Method Article
Modern high resolution X-ray powder diffraction (XRPD) in the laboratory is used as an efficient tool to determine crystal structures of long-known corrosion products on historic objects.
The crystal structure determination and refinement process of corrosion products on historic art objects using laboratory high-resolution X-ray powder diffraction (XRPD) is presented in detail via two case studies.
The first material under investigation was sodium copper formate hydroxide oxide hydrate, Cu4Na4O(HCOO)8(OH)2∙4H2O (sample 1) which forms on soda glass/copper alloy composite historic objects (e.g., enamels) in museum collections, exposed to formaldehyde and formic acid emitted from wooden storage cabinets, adhesives, etc. This degradation phenomenon has recently been characterized as "glass induced metal corrosion".
For the second case study, thecotrichite, Ca3(CH3COO)3Cl(NO3)2∙6H2O (sample 2), was chosen, which is an efflorescent salt forming needlelike crystallites on tiles and limestone objects which are stored in wooden cabinets and display cases. In this case, the wood acts as source for acetic acid which reacts with soluble chloride and nitrate salts from the artifact or its environment.
The knowledge of the geometrical structure helps conservation science to better understand production and decay reactions and to allow for full quantitative analysis in the frequent case of mixtures.
Conservation science applies scientific (often chemical) methods in the conservation of artifacts. This includes investigations of the production of artifacts ('technical art history': How was it made at that time?) and their decay pathways as a prerequisite to develop proper conservation treatments. Oftentimes these studies deal with metal organic salts like carbonates, formates and acetates. Some of them have been deliberately manufactured using suitable compounds (e.g., vinegar), others derive from deterioration reactions with the atmosphere (carbon dioxide or carbonyl compounds from indoor air pollution)1. As a matter of fact, the crystal structures of many of these corrosion materials are still unknown. This is an unfortunate fact, since the knowledge of the geometrical structure helps conservation science to better understand production and decay reactions and to allow for full quantitative analysis in the case of mixtures.
Under the condition that the material of interest forms single crystals of sufficient size and quality, single crystal diffraction is the method of choice for the determination of the crystal structure. If these boundary conditions are not fulfilled, powder diffraction is the closest alternative. The biggest drawback of powder diffraction as compared to single crystal diffraction lies in the loss of the orientational information of the reciprocal d-vector d* (scattering vector). In other words, the intensity of a single diffraction spot is smeared over the surface of a sphere. This can be considered a projection of the three-dimensional diffraction (= reciprocal) space onto the one dimensional 2θ-axis of the powder pattern. As a consequence, scattering vectors of different direction but equal or similar length, overlap systematically or accidentally making it difficult or even impossible to separate these reflections2 (Figure 1). This is also the main reason why powder diffraction, despite its early invention just four years after the first single crystal experiment3,4, was mainly used for phase identification and quantification for more than half a century. Nevertheless, the information content of a powder pattern is huge as can be easily deduced from Figure 2. The real challenge, however, is to reveal as much information as possible in a routine way.
A crucial step towards this goal, without any doubt, was the idea from Hugo Rietveld in 19695 who invented a local optimization technique for crystal structure refinement from powder diffraction data. The method does not refine single intensities but the entire powder pattern against a model of increasing complexity, thus taking the peak overlap intrinsically into account. From that time on, scientists using powder diffraction techniques were no longer limited to data analysis by methods developed for single crystal investigation. Several years after the invention of the Rietveld method, the power of the powder diffraction method for ab-initio structure determinations was recognized. Nowadays, almost all branches of natural sciences and engineering use powder diffraction to determine more and more complex crystal structures, although the method can still not be regarded as routine. Within the last decade, a new generation of powder diffractometers in the laboratory was designed providing high resolution, high energy and high intensity. Better resolution immediately leads to better peak separation while higher energies fight absorption. The benefit of a better peak profile description based on fundamental physical parameters (Figure 3) are more accurate intensities of Bragg reflection allowing for more detailed structural investigations. With modern equipment and software even microstructural parameters like domain sizes and microstrain are routinely deduced from powder diffraction data.
All algorithms for crystal structure determination from powder diffraction data use single peak intensities, the entire powder pattern or a combination of both. The conventional single crystal reciprocal space techniques often fail due to an unfavorable ratio between available observations and structural parameters. This situation changed dramatically with the introduction of the "charge flipping" technique6 (Figure 4) and the development of global optimization methods in direct space, of which the simulated annealing technique7 (Figure 5) is the most prominent representative. In particular, the introduction of chemical knowledge into the structure determination process using rigid bodies or the known connectivity of molecular compounds concerning bond lengths and angles strongly reduces the number of necessary parameters. In other words, instead of three positional parameters for every single atom, only the external (and few internal) degrees of freedom of groups of atoms need to be determined. It is this reduction of structural complexity which makes the powder method a real alternative to single crystal analysis.
Two pioneering case studies of the authors8,9 proved that it is possible to solve complicated crystal structures of complex corrosion products using powder diffraction data. The superiority of the crystallographic studies compared to other approaches was demonstrated among others by the fact that in both cases the reported formulas had to be corrected after considering the solved crystal structures.
The occurrence of both materials under investigation in museums is related to their storage in wooden cabinets or exposed to other sources of carbonyl pollutants. The first material under investigation was sodium copper formate hydroxide oxide hydrate, Cu4Na4O(HCOO)8(OH)2∙4H2O (sample 1), which forms on soda glass/copper alloy composite historic objects (e.g., enamels) in museum collections, exposed to formaldehyde and formic acid from wooden storage cabinets, adhesives, etc. This degradation phenomenon has recently been characterized as "glass induced metal corrosion"10. For the second case study, thecotrichite, Ca3(CH3COO)3Cl(NO3)2∙6H2O (sample 2), was chosen. Thecotrichite is a frequently observed efflorescent salt forming needlelike crystallites on tiles and limestone museum objects, which are stored in oak cabinets and display cases. In this case, the wood acts as source for acetic acid which reacts with soluble chloride and nitrate salts from the artifact.
In the following part of the text, the individual steps of the structure determination process using powder diffraction data applied to corrosion products from conservation science are presented in detail.
1. Sample Preparation
2. Data Collection
3. Crystal Structure Determination and Refinement
Note: For the determination and refinement of the crystal structures of samples 1 and 2, a complex computer program is used11. It is either run by a graphical user interface or by text based input files. The latter make use of a sophisticated scripting language. Sample input files of the different stages of the structural analysis using sample 1 are listed in Tables S1, S2, S4-S8. The general procedure is identical for sample 2.
High resolution XRPD was used to determine the previously unknown crystal structures of two long-known corrosion products on historic objects. The samples were taken from two museum objects and carefully grinded before they were sealed in transmission and capillary sample holders (Figures 6, 7). Standard measurements using a state of the art laboratory high resolution powder diffractometer in transmission and Debye-Scherrer geometry using monochromatic X-rays were performed (Figure 8).
A standardized procedure for structure determination from powder diffraction data was developed using recently developed highly effective algorithms in the following order: Determination of peak positions (Figure 10), indexing and space group determination (Figure 11), whole powder pattern fitting (Figure 12), structure determination (Figures 13-15), and Rietveld refinement (Figure 16). Crystal structure determination of both compounds was performed by iteratively combining reciprocal (charge flipping) (Figure 13) and direct space (simulated annealing) (Figure 14) methods with difference-Fourier analysis (Figure 15).
The determination of the crystal structures of these compounds (Figures 17, 18) improves our understanding of the decay mechanisms and allows full quantitative phase analysis (Figure 19) of corrosion products.
Figure 1. Powder diffraction in reciprocal space. Illustration of the region of reciprocal space that is accessible in a powder diffraction measurement. The smaller circle represents the Ewald sphere. In a powder measurement the reciprocal lattice is rotated to sample all orientations. An equivalent operation is to rotate the Ewald sphere in all possible orientations around the origin of reciprocal space. The volume swept out (area in the figure) is the region of reciprocal space accessible in the experiment.2
Figure 2. Information content of a powder pattern. Schematic picture of the information content of a powder diffraction pattern with the four main contributions of background, peak position, peak intensity, and peak profile.2 Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 3. Pawley fit. Pawley whole powder pattern fit of the powder pattern of a LaB6 standard measured with Mo-Kα1 radiation (λ = 0.7093 Å) from a Ge(220) monochromator in Debye-Scherrer geometry using the fundamental parameter approach. The following four convolutions have been applied: a pure Lorentzian emission profile, a hat shape function of the receiving slit in the equatorial plane, an axial convolution taking filament-, sample- and receiving slit lengths and secondary Soller slit into account, and a small Gaussian contribution related to the position sensitive detector.19 Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 4. Charge flipping scheme. Flipping scheme and flow diagram (as inset) of the charge flipping procedure in reciprocal space used for structure determination from powder diffraction data.
Figure 5. Simulated annealing scheme. Flow diagram of a simulated annealing procedure in direct space used for structure determination from powder diffraction data.19
Figure 6. Origin of Sample 1. Historic art object carrying Cu4Na4O(HCOO)8(OH)2∙4H2O (sample 1). Historic clasp, belonging to the collection of the Rosgartenmuseum Konstanz (RMK-1964.79). Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 7. Origin of Sample 2. Historic art object carrying Thecotrichite (sample 2). Thecotrichite on a glazed tile from the collection of Landesmuseum Württemberg (a) and its backside (b) covered with white thecotrichite crystals.9 Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 8. Powder diffraction pattern of sample 1. Screen shot showing the scattered X-ray intensities of Cu4Na4O(HCOO)8(OH)2∙4H2O (sample 1) at ambient conditions as a function of diffraction angle. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 9. Powder diffraction pattern of sample 2. Screen shot showing the scattered X-ray intensities of thecotrichite (sample 2) at ambient conditions, as a function of diffraction angle. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 10. Peak search for sample 1. Screen shot showing the scattered X-ray intensities of Cu4Na4O(HCOO)8(OH)2∙4H2O and the results of the automatic peak search algorithm using first and second derivatives of Savitzky-Golay smoothing filters. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 11. Indexing results for sample 1. Screen shot showing the results of indexing and space group determination for Cu4Na4O(HCOO)8(OH)2∙4H2O. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 12. Pawley fit of sample 1. Screen shot showing the results of a Pawley fit of Cu4Na4O(HCOO)8(OH)2∙4H2O in the most probable space group P42/n. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 13. Charge flipping of sample 1. Screen shot during the structure determination process for Cu4Na4O(HCOO)8(OH)2∙4H2O in space group P42/n using the method of charge flipping with histogram matching. Part of the crystal structure with preassigned atom types is already visible. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 14. Simulated annealing for sample 1. Screen shot during the structure determination process for Cu4Na4O(HCOO)8(OH)2∙4H2O in space group P42/n using the global optimization method of simulated annealing. Part of the crystal structure is already visible. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 15. Difference Fourier analysis for sample 1. Screen shot of the search for missing atoms during the structure determination process for Cu4Na4O(HCOO)8(OH)2∙4H2O in space group P42/n using the difference Fourier method. The crystal structure as is and additional electron density is plotted. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 16. Rietveld fit of sample 1. Screen shot showing the Rietveld plot of Cu4Na4O(HCOO)8(OH)2∙4H2O in space group P42/n. The observed pattern (blue), the best Rietveld fit profiles (red) and the difference curve between the observed and the calculated profiles (below in grey) are shown. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 17. Crystal structure of sample 1. Projection of the crystal structure of Cu4Na4O(HCOO)8(OH)2∙4H2O along the crystallographic c-axis. Polyhedra containing copper and sodium as central atoms are drawn. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 18. Crystal structure of sample 2. Projections of the crystal structure of thecotrichite, presented (a) along the c-axis and (b) along the b-axis. Polyhedra colors: Ca1: magenta, Ca2: cyan Ca3: green.8 Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 19. Quantitative analysis containing sample 1. Rietveld plot of a full quantitative phase analysis from a corrosion sample containing Cu4Na4O(HCOO)8(OH)2∙4H2O as the main phase and Cu2(OH)3(HCOO) and Cu2O as minor phases. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Molecular formula | Cu4Na4O(HCOO)8(OH)2 · 4(H2O) | Ca3(CH3COO)3Cl(NO3)2 ∙ 6H2O |
Sum formula | Cu4Na4O23C8H26 | Ca3Cl1O18N2C6H21 |
Formula weight (g/mol) | 414.18 | |
Crystal system | Tetragonal | Monoclinic |
Space group | P42/n (86) | P21/a |
Z | 8 | 4 |
a / Å | 8.425109(97) | 23.5933(4) |
c / Å | 17.47962(29) | 13.8459(3) |
c / Å | 17.47962(29) | 6.8010(1) |
β [°] | - | 95.195(2) |
V / Å3 | 1240.747(35) | 2212.57(7) |
Temperature (K) | 298 | 303 |
r (calc.) / g cm-3 | 2.255 | |
Wavelength (Å) | 1.54059 | 1.54059 |
R-exp (%) | 1.042 | 1.595 |
R-p (%) | 1.259 | 3.581 |
R-wp (%) | 1.662 | 4.743 |
R-Bragg (%) | 0.549 | 3.226 |
Starting angle (° 2θ) | 5 | 5.5 |
Final angle (° 2θ) | 75 | 59 |
Step width (° 2θ) | 0.015 | 0.015 |
Time/scan (hr) | 20 | 6 |
No. of variables | 70 | 112 |
Table 1. Selected crystallographic and structural details of Cu4Na4O(HCOO)8(OH)2∙4H2O and Ca3(CH3COO)3Cl(NO3)2∙6H2O (thecotrichite).
Supplementary Tables
Table S1. Input file after peak search of Cu4Na4O(HCOO)8(OH)2∙4H2O (only 1 peak is shown in the peak list). Please click here to download this file.
Table S2. Input file for indexing of Cu4Na4O(HCOO)8(OH)2∙4H2O. Please click here to download this file.
Table S3. List of reflection conditions for tetragonal space groups from the International Tables for Crystallography Volume A. Please click here to download this file.
Table S4. Input file for whole powder pattern fitting according to the Pawley method of Cu4Na4O(HCOO)8(OH)2∙4H2O (only few Bragg reflections are shown in the peak list). Please click here to download this file.
Table S5. Input file for charge flipping of Cu4Na4O(HCOO)8(OH)2∙4H2O. Please click here to download this file.
Table S6. Input file for simulated annealing of Cu4Na4O(HCOO)8(OH)2∙4H2O. Please click here to download this file.
Table S7. Input file for difference Fourier analysis of Cu4Na4O(HCOO)8(OH)2∙4H2O. Please click here to download this file.
Table S8. Input file for the final Rietveld refinement of Cu4Na4O(HCOO)8(OH)2∙4H2O. Please click here to download this file.
XRPD is a suitable technique for conservation research as it is non-destructive, fast and easy-to-use. XRPD data can be used in routine qualitative analysis, owing to the fact that the powder pattern is a fingerprint signature to the corresponding crystal structure. The biggest advantage of XRPD over other analytic techniques is the ability of performing simultaneous qualitative and quantitative analysis of crystalline constituents in mixtures by using the Rietveld refinement method5. Moreover, the presence of amorphous content can be detected and its amount estimated. However, this procedure requires knowledge on every crystal structure present in the mixture that is a subject to investigation.
To apply the method of XRPD routinely for structure determination to conservation science, several critical boundary conditions for the laboratory powder diffractometer must be fulfilled: 1.) To avoid preferred orientation in powder samples, transmission or even better Debye-Scherrer geometry must be used. 2.) Laboratory powder diffractometers should be equipped with a primary beam monochromator to ensure strict monochromatization and a position sensitive strip detector for high intensity (= good counting statistics) and high resolution. This particular type of instrument leads to sharp peak profiles which can be adequately described by few fundamental parameters being of great benefit for the separation of overlapping reflections.
Indexing of the powder pattern which is often regarded as the bottleneck in the structure determination process should be done with exhaustive methods like "singular value decomposition", which is also insensitive to small amounts of impurities. Due to the strongly reduced information content of a powder pattern as compared to a single crystal data set, a sophisticated combination of direct and reciprocal space structure determination algorithms is needed for a high success rate. The combination of charge flipping, simulated annealing and difference-Fourier analysis has been proven to be among the most promising approaches. Providing that the material under investigation is reasonably crystalline, crystal structures with 20-25 structural parameters can nowadays been solved almost routinely from powder diffraction data if the procedure described above is used. It can be expected that this limit can be pushed to much more complex crystal structures with the advent of better instrumentation, the use of synchrotron radiation, and even more sophisticated structure determination algorithms.
Even after 250 (!) years of conservation research and 100 years of crystal structure analysis, there are still many crystalline corrosion products on artifacts of unknown exact composition and structure. This is mainly due to the unavailability of naturally or synthetically grown single crystals of suitable size. XRPD data analysis as described here can overcome this restriction since powder samples are amenable to investigation. A quantum leap forward in Conservation Science as well as in other fields!
The authors have nothing to disclose.
The authors gratefully acknowledge Ms. Christine Stefani for performing the XRPD measurements. Marian Schüch and Rebekka Kuiter (State Academy of Art and Design Stuttgart) are acknowledged for the pictures of the tile (Fig. 7).
Name | Company | Catalog Number | Comments |
Stadi-P | Stoe & Cie GmbH | Powder Diffractometer | |
Mythen 1-K (450 μm) | Dectris Ltd. | Position Sensitive Detector | |
Mark tube borosilicate glass No. 50, 0.5 mm diameter | Hilgenberg GmbH | 4007605 | Low absorbing capillaries |
Topas 5.0 | Bruker AXS Advanced X-ray Solutions GmbH | Powder Diffraction Evaluation Software |
Zapytaj o uprawnienia na użycie tekstu lub obrazów z tego artykułu JoVE
Zapytaj o uprawnieniaThis article has been published
Video Coming Soon
Copyright © 2025 MyJoVE Corporation. Wszelkie prawa zastrzeżone