Talk:Periodic table (crystal structure)

Suggestions
Nergaal (talk) 15:43, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Try to make the page for all elements, not only for metals. Just say what crystal structure do the elements have at the melting point under normal pressure.
 * transform the usual crystal strycture section in a sort of legend.
 * add some intro.
 * get more referrences.

Nice proposal to generalize to non-metal elements. Look all the data up for melting temperature, please! :-) Btw: There are elements like He, C and As with doesn't melt at 1 bar -- okay we should take the sublimate temperature, I guess. Fore those lattices with have not a unique single lattice paramter (hcp, dhcp other unusal lattices), we should give the lattice paramater (or their ratios?). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.94.119.61 (talk) 14:40, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

The metalloids (C), Si, Ge, (alpha-Sn) could be added because all have the regular and well known diamond crystall structur. Also As may be added if we have already Sb in the table! Then As, Sb & Bi has similar crystal structure. 78.94.119.61 (talk) 15:42, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

But, currently Si and Ge are mislabeled as simple cubic. These need to be labeled as diamond cubic (which needs to be added to the legend). Hermanoere (talk) 21:48, 21 January 2016 (UTC)


 * The lattice parameter at normal conditions (where applicable) would be a nice addition to this table. Like masses are provided in a regular periodic table, here lattice parameters fit into a context, I think. 141.14.162.142 (talk) 09:56, 3 February 2020 (UTC) Karen Fidanyan

Title
Wouln'd a better page title be more like: "Crystal structure of [the] chemical elements"? -DePiep (talk) 16:00, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

New Template
Just granpa (talk) 11:10, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Page cleanup
The idea behind the page is interesting, but I think it needs some major work.
 * Issue #1: the table is a mix of structures at standard temperature and pressure, low temperature forms when elements are liquid or gaseous at room temperature, and theoretically predicted forms for unstable compounds. Having info on as many elements is good, but these should probably be separate tables for clarity, especially since the elements which are liquid or gas at STP are not clearly marked on the table (only in the text).
 * Issue #2: the table is a mix elements with structures which follow a simple Bravais lattice (FCC, BC, SC), specific more complex structure types (HCP, DC, DHCP), and elements with complex structures grouped by lattice system when the structure is actually different (e.g. iron's BCC structure is very different than manganese's BCC structure, but they are marked identically on the table) We should probably pick one level of granularity and stick with it (i.e. general lattice system, or detailed structure type)
 * Issue #3: some of the images used to explain the structures are inconsistent in a different way than issue #2. "Diamond cubic" is placed next to its Bravais lattice which is missing the motif of the lattice, but hexagonal close packed shows the detailed motif.
 * Issue #4: the division between common and uncommon structures seems pretty arbitrary and the elements' classification there doesn't line up with the colors of the table.
 * Issue #5: missing commonly given info like space groups or Pearson symbols, while containing extremely granular information about individual lattice parameters for some elements. The level of detail varies a lot.

I think it would probably be best to give a STP table labeled by structure type, with a second table for liquid/gas/unstable elements. We could organize the structure types by lattice system. Any other suggestions would be welcome.&#12296; Forbes72 &#124; Talk &#12297; 02:36, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree with you. Double sharp (talk) 09:56, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Regarding the alkali metals
Computational study. Francium is still under investigation. Double sharp (talk) 04:36, 24 January 2024 (UTC)