research papers\(\def\hfill{\hskip 5em}\def\hfil{\hskip 3em}\def\eqno#1{\hfil {#1}}\)

Journal logoSTRUCTURAL SCIENCE
CRYSTAL ENGINEERING
MATERIALS
ISSN: 2052-5206

Hexamer formation in tertiary butyl alcohol (2-methyl-2-propanol, C4H10O)

CROSSMARK_Color_square_no_text.svg

aSchool of Chemistry, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH9 3JJ, Scotland, and bDepartment of Physics, The University of Durham, Science Laboratories, South Road, Durham DH1 3LE, England
*Correspondence e-mail: d.r.allan@ed.ac.uk

(Received 27 October 2005; accepted 27 April 2006)

The crystal structure of phase II of tertiary butyl alcohol (2-methyl-2-propanol, C4H10O) has been solved using a combination of single-crystal X-ray diffraction techniques and ab initio density functional calculations. This trigonal P[\overline 3] phase, which is stable at both low temperature and high pressure, and the triclinic P[\overline 1] phase (phase IV) have very similar enthalpies, the calculations revealing only a 3.859 kJ mol−1 enthalpy difference at ambient pressure, despite the substantial change of the intermolecular bonding motif from helical catemer to hexamer with an increase in pressure or reduction in temperature. The hexamers in the trigonal phase adopt a chair conformation. There are two unique hexamers: at low temperature these are centred at (0, 0, [1\over2]) and ([2\over3][1\over3], 0.961 (13)), and at high pressure the centres are (0, 0, [1\over2]) and ([2\over3][1\over3], 0.958 (14)). A slight flattening of the hexamers is observed at high pressure and the calculations confirm that phase II becomes more stable relative to phase IV on pressure increase.

1. Introduction

The study of the structural systematics of small-molecule systems is rewarding as they reveal trends in whole classes of compounds and larger molecular systems. Brock & Duncan (1994[Brock, C. P. & Duncan, L. L. (1994). Chem. Mater. 6, 1307-1312.]) have described the general features of the packing motifs adopted by mono-alcohols (ROH) where there is a competition between the packing requirements of the relatively bulky R group and the need for the small hydroxyl groups to be close enough to form hydrogen bonds. If the molecules are relatively small then they can form catemers, generated by either a glide plane or a 21-screw axis, where the molecules form an approximately coplanar alternating sequence about the central chain of hydrogen bonds. If the molecules contain larger R groups, steric hindrance often prohibits this simple arrangement and, instead, the molecules often form chains about three-, four- or sixfold screw axes, or adopt crystal structures with more than one molecule in the asymmetric unit. Molecules containing particularly bulky R groups may no longer form hydrogen-bonded chains or catemers, but cyclic dimer, trimer, tetramer or hexamer rings can be created. We have been investigating the high-pressure polymorphism of a range of prototypical monoalcohols including methanol (Allan et al., 1998[Allan, D. R., Clark, S. J., Brugmans, M. J. P., Ackland, G. J. & Vos, W. L. (1998). Phys. Rev. B, 58, R11809-R11812.]), ethanol (Allan & Clark, 1999[Allan, D. R. & Clark, S. J. (1999). Phys. Rev. B, 60, 6328-6334.]; Allan et al., 2001[Allan, D. R., Parsons, S. & Teat, S. J. (2001). J. Synchrotron Rad. 8, 10-17.]), phenol (Allan et al., 2002[Allan, D. R., Clark, S. J., Dawson, A., McGregor, P. A. & Parsons, S. (2002). Acta Cryst. B58, 1018-1024.]) and its halogenated derivatives (e.g. 2-chlorophenol and 4-fluorophenol) (Oswald, Allan, Day et al., 2005[Oswald, I. D. H., Allan, D. R., Day, G. M., Motherwell, W. D. S. & Parsons, S. (2005). Cryst. Growth Des. 5, 1055-1071.]; Oswald, Allan, Motherwell & Parsons, 2005[Oswald, I. D. H., Allan, D. R., Motherwell, W. D. S. & Parsons, S. (2005). Acta Cryst. B61, 69-79.]), and, more recently, cyclobutanol (McGregor et al., 2005[McGregor, P. A., Allan, D. R., Parsons, S. & Pulham, C. R. (2005). Acta Cryst. B61, 449-454.]) and cyclopentanol (Moggach et al., 2005[Moggach, S. A., Allan, D. R., Parsons, S., Sawyer, L. & Warren, J. E. (2005). J. Synchrotron Rad. 12, 598-607.]), with a view to establishing trends in their packing and hydrogen-bonding behaviour. In general, we find that pressure tends to transform the packing of the R groups from having characteristics more closely associated with bulky groups to those more typical of small groups: i.e. pressure tends to promote catemers with a simple alternating sequence of molecules rather than the formation of helical chains or rings. Here we have extended our range of studies to tertiary butyl alcohol (t-butanol, C4H10O[link]), which has the bulkiest R group of all the monoalcohol systems we have investigated to date.

[Scheme 1]

The low-temperature behaviour of t-butanol in the solid state has been studied using a variety of techniques, including calorimetry, spectroscopy, neutron scattering and X-ray diffraction (Steininger et al., 1989[Steininger, R., Bilgram, J. H., Gramlich, V. & Petter, W. (1989). Z. Kristallogr. 187, 1-13.]). In the calorimetric measurements of Oetting (1963[Oetting, F. L. (1963). J. Phys. Chem. 67, 2757-2761.]), three crystalline phases were noted, although their structures were not determined. It was found that phase II is stable below 281 K and, from their IR studies, Sciesinska & Sciesinska (1980[Sciesinska, E. & Sciesinska, J. (1980). Acta. Phys. Pol. A, 58, 361-368.]) concluded that the crystal structure contains hydrogen-bonded chains of molecules. Phase II was found to transform into either phase I at 286.14 K or phase III at 281.54 K; the latter was reported to have a milky appearance and was stable between approximately 282 and 295 K. Although Steininger et al. (1989[Steininger, R., Bilgram, J. H., Gramlich, V. & Petter, W. (1989). Z. Kristallogr. 187, 1-13.]) reported that it is difficult to grow single crystals of phase III, they found that needle-like single crystals of phase I could be formed readily if the melt was supercooled in the temperature range between 281 K and the melting point at 298.97 K. The IR work of Sciesinska & Sciesinska (1980[Sciesinska, E. & Sciesinska, J. (1980). Acta. Phys. Pol. A, 58, 361-368.]) indicates that the structure of phase I is likely to be formed from `curl-like' disordered hydrogen-bonded chains (Steininger et al., 1989[Steininger, R., Bilgram, J. H., Gramlich, V. & Petter, W. (1989). Z. Kristallogr. 187, 1-13.]). Dilatometric studies by Neu (1968[Neu, W. J.-M. (1968). C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Ser. C, 267, 1025-1028.]) show that a further phase of t-butanol exists as the density of a sample of phase I increases with time if it is stored at 298 K.

Additionally, Atkins (1911[Atkins, W. R. G. (1911). J. Chem. Soc. 99, 10-23.]) followed a similar annealing process and observed that the needle-like crystals of phase I, which are nucleated from the supercooled liquid, are transformed into crystals with a rhombohedral habitus (phase IV) if they are held at a temperature close to the melting point. Despite the prominence of t-butanol in the monoalcohol series, its wide use in chemistry as a solvent and its rich phase behaviour, it is only this phase, phase IV, that has so far had its structure determined (Steininger et al., 1989[Steininger, R., Bilgram, J. H., Gramlich, V. & Petter, W. (1989). Z. Kristallogr. 187, 1-13.]; CSD refcode VATSAK). Steininger et al. (1989[Steininger, R., Bilgram, J. H., Gramlich, V. & Petter, W. (1989). Z. Kristallogr. 187, 1-13.]) used single-crystal X-ray diffraction techniques on a zone-refined sample to show that phase IV of t-butanol has a triclinic structure with the space group P[\overline1] and that it is characterized by hydrogen-bonded helical chains of molecules arranged along the a axis of the unit cell. There are two of these helices in the unit cell (each composed of three symmetry-independent molecules) and they are related by the inversion centre.

Here we report the first crystal structure determination of phase II of t-butanol, at both low-temperature and high-pressure, where we have used a combination of single-crystal X-ray diffraction techniques and ab initio density-functional calculations. We find that the structure is trigonal with P[\overline3] symmetry and is characterized by the formation of hydrogen-bonded hexamers. Although the structure of phase II is very different from that of phase IV, the calculations indicate that the alteration of the hydrogen bonding of the molecules from catemer to hexamer results in a relatively small increase in the enthalpy (3.859 kJ mol−1) for the trigonal structure at ambient pressure. At 0.85 GPa, the difference in enthalpy between the two crystal structures is reversed (and increases in magnitude slightly to 13.314 eV per molecule), indicating that only a fairly modest pressure is required to make the structure of phase II the relatively more stable.

2. Experiment and ab initio calculations

Initially, the low-temperature phase behaviour of t-butanol was surveyed by differential scanning calorimetery (DSC) measurements. These results were obtained using a Perkin Elmer Pyris DSC 1. The sample of t-butanol was distilled and dried using a vacuum line and loaded as a liquid into a sealed aluminium pan. The procedure was carried out at a scan rate of 10 K min−1 from 293 to 193 K and then back to room temperature (Fig. 1[link]).

[Figure 1]
Figure 1
Graph of heat flow versus temperature for a DSC experiment on t-butanol. The sample was loaded as a liquid at room temperature. The temperature was scanned from 298 to 193 K and then cycled back to 313 K at a rate of 10 K min−1. A = crystallization, B = phase transition from phase IV to phase II, C,D = anomaly due to a possible ordering of the methyl groups, E = phase transition from phase II to phase IV, F = melting.

Crystallization occurred at 280.6 K and was indicated by the large exothermic peak (event A in Fig. 1[link]). The peak also has a small endothermic shoulder at 276.5 K. The next event is at 250 K on cooling (event B), where another exothermic change occurs, due to a structural phase transition. This is followed by another event at 238 K where there is a slight kink in the graph on both cooling and heating (events C and D). It is postulated that this feature is due to ordering in the sample – perhaps due to the ordering of the methyl groups. The X-ray diffraction data were collected at 220 K and we have assigned the phase in this temperature region as phase II to be consistent with the results of Oetting (1963[Oetting, F. L. (1963). J. Phys. Chem. 67, 2757-2761.]), who found that phase II is stable below 281 K.

On heating from 193 K to room temperature, the kink in the scan at 235 K is observed, then an endothermic event at 267.3 K (event E). This is the phase change associated with the exothermic peak at 250 K (i.e. event B) on cooling, although there is some hysteresis observed in the sample. The melting curve of the sample is very shallow; the onset is just above the phase transition at 270 K and is completed some 20 K later at 290 K (event F). This is the region where Oetting (1963[Oetting, F. L. (1963). J. Phys. Chem. 67, 2757-2761.]) identified three further phases in the sample; it is clear from this experiment that there are no further phase transitions above 268 K, although there may have been a mixture of solid and liquid which may have affected their experiments. Consequently, we tentatively assign events B and E to being due to a phase transition between phase II and phase IV.

2.1. Low-temperature study

A distilled sample of t-butanol was loaded into a capillary using a vacuum line in order to prevent exposure to air and therefore reduce the risk of contamination of water into the hygroscopic sample. The capillary, with an internal diameter of ∼ 0.1 mm, was mounted and centred on a Bruker SMART APEX diffractometer (Siemens, 1993[Siemens (1993). SMART. Siemens Industrial Autom. Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, USA.]; graphite monochromated Mo Kα radiation) equipped with a cryogenic cooling system, initially set at 243 K, and a 25 W OHCD laser-assisted crystal grower (Boese & Nussbaumer, 1994[Boese, R. & Nussbaumer, M. (1994). Correlations, Transformations and Interactions in Organic Chemistry, IUCr Crystallographic Symposia, Vol. 7, edited by D. W. Jones & A. Katrusiak. Oxford University Press.]). This initial temperature ensured that the polycrystalline sample was safely in the phase II region. Subsequently, the temperature was raised to just below the phase II to phase IV transition temperature, and the laser was used to establish a solid–liquid boundary. A single crystal was obtained by zone refinement of the sample over a time span of 20 min. A series of frames was collected both to assess the crystal quality and to provide an initial unit cell for the sample at the 268 K crystal growth temperature. The reflections were indexed using GEMINI (Sparks, 1999[Sparks, R. A. (1999). GEMINI. Bruker AXS Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, USA.]), and the crystal system was found to be trigonal. The sample was then cooled to 220 K, whilst monitoring the diffraction pattern every 10 K, to ensure that the event associated with points C and D in the DSC experiment did not degrade the sample quality. A hemisphere of data was collected using 20 s exposures and 0.3° scans in ω. This data set was indexed, integrated, solved and refined using GEMINI (Sparks, 1999[Sparks, R. A. (1999). GEMINI. Bruker AXS Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, USA.]), SAINT (Siemens, 1995[Siemens (1995). SAINT. Siemens Industrial Autom. Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, USA.]) and the SHELX suite (Sheldrick, 1997[Sheldrick, G. M. (1997). SHELXL97. University of Göttingen, Germany.]). The H atoms were placed in idealized positions and the final refinement statistics are presented in Table 1[link].1 (Although attempts were made to grow single crystals of phase I, the samples proved to be unstable, even when contained within capillaries, and we therefore limited the scope of this study to the determination of phase II.)

Table 1
Refinement statistics for the low-temperature (220 K) and high-pressure (0.85 GPa) structure determinations of the trigonal P[\overline3] phase (phase II) of tertiary butanol

  Low temperature High pressure
Crystal data    
Chemical formula C4H10O C4H10O
Mr 74.12 74.12
Cell setting, space group Trigonal, P[\overline3] Trigonal, P[\overline3]
Temperature (K) 220 (2) 293 (2)
a, c (Å) 18.0946 (13), 8.4041 (9) 17.55 (2), 8.080 (10)
V3) 2383.0 (4) 2155 (4)
Z 18 18
Dx (Mg m–3) 0.930 1.028
Radiation type Mo Kα Mo Kα
No. of reflections for cell parameters 3699 16
θ range (°) 2.5–25 2–10
μ (mm–1) 0.06 0.07
Crystal form, colour Cylinder, colourless Cylinder, colourless
Crystal size (mm) 0.5 × 0.1 × 0.1 0.02 × 0.02 × 0.01
     
Data collection    
Diffractometer Bruker SMART APEX Enraf–Nonius CAD-4
Data collection method ω scans ω scans
Absorption correction Multi-scan (based on symmetry-related reflections) Multi-scan (based on symmetry-related reflections)
Tmin 0.816 0.253
Tmax 1.000 0.562
No. of measured, independent and observed reflections 12 157, 2818, 2217 1808, 1203, 550
Criterion for observed reflections I > 2σ(I) I > 2σ(I)
Rint 0.026 0.211
θmax (°) 25.0 20.0
Range of h, k, l −21 → h → 21 0 → h → 13
  −21 → k → 21 −16 → k → 14
  −10 → l → 4 −4 → l → 7
     
Refinement    
Refinement on F2 F2
R[F2> 2σ(F2)], wR(F2), S 0.044, 0.131, 1.07 0.115, 0.295, 1.01
No. of reflections 2818 1203
No. of parameters 144 64
H-atom treatment Constrained to parent site Constrained to parent site
Weighting scheme w = 1/[σ2(Fo2) + (0.0783P)2 + 0.0635P], where P = (Fo2 + 2Fc2)/3 w = 1/[σ2(Fo2) + (0.1552P)2], where P = (Fo2 + 2Fc2)/3
(Δ/σ)max 0.164 0.014
Δρmax, Δρmin (e Å–3) 0.13, −0.13 0.33, −0.21
Extinction method SHELXL97 None
Extinction coefficient 0.0000 (12)

2.2. High-pressure study

At ambient conditions t-butanol is a crystalline solid, but on gentle heating it can be readily liquefied. The t-butanol sample was loaded and pressurized in a Merrill–Bassett diamond anvil cell (Merrill & Bassett, 1974[Merrill, L. & Bassett, W. A. (1974). Rev. Sci. Instrum. 45, 290-294.]), which had been warmed to a temperature just above the melting point of t-butanol and had been equipped with 600 µm culet diamond anvils and a tungsten gasket. After the nucleation of many crystallites the temperature was cycled close to the melting curve, in order to reduce the number of crystallites, in a manner similar to that adopted by Vos et al. (1992[Vos, W. L., Finger, L. W., Hemley, R. J., Hu, J. Z., Mao, H. K. & Schouten, J. A. (1992). Nature (London), 358, 46.], 1993[Vos, W. L., Finger, L. W., Hemley, R. J. & Mao, H. (1993). Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 3150-3153.]). Finally, a single crystal was obtained at approximately 0.85 (1) GPa that entirely filled the 250 µm gasket hole.

The setting angles of 17 strong reflections were determined on an Enraf–Nonius CAD-4 diffractometer (equipped with an Mo X-ray tube) and a least-squares fit to the data gave trigonal unit-cell parameters that compare closely with the unit-cell parameters measured at low temperature.

Intensity data were collected with the ω-scan method at the position of least attenuation of the pressure cell, according to the fixed-φ technique (Finger & King, 1978[Finger, L. W. & King, H. (1978). Am. Mineral. 63, 337-342.]). All accessible reflections were measured in the shell +h, ±k, ±l for 0 Å−1 < sinθ/λ < 0.48 Å−1. The intensities were corrected for absorption and then used for structure solution by direct methods in P[\overline3] symmetry. Three molecules were identified in the asymmetric unit and the structure was refined with the SHELX suite of programs (Sheldrick, 1997[Sheldrick, G. M. (1997). SHELXL97. University of Göttingen, Germany.]). Owing to the low completeness of the high-pressure data set, the displacement parameters were refined isotropically. The H atoms were placed in idealized positions. The refinement statistics for the final fit are listed in Table 1[link].

2.3. Ab initio calculations

In order to acquire a fuller understanding of the relationship between the low-temperature and high-pressure phases, we have performed a series of ab initio calculations using the CASTEP code (Segall et al., 2002[Segall, M. D., Lindan, P. J. D., Probert, M. J., Pickard, C. J., Hasnip, P. J., Clark, S. J. & Payne, M. C. (2002). J. Phys. Condens. Matter, 14, 2717-2744.]). This also allows us to obtain accurate H-atom positions, which are difficult to obtain using X-ray diffraction techniques.

The calculations were performed using the density functional formalism with the generalized gradient approximation (Perdew & Wang, 1992[Perdew, J. P. & Wang, Y. (1992). Phys. Rev. B, 45, 13244-13249.]) applied for the many electron exchange and correlation interactions. This approach is known to improve the description of the structural and electronic properties of hydrogen-bonded systems compared with the commonly used local density approximation (Perdew & Zunger, 1981[Perdew, J. P. & Zunger, A. (1981). Phys. Rev. B, 23, 5048-5079.]). Non-local ultra-soft pseudopotentials generated by the method of Vanderbilt (1990[Vanderbilt, D. (1990). Phys. Rev. B, 41, 7892-7895.]) were used to describe electron-ion interactions. The valence electron wavefunctions were expanded in a plane-wave basis set with a kinetic energy cut-off of 540 eV. This converges the total energy of the system to better than 0.001 eV per molecule (0.096 kJ mol−1). Brillouin zone integrations were performed on a Monkhorst–Pack grid (Monkhorst & Pack, 1976[Monkhorst, H. J. & Pack, J. D. (1976). Phys. Rev. B, 13, 5188-5192.]) that is large enough to reach a level of convergence in total energy similar to the wavefunction cut-off. The electronic structure calculation proceeds via a preconditioned conjugate gradients, energy-minimization scheme (Payne et al., 1992[Payne, M. C., Teter, M. P., Allan, D. C., Arias, T. A. & Joannopoulos, J. D. (1992). Rev. Mod. Phys. 64, 1045-1097.]) and density mixing algorithm using the plane-wave coefficients as variational parameters.

The experimentally determined atomic positions and lattice parameters were used in the calculations as a starting point, from which relaxed structural parameters were determined. The Hellmann–Feynman theorem was used to calculate the forces on the individual atoms, which were used to relax the structure. The ab initio stresses on the cell were also used to relax the cell parameters. We include a correction to the stresses and total energy (Francis & Payne, 1990[Francis, G. P. & Payne, M. C. (1990). J. Phys. Condens. Matter, 2, 4395-4404.]) that is required since the basis set changes as the unit cell is optimized. However, our basis set is large enough that these corrections are very small and are only included for completeness.

3. Results and discussion

On performing the calculations to fully relax the structures of phase II and phase IV of t-butanol, we find that the lattice parameters are in good agreement with the experimental data (see Table 2[link]). In the calculations, the symmetry of the structures was not constrained and we find that no symmetry breaking occurs during the calculations, indicating that they are in agreement with the experimentally determined space groups for both phases. The calculated fractional coordinates, including those for the H atoms, are also in excellent agreement with those determined experimentally (see deposited data). This gives us additional confidence that we have accurately determined the structure of phase II from the X-ray diffraction experiments and we have confirmed the structure of phase IV.

Table 2
Lattice parameters (Å, °, Å3) obtained from the ab initio density functional calculations for both the triclinic P[\overline1] and the trigonal P[\overline3] phases of tertiary butanol at 0 and 0.85 GPa

  0 GPa 0.85 GPa
[P\overline1]    
a 6.2027 6.0631
b 9.1431 9.0661
c 14.7554 14.4493
α 86.373 85.248
β 78.776 78.531
γ 76.363 75.800
Vcell 797.363 754.133
Vmolecule 132.894 125.689
     
[P\overline3]    
a 17.5898 17.4389
c 8.1014 8.0210
Vcell 2170.755 2112.510
Vmolecule 120.598 117.362

The pseudo-threefold nature of the molecular chains in phase IV of t-butanol is readily observed in an a-axis projection of the crystal structure, as shown in Fig. 2[link]. Neighbouring chains are aligned alternately antiparallel to one another along the a axis and, in graph-set notation, these adopt a C33(6) configuration. The structure has three unique molecules in the asymmetric unit, which gives rise to three unique hydrogen bonds. The donor–acceptor distances, calculated from the structure reported by Steininger et al. (1989[Steininger, R., Bilgram, J. H., Gramlich, V. & Petter, W. (1989). Z. Kristallogr. 187, 1-13.]), are 2.714 Å for O1⋯O3, 2.712 Å for O3⋯O2 and 2.741 Å for O2⋯O1(1 + x, y, z).

[Figure 2]
Figure 2
The crystal structure of the triclinic P[\overline1] phase IV of t-butanol, viewed approximately along the crystallographic a axis. The threefold helical nature of the hydrogen-bonded molecular chains is apparent. The figure was generated using the unit-cell parameters and fractional coordinates from the 0 GPa calculation.

In phase II there are three symmetry-independent molecules and these form six-membered rings or hexamers, as shown in Fig. 3[link]. In graph-set notation, both rings have the notation R66(12), with six hydrogen bonds forming each ring. There are two unique hexamers within the structure, referred to as hexamer I and hexamer II. Hexamer I has one unique hydrogen bond and is centred at (0, 0, [1\over2]). Hexamer II has two unique hydrogen bonds and is centred at ([2\over3][1\over3], 0.961 (13)) in the low-temperature structure and at ([2\over3][1\over3], 0.958 (14)) in the high-pressure structure. Hexamer I lies on a threefold roto-inversion centre, whereas hexamer II lies only on a threefold axis. Both hexamer I and hexamer II are arranged in the `chair' conformation common to cyclohexane and its derivatives. Neighbouring t-butanol molecules are orientated either above or below the mean plane of the ring. Fig. 4[link] shows the packing arrangement of the hexamers within the phase II crystal structure in projection down the crystallographic c axis. Like phase IV of t-butanol, the asymmetric unit of phase II also contains three molecules, which again gives rise to three unique hydrogen bonds within the structure. The donor–acceptor distances for the low-temperature structure determination are 2.775 (1) Å for O1—O2(xyz + 1), 2.779 (1) Å for O2—O1(−y + 1, xy, z − 1) and 2.729 (1) Å for O3—O3(xy, x, −z + 2), while those for the high-pressure structure determination are 2.786 (9) Å for O1—O2(xyz + 1), 2.720 (9) Å for O2—O1(−y + 1, xy, z − 1) and 2.698 (7) Å for O3—O3(xyx, −z + 2).

[Figure 3]
Figure 3
A projection along the crystallographic c axis of hexamer I and hexamer II in the trigonal P[\overline3] phase II of t-butanol.
[Figure 4]
Figure 4
The crystal structure of the trigonal P[\overline3] phase II of t-butanol viewed along the crystallographic c axis.

A measure of the flatness of the hexamers can be made by considering the torsion angle between four neighbouring O atoms in the ring. Hexamers I and II each have a characteristic torsion angle. In hexamer I, the torsion angle O3—O3(y, y − x, z)—O3(yx, −xz)—O3(−x, −y, 2 − z) is 50.1 (1)° at 220 K and reduces to 42.1 (7)° at 0.85 GPa. In hexamer II, the torsion angle O1—O2(x, y, 1 + z)—O1(1 − y, xy, z)—O2(1 − y, xy, 1 + z) is found to be 50.1 (1)° at 220 K, which reduces to 47.8 (5)° at 0.85 GPa. Hence, with pressure, there is a slight flattening of both hexamers.

Examining the crystal packing as a whole, one notable feature is the range of methyl–methyl contacts present. (All distances refer to the carbon–carbon separations.) Methyl groups on the same t-butanol molecule are separated by 2.48 Å on average. The intrahexamer contacts are 3.98 Å for hexamer I, and 4.01 and 4.20 Å for hexamer II. However, the interhexamer separations are significantly shorter, with a shortest methyl–methyl contact of only 3.52 Å. The methyl–methyl contact motif is reminiscent of that of the low-temperature phase of acetic acid as the axes of the interacting methyl groups (defined by the C—C bonds) are approximately perpendicular to one another and are directed towards the methyl C atom of the adjacent interacting molecule (Allan & Clark, 1999[Allan, D. R. & Clark, S. J. (1999). Phys. Rev. B, 60, 6328-6334.]). In the low-temperature phase of acetic acid the methyl–methyl contacts form a zigzag link between adjacent hydrogen-bonded catemers, while the inter-hexamer contacts of the high-pressure phase of t-butanol form the vertices of what are almost equilateral triangles arranged on layers parallel to the xy plane (Fig. 5[link]a). The triangle formed by atoms C13, C23 and C33 is arranged on a layer at z ≃ [3\over4], and the triangle formed by atoms C11, C22 and C31 is formed on a layer z[1\over4].

[Figure 5]
Figure 5
The methyl–methyl interactions (- · - · -) in (a) the trigonal P[\overline3] phase II oft-butanol and (b) the triclinic P[\overline1] phase IV of t-butanol.

In contrast, the interhelical methyl–methyl contact motif of low-temperature P[\overline1] phase IV involves only individual pairs of molecules, on neighbouring helices. The axes defined by the C—C bond on each interacting methyl group lie along the line of contact and are almost ideally collinear to one another (Fig. 5[link]b). This form of methyl–methyl interaction motif is very similar to that exhibited by the high-pressure phase of acetic acid, where the intercatemer contacts involve only individual pairs of molecules that have almost perfectly coincident molecular axes (Allan & Clark, 1999[Allan, D. R. & Clark, S. J. (1999). Phys. Rev. B, 60, 6328-6334.]). The shortest interhelical methyl–methyl contacts for phase IV of t-butanol is 3.67 Å, which is significantly shorter than the intrahelical contacts of 4.05, 4.16 and 4.35 Å and marginally longer than the corresponding interhexamer distance in P[\overline3] phase II.

We have been able to examine the relative energies of the phases at both ambient (0.0 GPa) and elevated pressure (0.85 GPa) using the first-principles techniques. The relative total energies per molecule give a measure of the relative stability of each phase, although this approach does not give an indication of barrier heights, which can be used to estimate thermal stability. At ambient pressure it is found that phase IV is more stable than phase II by 3.859 kJ mol−1, while at elevated pressure the order of stability is reversed with a difference in enthalpy of 13.314 kJ mol−1, indicating that the application of pressure acts to stabilize the trigonal phase II. Our calculations also reveal that phase II is denser than phase IV at both ambient pressure and 0.85 GPa (see Table 2[link]), and this fact may partly explain why we found that phase II would crystallize in preference to phase IV in our ambient-pressure experiments. The difference in the calculated total energies at ambient pressure is certainly relatively small, and the crystallization of one phase in preference to another will strongly depend on the initial nucleation and variations in the crystal growth conditions. These effects, including the influence of crystal seeding on the particular phase grown at ambient pressure, have been documented by Steininger et al. (1989[Steininger, R., Bilgram, J. H., Gramlich, V. & Petter, W. (1989). Z. Kristallogr. 187, 1-13.]).

Although our calculations reveal that phase II is denser than phase IV at both ambient and elevated pressure (Table 2[link]), our calculations reveal that the difference in relative energy at ambient pressure is fairly modest.

4. Conclusions

In conclusion, we have solved the trigonal P[\overline3] phase II crystal structure of tertiary butyl alcohol, at both low-temperature and high-pressure, and find that this phase and the triclinic P[\overline1] phase (phase IV) have very similar enthalpies despite the extremely substantial change of intermolecular bonding motif from helical catemer to hexamer. The hexamers in the trigonal phase adopt a chair conformation and at low temperature these are centred at (0, 0, [1\over2]) and ([2\over3][1\over3], 0.961 (13)), and at high pressure the centres are (0, 0, [1\over2]) and ([2\over3][1\over3], 0.958 (14)). Between these layers, the hexamers are linked by methyl–methyl contacts, which form nearly ideal equilateral triangles on layers at z[1\over4] and z ≃ [3\over4]. The increased stability of phase II over that of phase IV with pressure, as indicated by the series of ab initio calculations, is contrary to the general trend towards small R-group behaviour that we have observed in the other members of the monoalcohol series. However, as the pressure range of the current study is extremely limited, we would certainly expect there to be additional polymorphs at higher pressure, which may have crystal structures consisting of relatively simple pseudo-twofold catemers in agreement with the general structural trends that we have already observed.

Supporting information


Computing details top

Program(s) used to solve structure: SHELXS97 (Sheldrick, 1990) for (I). Program(s) used to refine structure: SHELXL97 (Sheldrick, 1997) for (I), tbuoh1.

Figures top
[Figure 1]
[Figure 2]
[Figure 3]
[Figure 4]
[Figure 5]
(I) top
Crystal data top
C4H10ODx = 1.028 Mg m3
Mr = 74.12Mo Kα radiation, λ = 0.71073 Å
Trigonal, P3Cell parameters from 16 reflections
a = 17.55 (2) Åθ = 2–10°
c = 8.08 (1) ŵ = 0.07 mm1
V = 2155 (4) Å3T = 293 K
Z = 18Cylinder, colourless
F(000) = 7560.02 × 0.02 × 0.01 mm
Data collection top
Enraf-Nonius CAD-4
diffractometer
1203 independent reflections
Radiation source: fine-focus sealed tube550 reflections with I > 2σ(I)
Graphite monochromatorRint = 0.211
w scansθmax = 20.0°, θmin = 1.3°
Absorption correction: multi-scan (based on symmetry-related reflections
?
h = 013
Tmin = 0.253, Tmax = 0.562k = 1614
1808 measured reflectionsl = 47
Refinement top
Refinement on F2Primary atom site location: structure-invariant direct methods
Least-squares matrix: fullSecondary atom site location: difference Fourier map
R[F2 > 2σ(F2)] = 0.115Hydrogen site location: inferred from neighbouring sites
wR(F2) = 0.295H-atom parameters constrained
S = 1.02 w = 1/[σ2(Fo2) + (0.1552P)2]
where P = (Fo2 + 2Fc2)/3
1203 reflections(Δ/σ)max = 0.014
64 parametersΔρmax = 0.33 e Å3
12 restraintsΔρmin = 0.22 e Å3
Crystal data top
C4H10OZ = 18
Mr = 74.12Mo Kα radiation
Trigonal, P3µ = 0.07 mm1
a = 17.55 (2) ÅT = 293 K
c = 8.08 (1) Å0.02 × 0.02 × 0.01 mm
V = 2155 (4) Å3
Data collection top
Enraf-Nonius CAD-4
diffractometer
1203 independent reflections
Absorption correction: multi-scan (based on symmetry-related reflections
?
550 reflections with I > 2σ(I)
Tmin = 0.253, Tmax = 0.562Rint = 0.211
1808 measured reflectionsθmax = 20.0°
Refinement top
R[F2 > 2σ(F2)] = 0.11512 restraints
wR(F2) = 0.295H-atom parameters constrained
S = 1.02Δρmax = 0.33 e Å3
1203 reflectionsΔρmin = 0.22 e Å3
64 parameters
Special details top

Experimental. Transmission factors for absorption correction calculated overall for gasket, diamond and sample. ref: R·Angel

Geometry. All e.s.d.'s (except the e.s.d. in the dihedral angle between two l.s. planes) are estimated using the full covariance matrix. The cell e.s.d.'s are taken into account individually in the estimation of e.s.d.'s in distances, angles and torsion angles; correlations between e.s.d.'s in cell parameters are only used when they are defined by crystal symmetry. An approximate (isotropic) treatment of cell e.s.d.'s is used for estimating e.s.d.'s involving l.s. planes.

Refinement. Refinement of F2 against ALL reflections. The weighted R-factor wR and goodness of fit S are based on F2, conventional R-factors R are based on F, with F set to zero for negative F2. The threshold expression of F2 > σ(F2) is used only for calculating R-factors(gt) etc. and is not relevant to the choice of reflections for refinement. R-factors based on F2 are statistically about twice as large as those based on F, and R- factors based on ALL data will be even larger.

Fractional atomic coordinates and isotropic or equivalent isotropic displacement parameters (Å2) top
xyzUiso*/Ueq
O10.8388 (4)0.4113 (4)0.9176 (7)0.0522 (19)*
H10.81140.43660.93910.078*
C10.8820 (5)0.4415 (5)0.7612 (10)0.042 (3)*
C110.9089 (6)0.3763 (6)0.7103 (11)0.065 (3)*
H11A0.85730.31980.69400.097*
H11B0.94470.37200.79540.097*
H11C0.94170.39530.60900.097*
C120.8180 (6)0.4446 (6)0.6379 (11)0.058 (3)*
H12A0.76880.38640.62260.087*
H12B0.84720.46680.53390.087*
H12C0.79760.48240.67950.087*
C130.9619 (6)0.5326 (6)0.7828 (10)0.063 (3)*
H13A0.94310.57310.81620.095*
H13B0.99320.55170.67990.095*
H13C0.99990.53050.86600.095*
O20.7615 (5)0.5109 (4)0.0047 (7)0.060 (2)*
H20.73320.45710.01110.090*
C20.7757 (5)0.5483 (5)0.1688 (10)0.041 (3)*
C210.7067 (6)0.4834 (6)0.2844 (11)0.065 (3)*
H21A0.64960.47030.24660.098*
H21B0.71670.50810.39360.098*
H21C0.70980.43040.28680.098*
C220.8671 (5)0.5694 (6)0.2160 (10)0.053 (3)*
H22A0.86860.51570.22850.080*
H22B0.88350.60130.31860.080*
H22C0.90770.60470.13090.080*
C230.7702 (6)0.6307 (6)0.1550 (11)0.068 (3)*
H23A0.71180.61590.12220.102*
H23B0.81170.66900.07380.102*
H23C0.78370.66000.26020.102*
O30.9243 (4)0.0970 (4)0.5368 (7)0.056 (2)*
H30.92750.05210.54220.083*
C30.8976 (5)0.1141 (5)0.6969 (10)0.041 (3)*
C310.9676 (6)0.2055 (5)0.7429 (10)0.056 (3)*
H31A1.02200.20630.76240.083*
H31B0.95040.22350.84150.083*
H31C0.97530.24510.65420.083*
C320.8909 (6)0.0469 (6)0.8215 (12)0.075 (4)*
H32A0.84610.01070.78740.113*
H32B0.87610.06010.92790.113*
H32C0.94630.04860.82830.113*
C330.8112 (6)0.1111 (6)0.6714 (11)0.064 (3)*
H33A0.76730.05280.63870.095*
H33B0.81770.15210.58650.095*
H33C0.79360.12630.77280.095*
Geometric parameters (Å, º) top
O1—C11.432 (8)C21—H21C0.9600
O1—H10.8200C22—H22A0.9600
C1—C111.495 (10)C22—H22B0.9600
C1—C131.521 (10)C22—H22C0.9600
C1—C121.523 (10)C23—H23A0.9600
C11—H11A0.9600C23—H23B0.9600
C11—H11B0.9600C23—H23C0.9600
C11—H11C0.9600O3—C31.457 (8)
C12—H12A0.9600O3—H30.8200
C12—H12B0.9600C3—C311.500 (10)
C12—H12C0.9600C3—C331.504 (10)
C13—H13A0.9600C3—C321.509 (10)
C13—H13B0.9600C31—H31A0.9600
C13—H13C0.9600C31—H31B0.9600
O2—C21.445 (9)C31—H31C0.9600
O2—H20.8200C32—H32A0.9600
C2—C231.500 (10)C32—H32B0.9600
C2—C211.502 (10)C32—H32C0.9600
C2—C221.505 (10)C33—H33A0.9600
C21—H21A0.9600C33—H33B0.9600
C21—H21B0.9600C33—H33C0.9600
C1—O1—H1109.5C2—C22—H22A109.5
O1—C1—C11105.7 (6)C2—C22—H22B109.5
O1—C1—C13109.1 (7)H22A—C22—H22B109.5
C11—C1—C13111.0 (7)C2—C22—H22C109.5
O1—C1—C12109.0 (7)H22A—C22—H22C109.5
C11—C1—C12111.6 (7)H22B—C22—H22C109.5
C13—C1—C12110.3 (7)C2—C23—H23A109.5
C1—C11—H11A109.5C2—C23—H23B109.5
C1—C11—H11B109.5H23A—C23—H23B109.5
H11A—C11—H11B109.5C2—C23—H23C109.5
C1—C11—H11C109.5H23A—C23—H23C109.5
H11A—C11—H11C109.5H23B—C23—H23C109.5
H11B—C11—H11C109.5C3—O3—H3109.5
C1—C12—H12A109.5O3—C3—C31105.3 (7)
C1—C12—H12B109.5O3—C3—C33107.0 (6)
H12A—C12—H12B109.5C31—C3—C33110.1 (7)
C1—C12—H12C109.5O3—C3—C32109.8 (7)
H12A—C12—H12C109.5C31—C3—C32111.9 (7)
H12B—C12—H12C109.5C33—C3—C32112.4 (8)
C1—C13—H13A109.5C3—C31—H31A109.5
C1—C13—H13B109.5C3—C31—H31B109.5
H13A—C13—H13B109.5H31A—C31—H31B109.5
C1—C13—H13C109.5C3—C31—H31C109.5
H13A—C13—H13C109.5H31A—C31—H31C109.5
H13B—C13—H13C109.5H31B—C31—H31C109.5
C2—O2—H2109.5C3—C32—H32A109.5
O2—C2—C23106.9 (7)C3—C32—H32B109.5
O2—C2—C21109.6 (7)H32A—C32—H32B109.5
C23—C2—C21111.2 (7)C3—C32—H32C109.5
O2—C2—C22105.3 (7)H32A—C32—H32C109.5
C23—C2—C22110.9 (8)H32B—C32—H32C109.5
C21—C2—C22112.7 (7)C3—C33—H33A109.5
C2—C21—H21A109.5C3—C33—H33B109.5
C2—C21—H21B109.5H33A—C33—H33B109.5
H21A—C21—H21B109.5C3—C33—H33C109.5
C2—C21—H21C109.5H33A—C33—H33C109.5
H21A—C21—H21C109.5H33B—C33—H33C109.5
H21B—C21—H21C109.5
(tbuoh1) top
Crystal data top
C4H10ODx = 0.930 Mg m3
Mr = 74.12Mo Kα radiation, λ = 0.71073 Å
Trigonal, P3Cell parameters from 3699 reflections
a = 18.0946 (13) Åθ = 2.5–25°
c = 8.4041 (9) ŵ = 0.06 mm1
V = 2383.0 (4) Å3T = 220 K
Z = 18Cylinder, colourless
F(000) = 7560.5 × 0.1 × 0.1 mm
Data collection top
Bruker SMART APEX
diffractometer
2818 independent reflections
Radiation source: fine-focus sealed tube2217 reflections with I > 2σ(I)
Graphite monochromatorRint = 0.026
w scansθmax = 25.0°, θmin = 1.3°
Absorption correction: multi-scan (based on symmetry-related reflections
?
h = 2121
Tmin = 0.816, Tmax = 1.000k = 2121
12157 measured reflectionsl = 104
Refinement top
Refinement on F2Secondary atom site location: difference Fourier map
Least-squares matrix: fullHydrogen site location: inferred from neighbouring sites
R[F2 > 2σ(F2)] = 0.044H-atom parameters constrained
wR(F2) = 0.131 w = 1/[σ2(Fo2) + (0.0783P)2 + 0.0635P]
where P = (Fo2 + 2Fc2)/3
S = 1.07(Δ/σ)max = 0.164
2818 reflectionsΔρmax = 0.13 e Å3
144 parametersΔρmin = 0.13 e Å3
0 restraintsExtinction correction: SHELXL, Fc*=kFc[1+0.001xFc2λ3/sin(2θ)]-1/4
Primary atom site location: structure-invariant direct methodsExtinction coefficient: 0.0000 (12)
Crystal data top
C4H10OZ = 18
Mr = 74.12Mo Kα radiation
Trigonal, P3µ = 0.06 mm1
a = 18.0946 (13) ÅT = 220 K
c = 8.4041 (9) Å0.5 × 0.1 × 0.1 mm
V = 2383.0 (4) Å3
Data collection top
Bruker SMART APEX
diffractometer
2818 independent reflections
Absorption correction: multi-scan (based on symmetry-related reflections
?
2217 reflections with I > 2σ(I)
Tmin = 0.816, Tmax = 1.000Rint = 0.026
12157 measured reflections
Refinement top
R[F2 > 2σ(F2)] = 0.0440 restraints
wR(F2) = 0.131H-atom parameters constrained
S = 1.07(Δ/σ)max = 0.164
2818 reflectionsΔρmax = 0.13 e Å3
144 parametersΔρmin = 0.13 e Å3
Special details top

Geometry. All e.s.d.'s (except the e.s.d. in the dihedral angle between two l.s. planes) are estimated using the full covariance matrix. The cell e.s.d.'s are taken into account individually in the estimation of e.s.d.'s in distances, angles and torsion angles; correlations between e.s.d.'s in cell parameters are only used when they are defined by crystal symmetry. An approximate (isotropic) treatment of cell e.s.d.'s is used for estimating e.s.d.'s involving l.s. planes.

Refinement. Refinement of F2 against ALL reflections. The weighted R-factor wR and goodness of fit S are based on F2, conventional R-factors R are based on F, with F set to zero for negative F2. The threshold expression of F2 > σ(F2) is used only for calculating R-factors(gt) etc. and is not relevant to the choice of reflections for refinement. R-factors based on F2 are statistically about twice as large as those based on F, and R- factors based on ALL data will be even larger.

Fractional atomic coordinates and isotropic or equivalent isotropic displacement parameters (Å2) top
xyzUiso*/Ueq
O10.83626 (7)0.40951 (6)0.91006 (13)0.0565 (3)
H10.81510.43870.93960.067 (6)*
C10.87886 (9)0.44124 (9)0.76159 (17)0.0489 (4)
C110.90717 (12)0.37925 (12)0.7118 (2)0.0735 (5)
H11A0.85750.32340.69510.110*
H11B0.94270.37570.79440.110*
H11C0.93950.39880.61360.110*
C120.81798 (13)0.44308 (13)0.6423 (2)0.0762 (5)
H12A0.77000.38590.62810.114*
H12B0.84710.46430.54150.114*
H12C0.79750.48030.68040.114*
C130.95418 (12)0.52955 (11)0.7871 (2)0.0748 (5)
H13A0.93400.56780.81970.112*
H13B0.98610.55000.68870.112*
H13C0.99080.52750.86930.112*
O20.76006 (7)0.50264 (8)0.00500 (13)0.0633 (3)
H20.70960.48260.02320.066 (5)*
C20.77251 (9)0.54377 (9)0.15536 (16)0.0468 (4)
C210.70764 (11)0.48402 (12)0.2727 (2)0.0731 (5)
H21A0.65100.47020.23800.110*
H21B0.71920.51110.37640.110*
H21C0.71080.43210.27950.110*
C220.86140 (10)0.56685 (11)0.2062 (2)0.0664 (5)
H22A0.86450.51520.21930.100*
H22B0.87490.59750.30630.100*
H22C0.90190.60260.12560.100*
C230.76533 (14)0.62259 (12)0.1337 (3)0.0773 (6)
H23A0.70770.60620.10150.116*
H23B0.80520.65860.05240.116*
H23C0.77850.65380.23330.116*
O30.93209 (7)0.09881 (7)0.54378 (14)0.0609 (3)
H30.90130.04780.51970.071 (6)*
C30.90285 (9)0.11579 (9)0.68964 (18)0.0514 (4)
C310.97107 (12)0.20405 (11)0.7385 (2)0.0760 (6)
H31A1.02410.20430.75740.114*
H31B0.95370.22050.83520.114*
H31C0.97940.24420.65440.114*
C320.89299 (16)0.05174 (13)0.8124 (3)0.0936 (7)
H32A0.84900.00470.77910.140*
H32B0.87690.06590.91310.140*
H32C0.94660.05240.82480.140*
C330.81950 (13)0.11287 (16)0.6591 (3)0.0945 (7)
H33A0.77690.05570.62720.142*
H33B0.82700.15280.57510.142*
H33C0.80090.12830.75550.142*
Atomic displacement parameters (Å2) top
U11U22U33U12U13U23
O10.0653 (7)0.0499 (6)0.0587 (6)0.0323 (5)0.0147 (5)0.0105 (5)
C10.0496 (8)0.0491 (8)0.0485 (8)0.0250 (7)0.0047 (6)0.0048 (7)
C110.0765 (12)0.0803 (12)0.0792 (13)0.0509 (10)0.0133 (10)0.0001 (10)
C120.0857 (13)0.0896 (13)0.0662 (12)0.0535 (11)0.0143 (10)0.0041 (10)
C130.0668 (11)0.0604 (10)0.0766 (13)0.0164 (9)0.0074 (9)0.0110 (9)
O20.0479 (6)0.0845 (8)0.0622 (7)0.0366 (6)0.0109 (5)0.0254 (6)
C20.0456 (8)0.0467 (7)0.0474 (8)0.0225 (6)0.0015 (6)0.0040 (6)
C210.0642 (11)0.0738 (12)0.0674 (12)0.0242 (9)0.0041 (9)0.0119 (9)
C220.0536 (9)0.0690 (11)0.0717 (12)0.0270 (8)0.0146 (8)0.0165 (9)
C230.0968 (14)0.0671 (11)0.0802 (14)0.0501 (11)0.0012 (11)0.0034 (10)
O30.0522 (6)0.0499 (6)0.0675 (7)0.0157 (5)0.0138 (5)0.0130 (5)
C30.0461 (8)0.0502 (8)0.0544 (9)0.0214 (7)0.0060 (7)0.0061 (7)
C310.0694 (11)0.0621 (10)0.0852 (14)0.0244 (9)0.0093 (10)0.0218 (10)
C320.1263 (19)0.0767 (13)0.0694 (13)0.0444 (13)0.0032 (12)0.0032 (10)
C330.0687 (12)0.1289 (19)0.1003 (16)0.0603 (13)0.0090 (11)0.0317 (14)
Geometric parameters (Å, º) top
O1—C11.4277 (18)C2—C231.506 (2)
C1—C121.502 (2)C2—C221.507 (2)
C1—C111.507 (2)O3—C31.4281 (17)
C1—C131.510 (2)C3—C321.494 (3)
O2—C21.4261 (17)C3—C331.504 (2)
C2—C211.500 (2)C3—C311.507 (2)
O1—C1—C12109.73 (13)O2—C2—C22105.30 (12)
O1—C1—C11105.05 (13)C21—C2—C22110.83 (14)
C12—C1—C11110.92 (14)C23—C2—C22110.92 (14)
O1—C1—C13108.77 (13)O3—C3—C32109.83 (14)
C12—C1—C13110.81 (15)O3—C3—C33108.60 (14)
C11—C1—C13111.37 (14)C32—C3—C33111.20 (17)
O2—C2—C21110.11 (13)O3—C3—C31105.46 (12)
O2—C2—C23108.73 (13)C32—C3—C31110.51 (16)
C21—C2—C23110.79 (14)C33—C3—C31111.06 (15)
(hp_p-1) top
Crystal data top
?β = 78.531°
Mr = ?γ = 75.800°
Triclinic, P1V = 754.14 Å3
a = 6.0631 ÅZ = ?
b = 9.0661 Å? radiation, λ = ? Å
c = 14.4494 Å × × mm
α = 85.248°
Data collection top
h = ??l = ??
k = ??
Refinement top
Crystal data top
?β = 78.531°
Mr = ?γ = 75.800°
Triclinic, P1V = 754.14 Å3
a = 6.0631 ÅZ = ?
b = 9.0661 Å? radiation, λ = ? Å
c = 14.4494 Å × × mm
α = 85.248°
Data collection top
Refinement top
Fractional atomic coordinates and isotropic or equivalent isotropic displacement parameters (Å2) top
xyzBiso*/Beq
O20.528690.305090.68265
H290.368580.367310.70705
C50.517970.193180.61954
C60.765070.112140.5824
H100.772120.027060.5322
H110.849160.054580.63993
H120.863580.192740.54659
C70.401520.273330.53988
H130.400580.191830.48865
H140.491610.357840.50324
H150.222560.330720.56681
C80.382010.082730.67244
H160.375460.004230.6259
H170.204790.14130.70119
H180.462330.0250.7309
O30.18720.712110.19722
H300.295270.712860.2416
C90.263630.778530.10623
C100.1170.748380.04042
H190.170240.794410.03036
H200.133190.626670.03607
H210.064640.801880.06469
C110.516090.706830.07146
H220.577840.755530.00269
H230.620970.72410.12082
H240.543830.584410.06507
C120.227090.948010.11621
H250.332460.969440.16421
H260.274941.005130.04842
H270.045970.998430.14452
O40.109930.539620.24576
H580.006550.603590.22575
C130.008130.383750.25974
C140.174640.292390.27913
H310.301260.33090.34226
H320.265930.304480.22008
H330.096250.172090.29009
C150.181330.333410.17074
H340.306240.404640.15487
H350.27590.215740.17855
H360.092840.342910.11116
C160.12810.370820.34352
H370.253130.441870.33215
H380.001940.407530.40724
H390.219450.253520.35589
(lt_p-1) top
Crystal data top
?β = 78.776°
Mr = ?γ = 76.363°
Triclinic, P1V = 797.53 Å3
a = 6.2027 ÅZ = ?
b = 9.1431 Å? radiation, λ = ? Å
c = 14.7554 Å × × mm
α = 86.373°
Data collection top
h = ??l = ??
k = ??
Refinement top
Crystal data top
?β = 78.776°
Mr = ?γ = 76.363°
Triclinic, P1V = 797.53 Å3
a = 6.2027 ÅZ = ?
b = 9.1431 Å? radiation, λ = ? Å
c = 14.7554 Å × × mm
α = 86.373°
Data collection top
Refinement top
Fractional atomic coordinates and isotropic or equivalent isotropic displacement parameters (Å2) top
xyzBiso*/Beq
O20.531980.282720.68885
H290.378220.349730.70619
C50.524120.179160.62042
C60.767140.092490.58756
H100.777510.027290.57951
H110.868710.102250.63848
H120.845440.136610.52185
C70.426480.269820.5424
H130.425810.197120.48679
H140.525360.352040.51377
H150.254260.332950.5666
C80.378730.072030.66551
H160.36120.003290.61435
H170.210290.1330.69696
H180.454010.002520.71923
O30.201080.702480.19171
H300.29670.716340.23668
C90.266050.77490.1051
C100.11920.742280.04098
H190.094240.832770.01072
H200.194310.636520.0051
H210.046050.735220.08031
C110.517490.714020.06752
H220.601040.80540.04353
H230.605570.649580.11947
H240.542920.641560.00882
C120.214590.94370.11962
H250.286850.968320.17724
H260.284631.003170.05852
H270.03210.988660.13489
O40.10430.550490.2673
H580.003120.606750.23024
C130.010240.393830.27218
C140.170370.30390.29537
H310.262120.323680.36606
H320.291880.336450.24927
H330.09420.183740.28809
C150.154590.351570.17798
H340.262390.430210.15483
H350.26350.239570.17871
H360.047660.353410.12715
C160.150350.372990.34759
H370.244810.460560.34328
H380.043120.379980.41621
H390.270730.264080.34293
(hp_p-3) top
Crystal data top
?V = 2112.5 Å3
Mr = ?Z = ?
Trigonal, P3? radiation, λ = ? Å
a = 17.4389 Å × × mm
c = 8.0210 Å
Data collection top
h = ??l = ??
k = ??
Refinement top
Crystal data top
?V = 2112.5 Å3
Mr = ?Z = ?
Trigonal, P3? radiation, λ = ? Å
a = 17.4389 Å × × mm
c = 8.0210 Å
Data collection top
Refinement top
Fractional atomic coordinates and isotropic or equivalent isotropic displacement parameters (Å2) top
xyzBiso*/Beq
O10.162110.590930.07855
H10.190880.555530.048
C10.118210.559730.23724
C20.037920.468580.21441
H20.058840.42170.17796
H30.004670.47110.11804
H41e-0050.445330.33017
C30.091170.625620.28975
H50.149490.690440.30828
H60.054160.604580.40575
H70.049710.630860.1945
C40.181720.556920.36241
H80.239020.622890.37645
H90.203810.511660.32049
H100.149320.534610.48316
O20.490050.254460.00099
H110.520080.220090.03
C50.45150.228320.1633
C60.516730.224030.28097
H120.575830.288950.29131
H130.487030.203110.40419
H140.534870.176440.23512
C70.368460.138530.15208
H150.385790.088780.11682
H160.33310.119630.27104
H170.325060.141270.05789
C80.430560.298620.2144
H180.491340.36230.2237
H190.388080.303390.12041
H200.396750.282660.33382
O30.099090.169790.46125
H210.034850.142640.48942
C90.115940.216140.3052
C100.207510.236930.25605
H220.208680.175890.23461
H230.253920.273670.35554
H240.22820.276640.14344
C110.111370.300110.33077
H250.044130.28380.36309
H260.132410.341890.21941
H270.155350.33740.43314
C120.048610.15760.17661
H280.053540.098410.1575
H290.062110.193360.05885
H300.018330.13840.21715
(lt_p-3) top
Crystal data top
?V = 2170.76 Å3
Mr = ?Z = ?
Trigonal, P3? radiation, λ = ? Å
a = 17.5898 Å × × mm
c = 8.1014 Å
Data collection top
h = ??l = ??
k = ??
Refinement top
Crystal data top
?V = 2170.76 Å3
Mr = ?Z = ?
Trigonal, P3? radiation, λ = ? Å
a = 17.5898 Å × × mm
c = 8.1014 Å
Data collection top
Refinement top
Fractional atomic coordinates and isotropic or equivalent isotropic displacement parameters (Å2) top
xyzBiso*/Beq
O10.161870.590630.0803
H10.189670.555150.04841
C10.118280.559680.23715
C20.038640.469440.21465
H20.058840.422420.17844
H30.003860.471460.11904
H40.000680.445930.3289
C30.091320.6250.28936
H50.149140.689470.30777
H60.054470.604470.40481
H70.050270.630490.19503
C40.181130.556950.36156
H80.238240.622260.376
H90.203410.512150.32068
H100.14950.534830.48171
O20.490010.25430.00108
H110.518730.21950.0294
C50.451560.228270.16331
C60.516120.224030.28026
H120.5750.288270.29087
H130.487220.203270.40281
H140.534510.176950.23536
C70.36920.139340.15232
H150.385880.089540.11741
H160.333750.120080.26973
H170.325790.141470.05894
C80.430660.298050.21412
H180.490910.361390.22336
H190.388630.30310.12106
H200.397020.282630.3329
O30.099090.170130.45959
H210.035590.144010.48938
C90.115830.216140.30513
C100.206740.236810.25634
H220.208070.176280.23504
H230.252910.273150.35499
H240.227820.276410.1443
C110.111480.299340.33042
H250.044850.283650.36255
H260.132170.34110.2206
H270.154920.336660.43194
C120.049280.158240.17743
H280.053820.09930.15797
H290.062080.193140.06018
H300.017380.138820.21699

Experimental details

(I)(tbuoh1)(hp_p-1)(lt_p-1)
Crystal data
Chemical formulaC4H10OC4H10O??
Mr74.1274.12??
Crystal system, space groupTrigonal, P3Trigonal, P3Triclinic, P1Triclinic, P1
Temperature (K)293220??
a, b, c (Å)17.55 (2), 17.55 (2), 8.08 (1)18.0946 (13), 18.0946 (13), 8.4041 (9)6.0631, 9.0661, 14.44946.2027, 9.1431, 14.7554
α, β, γ (°)90, 90, 12090, 90, 12085.248, 78.531, 75.80086.373, 78.776, 76.363
V3)2155 (4)2383.0 (4)754.14797.53
Z1818??
Radiation typeMo KαMo Kα?, λ = ? Å?, λ = ? Å
µ (mm1)0.070.06??
Crystal size (mm)0.02 × 0.02 × 0.010.5 × 0.1 × 0.1 × × × ×
Data collection
DiffractometerEnraf-Nonius CAD-4
diffractometer
Bruker SMART APEX
diffractometer
??
Absorption correctionMulti-scan (based on symmetry-related reflectionsMulti-scan (based on symmetry-related reflections??
Tmin, Tmax0.253, 0.5620.816, 1.000?, ??, ?
No. of measured, independent and
observed reflections
1808, 1203, 550 [I > 2σ(I)]12157, 2818, 2217 [I > 2σ(I)]?, ?, ? (?)?, ?, ? (?)
Rint0.2110.026??
θmax (°)20.025.0??
(sin θ/λ)max1)0.4820.595
Refinement
R[F2 > 2σ(F2)], wR(F2), S 0.115, 0.295, 1.02 0.044, 0.131, 1.07 ?, ?, ? ?, ?, ?
No. of reflections12032818??
No. of parameters64144??
No. of restraints120??
H-atom treatmentH-atom parameters constrainedH-atom parameters constrained
(Δ/σ)max0.0140.164??
Δρmax, Δρmin (e Å3)0.33, 0.220.13, 0.13?, ??, ?


(hp_p-3)(lt_p-3)
Crystal data
Chemical formula??
Mr??
Crystal system, space groupTrigonal, P3Trigonal, P3
Temperature (K)??
a, b, c (Å)17.4389, 17.4389, 8.021017.5898, 17.5898, 8.1014
α, β, γ (°)90, 90, 12090, 90, 120
V3)2112.52170.76
Z??
Radiation type?, λ = ? Å?, λ = ? Å
µ (mm1)??
Crystal size (mm) × × × ×
Data collection
Diffractometer??
Absorption correction??
Tmin, Tmax?, ??, ?
No. of measured, independent and
observed reflections
?, ?, ? (?)?, ?, ? (?)
Rint??
θmax (°)??
(sin θ/λ)max1)
Refinement
R[F2 > 2σ(F2)], wR(F2), S ?, ?, ? ?, ?, ?
No. of reflections??
No. of parameters??
No. of restraints??
H-atom treatment
(Δ/σ)max??
Δρmax, Δρmin (e Å3)?, ??, ?

Computer programs: SHELXS97 (Sheldrick, 1990), SHELXL97 (Sheldrick, 1997).

 

Footnotes

1Supplementary data for this paper are available from the IUCr electronic archives (Reference: WS5038 ). Services for accessing these data are described at the back of the journal.

Acknowledgements

We thank the EPSRC for funding this work and for supporting DRA through his EPSRC Advanced Research Fellowship.

References

First citationAllan, D. R. & Clark, S. J. (1999). Phys. Rev. B, 60, 6328–6334.  Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
First citationAllan, D. R., Clark, S. J., Brugmans, M. J. P., Ackland, G. J. & Vos, W. L. (1998). Phys. Rev. B, 58, R11809–R11812.  CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
First citationAllan, D. R., Clark, S. J., Dawson, A., McGregor, P. A. & Parsons, S. (2002). Acta Cryst. B58, 1018–1024.  Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
First citationAllan, D. R., Parsons, S. & Teat, S. J. (2001). J. Synchrotron Rad. 8, 10–17.  Web of Science CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
First citationAtkins, W. R. G. (1911). J. Chem. Soc. 99, 10–23.  CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
First citationBoese, R. & Nussbaumer, M. (1994). Correlations, Transformations and Interactions in Organic Chemistry, IUCr Crystallographic Symposia, Vol. 7, edited by D. W. Jones & A. Katrusiak. Oxford University Press.  Google Scholar
First citationBrock, C. P. & Duncan, L. L. (1994). Chem. Mater. 6, 1307–1312.  CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
First citationFinger, L. W. & King, H. (1978). Am. Mineral. 63, 337–342.  CAS Google Scholar
First citationFrancis, G. P. & Payne, M. C. (1990). J. Phys. Condens. Matter, 2, 4395–4404.  CrossRef Web of Science Google Scholar
First citationMcGregor, P. A., Allan, D. R., Parsons, S. & Pulham, C. R. (2005). Acta Cryst. B61, 449–454.  Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
First citationMerrill, L. & Bassett, W. A. (1974). Rev. Sci. Instrum. 45, 290–294.  CrossRef Web of Science Google Scholar
First citationMoggach, S. A., Allan, D. R., Parsons, S., Sawyer, L. & Warren, J. E. (2005). J. Synchrotron Rad. 12, 598–607.  Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
First citationMonkhorst, H. J. & Pack, J. D. (1976). Phys. Rev. B, 13, 5188–5192.  CrossRef Web of Science Google Scholar
First citationNeu, W. J.-M. (1968). C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Ser. C, 267, 1025–1028.  CAS Google Scholar
First citationOetting, F. L. (1963). J. Phys. Chem. 67, 2757–2761.  CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
First citationOswald, I. D. H., Allan, D. R., Day, G. M., Motherwell, W. D. S. & Parsons, S. (2005). Cryst. Growth Des. 5, 1055–1071.  Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
First citationOswald, I. D. H., Allan, D. R., Motherwell, W. D. S. & Parsons, S. (2005). Acta Cryst. B61, 69–79.  Web of Science CSD CrossRef CAS IUCr Journals Google Scholar
First citationPayne, M. C., Teter, M. P., Allan, D. C., Arias, T. A. & Joannopoulos, J. D. (1992). Rev. Mod. Phys. 64, 1045–1097.  CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
First citationPerdew, J. P. & Wang, Y. (1992). Phys. Rev. B, 45, 13244–13249.  CrossRef Web of Science Google Scholar
First citationPerdew, J. P. & Zunger, A. (1981). Phys. Rev. B, 23, 5048–5079.  CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
First citationSciesinska, E. & Sciesinska, J. (1980). Acta. Phys. Pol. A, 58, 361–368.  Google Scholar
First citationSegall, M. D., Lindan, P. J. D., Probert, M. J., Pickard, C. J., Hasnip, P. J., Clark, S. J. & Payne, M. C. (2002). J. Phys. Condens. Matter, 14, 2717–2744.  Web of Science CrossRef CAS Google Scholar
First citationSheldrick, G. M. (1997). SHELXL97. University of Göttingen, Germany.  Google Scholar
First citationSiemens (1993). SMART. Siemens Industrial Autom. Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, USA.  Google Scholar
First citationSiemens (1995). SAINT. Siemens Industrial Autom. Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, USA.  Google Scholar
First citationSparks, R. A. (1999). GEMINI. Bruker AXS Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, USA.  Google Scholar
First citationSteininger, R., Bilgram, J. H., Gramlich, V. & Petter, W. (1989). Z. Kristallogr. 187, 1–13.  CrossRef CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
First citationVanderbilt, D. (1990). Phys. Rev. B, 41, 7892–7895.  CrossRef Web of Science Google Scholar
First citationVos, W. L., Finger, L. W., Hemley, R. J., Hu, J. Z., Mao, H. K. & Schouten, J. A. (1992). Nature (London), 358, 46.  CrossRef Google Scholar
First citationVos, W. L., Finger, L. W., Hemley, R. J. & Mao, H. (1993). Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 3150–3153.  CrossRef PubMed CAS Web of Science Google Scholar

© International Union of Crystallography. Prior permission is not required to reproduce short quotations, tables and figures from this article, provided the original authors and source are cited. For more information, click here.

Journal logoSTRUCTURAL SCIENCE
CRYSTAL ENGINEERING
MATERIALS
ISSN: 2052-5206
Follow Acta Cryst. B
Sign up for e-alerts
Follow Acta Cryst. on Twitter
Follow us on facebook
Sign up for RSS feeds