CCL: Differences between theoretical and experimental torsion angles



Hi,
I went through the list of values you quoted and I am surprised you are talking of big differences. Sincerely, you theoretical values are well comparable to the experimental values. What happend was a simple 180 degree rotation in the plane of molecule, perhaps this happened while modeling your molecule. Hence, the negative values. You can just take the magnitudes. The last value that seemed largely different is actually 89 degree (if you subtract it from 180 degree by which the molecular plane was rotated).
Best regards.
 
Olasunkanmi Lukman Olawale

Current Address:
Department of Chemistry,
Obafemi Awolowo University,
Ile-Ife, Osun State.
Nigeria.
+234-0-80-52401564 Or +234-0-80-67161091



On Tuesday, 12 November 2013, 12:15, N. Sukumar nagams__rpi.edu <owner-chemistry(0)ccl.net> wrote:

Sent to CCL by: "N. Sukumar" [nagams_-_rpi.edu]
By adding 2pi (360deg) to it (as Hugo has already explained).

N. Sukumar
Professor of Chemistry
Shiv Nadar University, India
----------------------------
"Pursue something so important that even if you fail, the world is better
off with you having tried." -- Tim O'Reilly
http://as.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-0470769009.html
==============Original message text===============
On Sun, 10 Nov 2013 5:08:07 EST "Hamid Shojaei shojaei81^gmail.com" wrote:


Sent to CCL by: "Hamid  Shojaei" [shojaei81**gmail.com]

Dear Dr. Hugo Alejandro Jimnez Vzquez,

Thank you very much for your comment on my question in CCL.
in some of torsional angles we have differences in a negative sign. How
can I ignore this sign.


Regards,
  shojaei


> "Hugo Alejandro Jimenez Vazquez hjimenez[*]woodward.encb.ipn.mx"  wrote:
>
> Sent to CCL by: Hugo Alejandro Jimenez Vazquez
[hjimenez^_^woodward.encb.ipn.mx]
>  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
>  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.
>
> ---862666845-1686960974-1384055120=:5311
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
> Content-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1311092147191.5385(a)woodward.encb.ipn.mx>
>
>
> To be sincere, I do not see those "big differences" you mention. If you=20
> take into account that the negative angles can be converted to positive by=
> =20
> adding 360, what you have is:
>
>  175.1 vs. 184.0
>  178.9 vs. 183.0
>  177.0 vs. 179.8
>  178.7 vs. 182.2
>  174.2 vs. 169.7
>    91.0 vs. 138.2
>
> At least for me, only the values for the last angle differ by a more than=
> =20
> reasonable amount; out of all the others, the first one differs the most,=
> =20
> by less than 10=B0.
>
> I have no idea about what your molecule looks like. In addition, you do=20
> not mention how you got the experimental values, but I would assume they=20
> came from an X-ray diffraction structure. You should be aware that the=20
> gas phase structure (from the calculations) does not necessarily have to=20
> be exactly the same as the structure in the crystal. In the solid phase=20
> the geometry is influenced by nonbonded interactions with all the=20
> neighbouring molecues which might lead to a slight or severe changes with=
> =20
> respect to the gas phase structure, particularly in floppy molecules.
>
> The gas phase geometry obtained through calculation also depends on the=20
> level of theory employed, something that you do not mention either.
>
> Regards,
>
> ---
> Hugo A. Jimenez Vazquez
> hjimenez(a)woodward.encb.ipn.mx
> Departamento de Quimica Organica
> ENCB-IPN
> Mexico
>
>
> On Sat, 9 Nov 2013, Hamid Shojaei Shojaei81..gmail.com wrote:
>
> >
> > Sent to CCL by: "Hamid  Shojaei" [Shojaei81-#-gmail.com]
> > Dear All,
> >
> > I do some structural calculations but I see big differences between theor=
> etical
> > and experimental torsion angles.
> >
> > Torsion angle=09      Experimental=09Theoretical
> > N(2)C(2)C(3)C(8)=09 175.1=09        -175.965
> > O(1)C(2)C(3)C(4)=09 178.94=09        -177.005
> > C(8)C(3)C(4)N(3)=09177.0          179.837
> > C(2)C(3)C(4)C(5)=09 178.73=09        -177.808
> > C(31)N(3)C(4)C(3)=09 174.2=09        169.686
> > C(4)N(3)C(31)C(32)=09  91.0=09        138.193
> >
> >
> > Any idea explaining such a differences is highly appreciated.
> >
> >
> >
> ---862666845-1686960974-1384055120=:5311--http://www.ccl.net/cgi-bin/ccl/send_ccl_messagehttp-:-//www.ccl.net/chemistry/sub_unsub.shtmlhttp-:-//www.ccl.net/spammers.txt===========End of original message text===========



-= This is automatically added to each message by the mailing script =-
To recover the email address of the author of the message, please change
the strange characters on the top line to the (0) sign. You can also
look up the X-Original-From: line in the mail header.

E-mail to subscribers: CHEMISTRY(0)ccl.net or use:
      http://www.ccl.net/cgi-bin/ccl/send_ccl_message

E-mail to administrators: CHEMISTRY-REQUEST(0)ccl.net or use
      http://www.ccl.net/cgi-bin/ccl/send_ccl_message
      http://www.ccl.net/chemistry/sub_unsub.shtml

Before posting, check wait time at: http://www.ccl.net

Job: http://www.ccl.net/jobs
Conferences: http://server.ccl.net/chemistry/announcements/conferences/

Search Messages: http://www.ccl.net/chemistry/searchccl/index.shtml
      http://www.ccl.net/spammers.txt

RTFI: http://www.ccl.net/chemistry/aboutccl/instructions/