In my book in the chapter on General Principles and Processes of Isolation of Elements, I found that the formula for copper pyrites was stated as $\ce{Cu2S.Fe2S3}$ at one place, $\ce{CuFeS2}$ at another place and $\ce{Cu2FeS2}$ at another place.

Are all these taken to be the formula for copper pyrites or are these printing mistakes. I have searched the internet but could not find any useful information regarding this.


2 Answers 2


Both $\ce{Cu2S.Fe2S3}$ and $\ce{CuFeS2}$ are the equivalent means to denote chalcopyrite. The first notation, $\ce{Cu2S.Fe2S3}$, commonly used a few decades ago, shows that two sulfides are not just a mechanical mix, but form a chemical compound (same as for crystallohydrates, e.g. $\ce{CuSO4 * 5 H2O}$). The second one, $\ce{CuFeS2}$, is a formula unit, a more universal and modern representation. Chalcopyrite is a mineral of $\ce{ABX2}$ type, crystallizes in $I\bar{4}2d$ space group.

enter image description here

Figure 1. Unit cell of chalcopyrite $\ce{CuFeS2}$. Color code: $\color{#FFFF30}{\Large\bullet}~\ce{S}$; $\color{#E06633}{\Large\bullet}~\ce{Fe}$; $\color{#C88033}{\Large\bullet}~\ce{Cu}$.

On the other hand, $\ce{Cu2FeS2}$ is a reduced formula of $\ce{Cu8Fe4S8}$, a superstructured bornite [1]. A compound of $\ce{AB2X2}$ type, crystallizes in $F\bar{4}3m$ space group.

Unit cell of superstructured bornite

Figure 2. Unit cell of superstructured bornite $\ce{Cu8Fe4S8}$. Color code: $\color{#FFFF30}{\Large\bullet}~\ce{S}$; $\color{#E06633}{\Large\bullet}~\ce{Fe}$; $\color{#C88033}{\Large\bullet}~\ce{Cu}$.

Structurally, chalcopyrite and superstructured bornite have very little in common. Unless there is a specific context given, I'd rather say that $\ce{Cu2FeS2}$ is an outlier among the three and is probably a typographic issue. Also, it's not a good practice to mix dot-notated formulas with formula unit representations unless one wants to underline some structural aspects (e.g. molecular assemblies/coordination polyhedra/domains etc.)


  1. Ding, Y.; Veblen, D. R.; Prewitt, C. T. Possible $\ce{Fe/Cu}$ Ordering Schemes in the 2a Superstructure of Bornite ($\ce{Cu5FeS4}$). American Mineralogist 2005, 90 (8–9), 1265–1269. https://doi.org/10.2138/am.2005.1518.

I know of five copper iron sulfide minerals:

Bornite - $\ce{Cu5FeS4}$

Chalcopyrite - $\ce{CuFeS2}$

Cubanite - $\ce{CuFe2S3}$

Idaite - $\ce{Cu5FeS6}$

Isocubanite - $\ce{CuFe2S3}$

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Here is some more: talnakhite $\ce{Cu18Fe16S32}$, valleriite $\ce{Cu2Fe4S7}$, fukuchilite $\ce{Cu3FeS8}$, nukundamite $\ce{Cu_{3.39}Fe_{0.61}S4}$, haycockite $\ce{Cu4Fe5S8}$, mooihoekite $\ce{Cu9Fe9S16}$. $\endgroup$
    – andselisk
    Jan 26, 2019 at 20:05

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.