Ambiguous structure determination from powder data: four different structural models of 4,11-di-fluoro-quinacridone with similar X-ray powder patterns, fit to the PDF, SSNMR and DFT-D.

Four different structural models, which all fit the same X-ray powder pattern, were obtained in the structure determination of 4,11-di-fluoro-quinacridone (C20H10N2O2F2) from unindexed X-ray powder data by a global fit. The models differ in their lattice parameters, space groups, Z, Z', molecular packing and hydrogen bond patterns. The molecules form a criss-cross pattern in models A and B, a layer structure built from chains in model C and a criss-cross arrangement of dimers in model D. Nevertheless, all models give a good Rietveld fit to the experimental powder pattern with acceptable R-values. All molecular geometries are reliable, except for model D, which is slightly distorted. All structures are crystallochemically plausible, concerning density, hydrogen bonds, intermolecular distances etc. All models passed the checkCIF test without major problems; only in model A a missed symmetry was detected. All structures could have probably been published, although 3 of the 4 structures were wrong. The investigation, which of the four structures is actually the correct one, was challenging. Six methods were used: (1) Rietveld refinements, (2) fit of the crystal structures to the pair distribution function (PDF) including the refinement of lattice parameters and atomic coordinates, (3) evaluation of the colour, (4) lattice-energy minimizations with force fields, (5) lattice-energy minimizations by two dispersion-corrected density functional theory methods, and (6) multinuclear CPMAS solid-state NMR spectroscopy (1H, 13C, 19F) including the comparison of calculated and experimental chemical shifts. All in all, model B (perhaps with some disorder) can probably be considered to be the correct one. This work shows that a structure determination from limited-quality powder data may result in totally different structural models, which all may be correct or wrong, even if they are chemically sensible and give a good Rietveld refinement. Additionally, the work is an excellent example that the refinement of an organic crystal structure can be successfully performed by a fit to the PDF, and the combination of computed and experimental solid-state NMR chemical shifts can provide further information for the selection of the most reliable structure among several possibilities.

Electron diffraction, X-ray powder diffraction and pair-distribution-function analyses to determine the crystal structures of Pigment Yellow 213, C23H21N5O9.

The crystal structure of the nanocrystalline alpha phase of Pigment Yellow 213 (P.Y. 213) was solved by a combination of single-crystal electron diffraction and X-ray powder diffraction, despite the poor crystallinity of the material. The molecules form an efficient dense packing, which explains the observed insolubility and weather fastness of the pigment. The pair-distribution function (PDF) of the alpha phase is consistent with the determined crystal structure. The beta phase of P.Y. 213 shows even lower crystal quality, so extracting any structural information directly from the diffraction data is not possible. PDF analysis indicates the beta phase to have a columnar structure with a similar local structure as the alpha phase and a domain size in column direction of approximately 4 nm.

Rietveld refinement of a wrong crystal structure.

Rietveld refinements are generally used to confirm crystal structures solved from powder diffraction data. If the Rietveld refinement converges with low R values and with a smooth difference curve, and the structure looks chemically sensible, the resulting structure is generally considered to be close to the correct crystal structure. Here we present a counter example: The Rietveld refinement of the X-ray powder pattern of gamma-quinacridone with the crystal structure of beta-quinacridone gives quite a smooth difference curve; the resulting crystal structure looks reasonable in terms of molecular conformation, molecular packing and intermolecular hydrogen bonds. However, neither the lattice parameters, the molecular packing nor the conformation of the molecules show any similarity with the actual structure, which was determined from single-crystal data. This example shows that a successful Rietveld refinement is not always final proof of the correctness of a crystal structure; in special cases the resulting crystal structure may still be wrong.