground
state. It seems inevitable that the strong absorption we observe
starting at 11 212 cm-1 must be assigned to this transition.
The photodetachment spectrum of the CuBr2- anion, reported
recently by Wang et al.,24 is useful in discussing the CuBr2 state
assignments. The spectrum is reproduced in a vertical orientation
on the right-hand side of Figure 5. The authors24 assigned the
two bands denoted in Figure 5 as E and F to the (1/2) and (3/2)
spin-orbit components, respectively, of this 2Πu electronic state
and report energies of 10 550 and 11 800 cm-1 for these states.
The features observed in the photodetachment spectrum are,
however, quite broad; furthermore, the bands assigned to
different states exhibit different widths and shapes. Therefore,
measuring the separations of the band maxima may not be the
most reliable way of determining the state adiabatic energies.
Rev ) e′,V′′| µ | e′′,V′′ ) e′ | µe | e′′ V′ | V′′ ) Re V′ | V′′
with the transition intensity being proportional to its square,
Rev2. According to the Franck-Condon principle, the Born-
Oppenheimer approximation allows a separation of vibrational
and electronic motion and factoring of the electronic transition
moment Re. Here, the first factor, Re, determines if the electronic
transition is allowed, with the second and the Franck-Condon
2
factors V′ |V′′ determining the intensity distribution between
various vibrational levels. For a given band to appear, the
integrand in V′ |V′′ has to be totally symmetric, and because
most molecules are usually in the vibrationless level, only totally
symmetric vibrations appear in the spectrum.
We have attempted to reanalyze the photodetachment spectra
of both CuCl2 and CuBr2 by an alternative method. We have
first extrapolated the steeply rising portion of each observed
photodetachment band to find an intercept with the baseline,
as suggested by the dotted lines in Figure 5. We have then
converted the separations between intercepts obtained in this
way into the adiabatic state energies and have obtained
considerably different values of about 11 500 ( 200 and 12 700
( 200 cm-1 for the E and F states, respectively. The former
value is in very good agreement with the matrix ∼11 200 cm-1
As realized by Herzberg and Teller,23 the separation of the
electronic and nuclear motion is not necessarily rigorous, and
the dipole and the electronic transition moment Re will change
with the motion of the nuclei. To include this effect of vibronic
coupling and the changes of the electronic transition moment
with the motion of the nuclei, one can express the electronic
transition moment in the form of a Taylor expansion in normal
coordinates while retaining only the first two terms: Re ≈ Re0
+ Σi ReiQi where Rei ) ∂Re/∂Qi. Inserting this expression into