Product Code Database
Example Keywords: jelly -wii $9
barcode-scavenger
   » » Wiki: Lawrencium
Tag Wiki 'Lawrencium'.
Tag

Lawrencium is a synthetic chemical element; it has Lr (formerly Lw) and 103. It is named after , inventor of the , a device that was used to discover many artificial elements. A radioactive , lawrencium is the eleventh transuranium element, the third transfermium, and the last member of the series. Like all elements with atomic number over 100, lawrencium can only be produced in particle accelerators by bombarding lighter elements with charged particles. Fourteen isotopes of lawrencium are currently known; the most stable is 266Lr with 11 hours, but the shorter-lived 260Lr (half-life 2.7 minutes) is most commonly used in chemistry because it can be produced on a larger scale.

Chemistry experiments confirm that lawrencium behaves as a heavier homolog to in the , and is a trivalent element. It thus could also be classified as the first of the 7th-period . Its electron configuration is anomalous for its position in the periodic table, having an configuration instead of the s2d configuration of its homolog lutetium. However, this does not appear to affect lawrencium's chemistry.

In the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, many claims of the synthesis of element 103 of varying quality were made from laboratories in the and the . The priority of the discovery and therefore the name of the element was disputed between Soviet and American scientists. The International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) initially established lawrencium as the official name for the element and gave the American team credit for the discovery; this was reevaluated in 1992, giving both teams shared credit for the discovery but not changing the element's name.


Introduction

History
In 1958, scientists at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory claimed the discovery of element 102, now called . At the same time, they also tried to synthesize element 103 by bombarding the same target used with -14 ions. Eighteen tracks were noted, with around and half-life around 0.25 s; the Berkeley team noted that while the cause could be the production of an isotope of element 103, other possibilities could not be ruled out. While the data agrees reasonably with that later discovered for 257Lr ( energy 8.87 MeV, half-life 0.6 s), the evidence obtained in this experiment fell far short of the strength required to conclusively demonstrate synthesis of element 103. A follow-up on this experiment was not done, as the target was destroyed. (Note: for Part I see Pure Appl. Chem., Vol. 63, No. 6, pp. 879–886, 1991) Later, in 1960, the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory attempted to synthesize the element by bombarding 252 with 10B and 11B. The results of this experiment were not conclusive.

The first important work on element 103 was done at Berkeley by the team of , Torbjørn Sikkeland, Almon Larsh, Robert M. Latimer, and their co-workers on February 14, 1961. The first atoms of lawrencium were reportedly made by bombarding a three- target consisting of three isotopes of with -10 and boron-11 from the Heavy Ion Linear Accelerator (HILAC). The Berkeley team reported that the 257103 was detected in this manner, and that it decayed by emitting an 8.6 MeV with a of . This identification was later corrected to 258103, as later work proved that 257Lr did not have the properties detected, but 258Lr did. This was considered at the time to be convincing proof of synthesis of element 103: while the mass assignment was less certain and proved to be mistaken, it did not affect the arguments in favor of element 103 having been synthesized. Scientists at Joint Institute for Nuclear Research in (then in the ) raised several criticisms: all but one were answered adequately. The exception was that 252Cf was the most common isotope in the target, and in the reactions with 10B, 258Lr could only have been produced by emitting four neutrons, and emitting three neutrons was expected to be much less likely than emitting four or five. This would lead to a narrow yield curve, not the broad one reported by the Berkeley team. A possible explanation was that there was a low number of events attributed to element 103. This was an important intermediate step to the unquestioned discovery of element 103, although the evidence was not completely convincing. The Berkeley team proposed the name "lawrencium" with symbol "Lw", after , inventor of the . The IUPAC Commission on Nomenclature of Inorganic Chemistry accepted the name, but changed the symbol to "Lr". This acceptance of the discovery was later characterized as being hasty by the Dubna team.

+ → * → + 5

The first work at Dubna on element 103 came in 1965, when they reported to have made 256103 in 1965 by bombarding 243 with 18, identifying it indirectly from its -252. The half-life they reported was somewhat too high, possibly due to background events. Later 1967 work on the same reaction identified two decay energies in the ranges 8.35–8.50 MeV and 8.50–8.60 MeV: these were assigned to 256103 and 257103. Despite repeat attempts, they were unable to confirm assignment of an alpha emitter with a half-life of 8 seconds to 257103. The Russians proposed the name "rutherfordium" for the new element in 1967: this name was later proposed by Berkeley for .

+ → * → + 5

Further experiments in 1969 at Dubna and in 1970 at Berkeley demonstrated an chemistry for the new element; so by 1970 it was known that element 103 is the last actinide.

(2025). 140201371X, Springer. 140201371X
In 1970, the Dubna group reported the synthesis of 255103 with half-life 20 s and alpha decay energy 8.38 MeV. However, it was not until 1971, when the nuclear physics team at University of California at Berkeley successfully did a whole series of experiments aimed at measuring the nuclear decay properties of the lawrencium isotopes with mass numbers 255 to 260, that all previous results from Berkeley and Dubna were confirmed, apart from the Berkeley's group initial erroneous assignment of their first produced isotope to 257103 instead of the probably correct 258103. All final doubts were dispelled in 1976 and 1977 when the energies of emitted from 258103 were measured.

In 1971, the IUPAC granted the discovery of lawrencium to the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, even though they did not have ideal data for the element's existence. But in 1992, the Transfermium Working Group (TWG) officially recognized the nuclear physics teams at Dubna and Berkeley as co-discoverers of lawrencium, concluding that while the 1961 Berkeley experiments were an important step to lawrencium's discovery, they were not yet fully convincing; and while the 1965, 1968, and 1970 Dubna experiments came very close to the needed level of confidence taken together, only the 1971 Berkeley experiments, which clarified and confirmed previous observations, finally resulted in complete confidence in the discovery of element 103. Because the name "lawrencium" had been in use for a long time by this point, it was retained by IUPAC, and in August 1997, the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) ratified the name lawrencium and the symbol "Lr" during a meeting in .


Characteristics

Physical
Lawrencium is the last . Authors considering the subject generally consider it a group 3 element, along with , , and , as its filled f-shell is expected to make it resemble the other 7th-period . In the , it is to the right of the actinide , to the left of the 6d transition metal , and under the lanthanide lutetium with which it shares many physical and chemical properties. Lawrencium is expected to be a solid under normal conditions and have a hexagonal close-packed crystal structure ( c/ a = 1.58), similar to its lighter congener lutetium, though this is not yet known experimentally. The of sublimation of lawrencium is estimated at 352 kJ/mol, close to the value of lutetium and strongly suggesting that metallic lawrencium is trivalent with three electrons delocalized, a prediction also supported by a systematic extrapolation of the values of heat of vaporization, , and of neighboring elements to lawrencium. This makes it unlike the immediately preceding late actinides which are known to be (fermium and mendelevium) or expected to be (nobelium) divalent. The estimated enthalpies of vaporization show that lawrencium deviates from the trend of the late actinides and instead matches the trend of the succeeding 6d elements rutherfordium and dubnium, consistent with lawrencium's interpretation as a group 3 element. Some scientists prefer to end the actinides with nobelium and consider lawrencium to be the first transition metal of the seventh period.
(1981). 9780520906150, University of California Press.

Lawrencium is expected to be a trivalent, silvery metal, easily by air, , and ,

(2025). 9780199605637, Oxford University Press. .
and having an atomic volume similar to that of lutetium and a trivalent of 171 . It is expected to be a rather heavy metal with a density of around 14.4 g/cm3. It is also predicted to have a of around 1900  (1600 ), not far from the value for lutetium (1925 K).


Chemical
In 1949, Glenn T. Seaborg, who devised the , predicted that element 103 (lawrencium) should be the last actinide and that the ion should be about as stable as in . It was not until decades later that element 103 was finally conclusively synthesized and this prediction was experimentally confirmed.

Studies on the element, performed in 1969, showed that lawrencium reacts with to form a product that was most likely the trichloride, . Its volatility was found to be similar to the chlorides of , , and and much less than that of chloride. In 1970, chemical studies were performed on 1500 atoms of 256Lr, comparing it with divalent (, , ), trivalent (, , , , ), and tetravalent (, ) elements. It was found that lawrencium coextracted with the trivalent ions, but the short half-life of 256Lr precluded a confirmation that it ahead of in the elution sequence. Lawrencium occurs as the trivalent ion in aqueous solution and hence its compounds should be similar to those of the other trivalent actinides: for example, lawrencium(III) () and () should both be insoluble in water. Due to the actinide contraction, the of should be smaller than that of , and it should elute ahead of when ammonium α-hydroxyisobutyrate (ammonium α-HIB) is used as an eluant. Later 1987 experiments on the longer-lived isotope 260Lr confirmed lawrencium's trivalency and that it eluted in roughly the same place as , and found that lawrencium's ionic radius was , larger than would be expected from simple extrapolation from . Later 1988 experiments with more lawrencium atoms refined this to and calculated an enthalpy of hydration value of . It was also found that the actinide contraction at the end of the actinides was larger than the analogous lanthanide contraction, with the exception of the last actinide, lawrencium: the cause was speculated to be relativistic effects.

It has been speculated that the 7s electrons are relativistically stabilized, so that in reducing conditions, only the 7p1/2 electron would be ionized, leading to the monovalent ion. However, all experiments to reduce to or in aqueous solution were unsuccessful, similarly to lutetium. On the basis of this, the standard electrode potential of the E°() couple was calculated to be less than −1.56 , indicating that the existence of ions in aqueous solution was unlikely. The upper limit for the E°() couple was predicted to be −0.44 V: the values for E°() and E°() are predicted to be −2.06 V and +7.9 V. The stability of the group oxidation state in the 6d transition series decreases as IV > V > VI, and lawrencium continues the trend with LrIII being more stable than RfIV.

(2025). 9781402035555, Springer Science+Business Media.

In the molecule lawrencium dihydride (), which is predicted to be bent, the 6d orbital of lawrencium is not expected to play a role in the bonding, unlike that of lanthanum dihydride (). has La–H bond distances of 2.158 Å, while should have shorter Lr–H bond distances of 2.042 Å due to the relativistic contraction and stabilization of the 7s and 7p orbitals involved in the bonding, in contrast to the core-like 5f subshell and the mostly uninvolved 6d subshell. In general, molecular and LrH are expected to resemble the corresponding species (thallium having a 6s26p1 valence configuration in the gas phase, like lawrencium's 7s27p1) more than the corresponding species. The electron configurations of and are expected to be 7s2 and 7s1 respectively. However, in species where all three valence electrons of lawrencium are ionized to give at least formally the cation, lawrencium is expected to behave like a typical actinide and the heavier congener of lutetium, especially because the first three ionization potentials of lawrencium are predicted to be similar to those of lutetium. Hence, unlike thallium but like lutetium, lawrencium would prefer to form than LrH, and Lr is expected to be similar to the also unknown LuCO, both metals having valence configuration σ2π1 in their monocarbonyls. The pπ–dπ bond is expected to be seen in just as it is for and more generally all the . The complex anion is expected to be stable with a configuration of 6d1 for lawrencium; this 6d orbital would be its highest occupied molecular orbital. This is analogous to the electronic structure of the analogous lutetium compound.


Atomic
Lawrencium has three : the 5f electrons are in the atomic core. In 1970, it was predicted that the ground-state electron configuration of lawrencium was Rn5f146d17s2 (ground state 2D3/2), per the and conforming to the Xe4f145d16s2 configuration of lawrencium's lighter homolog lutetium. But the next year, calculations were published that questioned this prediction, instead expecting an anomalous Rn5f147s27p1 configuration. Though early calculations gave conflicting results, more recent studies and calculations confirm the s2p suggestion. 1974 relativistic calculations concluded that the energy difference between the two configurations was small and that it was uncertain which was the ground state. Later 1995 calculations concluded that the s2p configuration should be energetically favored, because the spherical s and p1/2 are nearest to the and thus move quickly enough that their relativistic mass increases significantly.

In 1988, a team of scientists led by Eichler calculated that lawrencium's enthalpy of adsorption on metal sources would differ enough depending on its electron configuration that it would be feasible to carry out experiments to exploit this fact to measure lawrencium's electron configuration. The s2p configuration was expected to be more volatile than the s2d configuration, and be more similar to that of the element . No evidence for lawrencium being volatile was obtained and the lower limit for the enthalpy of adsorption of lawrencium on or was significantly higher than the estimated value for the s2p configuration.

In 2015, the first ionization energy of lawrencium was measured, using the isotope 256Lr. The measured value, , agreed very well with the relativistic theoretical prediction of 4.963(15) eV, and also provided a first step into measuring the first ionization energies of the . This value is the lowest among all the lanthanides and actinides, and supports the s2p configuration as the 7p1/2 electron is expected to be only weakly bound. As ionisation energies generally increase left to right in the f-block, this low value suggests that lutetium and lawrencium belong in the d-block (whose trend they follow) and not the f-block. That would make them the heavier congeners of and , rather than and . Although some -like behaviour has been predicted, adsorption experiments suggest that lawrencium is trivalent like scandium and yttrium, not monovalent like the alkali metals. A lower limit on lawrencium's second ionization energy (>13.3 eV) was experimentally found in 2021.

Even though s2p is now known to be the ground-state configuration of the lawrencium atom, ds2 should be a low-lying excited-state configuration, with an excitation energy variously calculated as 0.156 eV, 0.165 eV, or 0.626 eV. As such lawrencium may still be considered to be a d-block element, albeit with an anomalous electron configuration (like or ), as its chemical behaviour matches expectations for a heavier analogue of lutetium.


Isotopes
Fourteen isotopes of lawrencium are known, with 251–262, 264, and 266; all are radioactive. Seven are known. The longest-lived isotope, 266Lr, has a half-life of about ten hours and is one of the longest-lived superheavy isotopes known to date. However, shorter-lived isotopes are usually used in chemical experiments because 266Lr currently can only be produced as a final of even heavier and harder-to-make elements: it was discovered in 2014 in the of 294. 256Lr (half-life 27 seconds) was used in the first chemical studies on lawrencium: currently, the longer-lived 260Lr (half-life 2.7 minutes) is usually used for this purpose. After 266Lr, the longest-lived isotopes are 264Lr (), 262Lr (3.6 h), and 261Lr (44 min). All other known lawrencium isotopes have half-lives under 5 minutes, and the shortest-lived of them (251Lr) has a half-life of 24.4 milliseconds. The half-lives of lawrencium isotopes mostly increase smoothly from 251Lr to 266Lr, with a dip from 257Lr to 259Lr.


Preparation and purification
Most isotopes of lawrencium can be produced by bombarding actinide ( to ) targets with light ions (from to neon). The two most important isotopes, 256Lr and 260Lr, can be respectively produced by bombarding -249 with 70 MeV -11 ions (producing lawrencium-256 and four ) and by bombarding -249 with -18 (producing lawrencium-260, an alpha particle, and three neutrons). The two heaviest and longest-lived known isotopes, 264Lr and 266Lr, can only be produced at much lower yields as decay products of dubnium, whose progenitors are isotopes of moscovium and tennessine.

Both 256Lr and 260Lr have half-lives too short to allow a complete chemical purification process. Early experiments with 256Lr therefore used rapid solvent extraction, with the thenoyltrifluoroacetone (TTA) dissolved in methyl isobutyl ketone (MIBK) as the , and with the being buffered solutions. Ions of different charge (+2, +3, or +4) will then extract into the organic phase under different pH ranges, but this method will not separate the trivalent actinides and thus 256Lr must be identified by its emitted 8.24 MeV alpha particles. More recent methods have allowed rapid selective elution with α-HIB to take place in enough time to separate out the longer-lived isotope 260Lr, which can be removed from the catcher foil with 0.05 M hydrochloric acid.


See also

Notes

Bibliography


External links

Page 1 of 1
1
Page 1 of 1
1

Account

Social:
Pages:  ..   .. 
Items:  .. 

Navigation

General: Atom Feed Atom Feed  .. 
Help:  ..   .. 
Category:  ..   .. 
Media:  ..   .. 
Posts:  ..   ..   .. 

Statistics

Page:  .. 
Summary:  .. 
1 Tags
10/10 Page Rank
5 Page Refs
1s Time