Solution

ID: past-exam-of-the-materials-science-course-of-the-university-of-cambridge/2017/paper-1/1/d/solution

The actual ionic radii need not equal the limiting ratio, and electronic charge distributions are not rigid sphere boundaries. In the same unlike-contact hard-sphere model, put and use to get
A cation somewhat larger relative to the anion than the limiting size opens gaps between the anions. Starting from and reducing modestly reduces this packing fraction; thus a lower value is expected for that departure from the ideal contact construction. The formula is not monotonic for all imaginable ratios, so no universal inequality should be inferred without specifying radii. Coordination-dependent ionic radii, polarizability, nonionic contributions to bonding, thermal expansion and point defects also limit the model. No numerical real-crystal packing fraction is determined by the supplied data alone.

New to topics? Read the docs here!