The title compound, C18H16N4O, consists of a 3,6-bis­(pyridin-2-yl)pyridazine moiety linked to a 4-[(prop-2-en-1-yl­oxy)meth­yl] group. The pyridine-2-yl rings are oriented at a dihedral angle of 17.34 (4)° and are rotated slightly out of the plane of the pyridazine ring. In the crystal, C—HPyrd⋯NPyrdz (Pyrd = pyridine and Pyrdz = pyridazine) hydrogen bonds and C—HPrp­oxy⋯π (Prp­oxy = prop-2-en-1-yl­oxy) inter­actions link the mol­ecules, forming deeply corrugated layers approximately parallel to the bc plane and stacked along the a-axis direction. Hirshfeld surface analysis indicates that the most important contributions for the crystal packing are from H⋯H (48.5%), H⋯C/C⋯H (26.0%) and H⋯N/N⋯H (17.1%) contacts, hydrogen bonding and van der Waals inter­actions being the dominant inter­actions in the crystal packing. Computational chemistry indicates that in the crystal, the C—HPyrd⋯NPyrdz hydrogen-bond energy is 64.3 kJ mol−1. Density functional theory (DFT) optimized structures at the B3LYP/6–311 G(d,p) level are compared with the experimentally determined mol­ecular structure in the solid state. The HOMO–LUMO behaviour was elucidated to determine the energy gap.

The title compound, C14H15BrClNO4, consists of a 5-bromo­indoline-2,3-dione unit linked to a 1-{2-[2-(2-chloro­eth­oxy)eth­oxy]eth­yl} moiety. In the crystal, a series of C—H⋯O hydrogen bonds link the molecules to form a supramolecular three-dimensional structure, enclosing R22(8), R22(12), R22(18) and R22(22) ring motifs. π–π contacts between the five-membered dione rings may further stabilize the structure, with a centroid–centroid distance of 3.899 (2) Å. The Hirshfeld surface analysis of the crystal structure indicates that the most important contributions for the crystal packing are from H⋯H (28.1%), H⋯O/O⋯H (23.5%), H⋯Br/Br⋯H (13.8%), H⋯Cl/Cl⋯H (13.0%) and H⋯C/C⋯H (10.2%) inter­actions. Hydrogen bonding and van der Waals inter­actions are the dominant inter­actions in the crystal packing. Density functional theory (DFT) optimized structures at the B3LYP/6-311G(d,p) level are compared with the experimentally determined mol­ecular structure in the solid state. The HOMO—LUMO behaviour was elucidated to determine the energy gap. The chloro­eth­oxy­ethoxyethyl side chain atoms are disordered over two sets of sites with an occupancy ratio of 0.665 (8):0.335 (6).

The title compound, C15H12ClNO3, consists of a 1,2-di­hydro­quinoline-4-carb­oxyl­ate unit with 2-chloro­ethyl and propynyl substituents, where the quinoline moiety is almost planar and the propynyl substituent is nearly perpendicular to its mean plane. In the crystal, the mol­ecules form zigzag stacks along the a-axis direction through slightly offset π-stacking inter­actions between inversion-related quinoline moieties which are tied together by inter­molecular C—HPrpn­yl⋯OCarbx and C—HChlethy⋯OCarbx (Prpnyl = propynyl, Carbx = carboxyl­ate and Chlethy = chloro­eth­yl) hydrogen bonds. The Hirshfeld surface analysis of the crystal structure indicates that the most important contributions for the crystal packing are from H⋯H (29.9%), H⋯O/O⋯H (21.4%), H⋯C/C⋯ H (19.4%), H⋯Cl/Cl⋯H (16.3%) and C⋯C (8.6%) inter­actions. Hydrogen bonding and van der Waals inter­actions are the dominant inter­actions in the crystal packing. Computational chemistry indicates that in the crystal, the C—HPrpn­yl⋯OCarbx and C—HChlethy⋯OCarbx hydrogen bond energies are 67.1 and 61.7 kJ mol−1, respectively. Density functional theory (DFT) optimized structures at the B3LYP/ 6–311 G(d,p) level are compared with the experimentally determined mol­ecular structure in the solid state. The HOMO–LUMO behaviour was elucidated to determine the energy gap.

In the title compound, bis­(2-meth­oxy­ethyl xanthato-κS)(N,N,N',N'-tetra­methyl­ethylenedi­amine-κ2N,N')zinc(II) acetone hemisolvate, [Zn(C4H7O2S2)2(C6H16N2)]·0.5C3H6O, the ZnII ion is coordinated by two N atoms of the N,N,N',N'-tetra­methyl­ethylenedi­amine ligand and two S atoms from two 2-meth­oxy­ethyl xanthate ligands. The amine ligand is disordered over two orientations and was modelled with refined occupancies of 0.538 (6) and 0.462 (6). The mol­ecular structure features two C—H⋯O and two C—H⋯S intra­molecular inter­actions. In the crystal, mol­ecules are linked by weak C—H⋯O and C—H⋯S hydrogen bonds, forming a three-dimensional supra­molecular architecture. The mol­ecular structure was optimized using density functional theory (DFT) at the B3LYP/6–311 G(d,p) level. The smallest HOMO–LUMO energy gap (3.19 eV) indicates the suitability of this crystal for optoelectronic applications. The mol­ecular electrostatic potential (MEP) further identifies the positive, negative and neutral electrostatic potential regions of the mol­ecules. Half a mol­ecule of disordered acetone was removed with the solvent-mask procedure in OLEX2 [Dolomanov et al. (2009). J. Appl. Cryst. 42, 339–341] and this contribition is included in the formula.

The title imidazo[1,2-a] pyridine derivative, C13H8Br2N2, was synthesized via a single-step reaction method. The title mol­ecule is planar, showing a dihedral angle of 0.62 (17)° between the phenyl and the imidazo[1,2-a] pyridine rings. An intra­molecular C—H⋯N hydrogen bond with an S(5) ring motif is present. In the crystal, a short H⋯H contact links adjacent mol­ecules into inversion-related dimers. The dimers are linked in turn by weak C—H⋯π and slipped π–π stacking inter­actions, forming layers parallel to (110). The layers are connected into a three-dimensional network by short Br⋯H contacts. Two-dimensional fingerprint plots and three-dimensional Hirshfeld surface analysis of the inter­molecular contacts reveal that the most important contributions for the crystal packing are from H⋯Br/Br⋯H (26.1%), H⋯H (21.7%), H⋯C/C⋯H (21.3%) and C⋯C (6.5%) inter­actions. Energy framework calculations suggest that the contacts formed between mol­ecules are largely dispersive in nature. Analysis of HOMO–LUMO energies from a DFT calculation reveals the pure π character of the aromatic rings with the highest electron density on the phenyl ring, and σ character of the electron density on the Br atoms. The HOMO–LUMO gap was found to be 4.343 eV.

The benzo­pyran ring of the title com­pound, C16H11ClN2O2, is planar [maximum deviation = 0.079 (2) Å] and is almost perpendicular to the chloro­phenyl ring [dihedral angle = 86.85 (6)°]. In the crystal, N—H⋯O, O—H⋯N, C—H⋯O and C—H⋯Cl hydrogen bonds form inter- and intra­molecular inter­actions. The DFT/B3LYP/6-311G(d,p) method was used to determine the HOMO–LUMO energy levels. The mol­ecular electrostatic potential surfaces were investigated by Hirshfeld surface analysis and two-dimensional fingerprint plots were used to analyse the inter­molecular inter­actions in the mol­ecule.

The title compound, C22H15Cl2NOS, contains 1,4-benzo­thia­zine and 2,4-di­­chloro­benzyl­idene units, where the di­hydro­thia­zine ring adopts a screw-boat conformation. In the crystal, inter­molecular C—HBnz⋯OThz (Bnz = benzene and Thz = thia­zine) hydrogen bonds form corrugated chains extending along the b-axis direction which are connected into layers parallel to the bc plane by inter­molecular C—HMethy⋯SThz (Methy = methyl­ene) hydrogen bonds, en­closing R44(22) ring motifs. Offset π-stacking inter­actions between 2,4-di­­chloro­phenyl rings [centroid–centroid = 3.7701 (8) Å] and π-inter­actions which are associated by C—HBnz⋯π(ring) and C—HDchlphy⋯π(ring) (Dchlphy = 2,4-di­chloro­phen­yl) inter­actions may be effective in the stabilization of the crystal structure. The Hirshfeld surface analysis of the crystal structure indicates that the most important contributions for the crystal packing are from H⋯H (29.1%), H⋯C/C⋯H (27.5%), H⋯Cl/Cl⋯H (20.6%) and O⋯H/H⋯O (7.0%) inter­actions. Hydrogen-bonding and van der Waals inter­actions are the dominant inter­actions in the crystal packing. Computational chemistry indicates that in the crystal, the C—HBnz⋯OThz and C—HMethy⋯SThz hydrogen-bond energies are 55.0 and 27.1 kJ mol−1, respectively. Density functional theory (DFT) optimized structures at the B3LYP/6-311G(d,p) level are compared with the experimentally determined mol­ecular structure in the solid state. The HOMO–LUMO behaviour was elucidated to determine the energy gap.

The title com­pound, C22H16N4O2, contains two pyridine rings and one meth­oxy­carbonyl­phenyl group attached to a pyridazine ring which deviates very slightly from planarity. In the crystal, ribbons consisting of inversion-related chains of mol­ecules extending along the a-axis direction are formed by C—HMthy⋯OCarbx (Mthy = methyl and Carbx = carboxyl­ate) hydrogen bonds. The ribbons are connected into layers parallel to the bc plane by C—HBnz⋯π(ring) (Bnz = benzene) inter­actions. The Hirshfeld surface analysis of the crystal structure indicates that the most important contributions for the crystal packing are from H⋯H (39.7%), H⋯C/C⋯H (27.5%), H⋯N/N⋯H (15.5%) and O⋯H/H⋯O (11.1%) inter­actions. Hydrogen-bonding and van der Waals inter­actions are the dominant inter­actions in the crystal packing. Computational chemistry indicates that in the crystal, C—HMthy⋯OCarbx hydrogen-bond energies are 62.0 and 34.3 kJ mol−1, respectively. Density functional theory (DFT) optimized structures at the B3LYP/6-311G(d,p) level are com­pared with the experimentally determined mol­ecular structure in the solid state. The HOMO–LUMO behaviour was elucidated to determine the energy gap.

The title com­pound, C24H24N2O6, consists of ethyl 2-(1,2,3,4-tetra­hydro-2-oxo­quinolin-1-yl)acetate and 4-[(2-eth­oxy-2-oxoeth­yl)(phen­yl)carbomoyl] units, where the oxo­quinoline unit is almost planar and the acetate substituent is nearly perpendicular to its mean plane. In the crystal, C—HOxqn⋯OEthx and C—HPh­yl⋯OCarbx (Oxqn = oxoquinolin, Ethx = eth­oxy, Phyl = phenyl and Carbx = carboxyl­ate) weak hydrogen bonds link the mol­ecules into a three-dimensional network sturucture. A π–π inter­action between the constituent rings of the oxo­quinoline unit, with a centroid–centroid distance of 3.675 (1) Å may further stabilize the structure. Both terminal ethyl groups are disordered over two sets of sites. The ratios of the refined occupanies are 0.821 (8):0.179 (8) and 0.651 (18):0.349 (18). The Hirshfeld surface analysis of the crystal structure indicates that the most important contributions for the crystal packing are from H⋯H (53.9%), H⋯O/O⋯H (28.5%) and H⋯C/C⋯H (11.8%) inter­actions. Weak inter­molecular hydrogen-bond inter­actions and van der Waals inter­actions are the dominant inter­actions in the crystal packing. Density functional theory (DFT) geometric optimized structures at the B3LYP/6-311G(d,p) level are com­pared with the experimentally determined mol­ecular structure in the solid state. The HOMO–LUMO mol­ecular orbital behaviour was elucidated to determine the energy gap.

In the title compound, C10H10N2OS, the five atoms of the thio­phene ring are essentially coplanar (r.m.s. deviation = 0.0037 Å) and the pyridazine ring is non-planar. In the crystal, pairs of N—H⋯O hydrogen bonds link the mol­ecules into dimers with an R22(8) ring motif. The dimers are linked by C—H⋯O inter­actions, forming layers parallel to the bc plane. The theoretical geometric parameters are in good agreement with XRD results. The inter­molecular inter­actions were investigated using a Hirshfeld surface analysis and two-dimensional fingerprint plots. The Hirshfeld surface analysis of the title compound suggests that the most significant contributions to the crystal packing are by H⋯H (39.7%), C⋯H/H⋯C (17.3%) and O⋯H/H⋯O (16.8%) contacts.

The title pyridazinone derivative, C20H18N2O3, is not planar. The phenyl ring and the pyridazine ring are inclined to each other by 10.55 (12)°, whereas the 4-methyl­benzyl ring is nearly orthogonal to the pyridazine ring, with a dihedral angle of 72.97 (10)°. In the crystal, mol­ecules are linked by pairs of O—H⋯O hydrogen bonds, forming inversion dimers with an R22(14) ring motif. The dimers are linked by C—H⋯O hydrogen bonds, generating ribbons propagating along the c-axis direction. The inter­molecular inter­actions were additionally investigated using Hirshfeld surface analysis and two-dimensional fingerprint plots. They revealed that the most significant contributions to the crystal packing are from H⋯H (48.4%), H⋯O/O⋯H (21.8%) and H⋯C/C⋯H (20.4%) contacts. Mol­ecular orbital calculations providing electron-density plots of HOMO and LUMO mol­ecular orbitals and mol­ecular electrostatic potentials (MEP) were also computed, both with the DFT/B3LYP/6–311 G++(d,p) basis set.

In the title mol­ecule, C11H10N2O, the di­hydro­benzimidazol-2-one moiety is essentially planar, with the prop-2-yn-1-yl substituent rotated well out of this plane. In the crystal, C—HMthy⋯π(ring) inter­actions and C—HProp⋯ODhyr (Mthy = methyl, Prop = prop-2-yn-1-yl and Dhyr = di­hydro) hydrogen bonds form corrugated layers parallel to (10overline{1}), which are associated through additional C—HBnz⋯ODhyr (Bnz = benzene) hydrogen bonds and head-to-tail, slipped, π-stacking [centroid-to-centroid distance = 3.7712 (7) Å] inter­actions between di­hydro­benzimidazol-2-one moieties. The Hirshfeld surface analysis of the crystal structure indicates that the most important contributions to the crystal packing are from H⋯H (44.1%), H⋯C/C⋯H (33.5%) and O⋯H/H⋯O (13.4%) inter­actions. Hydrogen-bonding and van der Waals inter­actions are the dominant inter­actions in the crystal packing. Computational chemistry calculations indicate that in the crystal, C—H⋯O hydrogen-bond energies are 46.8 and 32.5 (for C—HProp⋯ODhyr) and 20.2 (for C—HBnz⋯ODhyr) kJ mol−1. Density functional theory (DFT) optimized structures at the B3LYP/6–311 G(d,p) level are compared with the experimentally determined mol­ecular structure in the solid state. The HOMO–LUMO behaviour was elucidated to determine the energy gap.

In the title mol­ecule, C24H21N5O·H2O, the di­hydro­benzo­diazole moiety is not quite planar, while the whole mol­ecule adopts a U-shaped conformation in which there is a close approach of the two benzyl groups. In the crystal, chains of alternating mol­ecules and lattice water extending along [201] are formed by O—HUncoordW⋯ODhyr and O—HUncoordW⋯NTrz (UncoordW = uncoordinated water, Dhyr = di­hydro and Trz = triazole) hydrogen bonds. The chains are connected into layers parallel to (010) by C—HTrz⋯OUncoordW hydrogen bonds with the di­hydro­benzo­diazole units in adjacent layers inter­calating to form head-to-tail π-stacking [centroid-to-centroid distance = 3.5694 (11) Å] inter­actions between them, which generates the overall three-dimensional structure. Hirshfeld surface analysis indicates that the most important contributions for the crystal packing are from H⋯H (52.1%), H⋯C/C⋯H (23.8%) and O⋯H/H⋯O (11.2%) inter­actions. Hydrogen-bonding and van der Waals inter­actions are the dominant inter­actions in the crystal packing. Density functional theory (DFT) optimized structures at the B3LYP/ 6–311 G(d,p) level are compared with the experimentally determined mol­ecular structure in the solid state. The HOMO–LUMO behaviour was elucidated to determine the energy gap.

In the title compound, C18H15ClN2O·H2O, a benzohydrazide derivative, the dihedral angle between the mean plane of the di­hydro­naphthalene ring system and the phenyl ring is 17.1 (2)°. In the crystal, O—H⋯O, N—H⋯O and C—H⋯O hydrogen bonds link the benzohydrazide and water mol­ecules, forming a layer parallel to the bc plane. Hirshfeld surface analysis and two-dimensional fingerprint plots indicate that the most important contributions to the crystal packing are from H⋯H (45.7%) and H⋯C/C⋯H (20.2%) contacts.

In the crystal structure of the title compound, C14H12ClNO, the mol­ecules are linked through C—H⋯O hydrogen bonds and C—H⋯π inter­actions, forming chains parallel to the [010] direction. π–π inter­actions and intra­molecular hydrogen bonds are also observed. The mol­ecular geometry of the title compound in the ground state has been calculated using density functional theory at the B3LYP level with the 6–311++G(2d,2p) basis set. Additionally, frontier mol­ecular orbital and mol­ecular electrostatic potential map analyses were performed.

The title compound, C24H27Cl2NOS, contains 1,4-benzo­thia­zine and 2,4-di­chloro­phenyl­methyl­idene units in which the di­hydro­thia­zine ring adopts a screw-boat conformation. In the crystal, inter­molecular C—HBnz⋯OThz (Bnz = benzene and Thz = thia­zine) hydrogen bonds form chains of mol­ecules extending along the a-axis direction, which are connected to their inversion-related counterparts by C—HBnz⋯ClDchlphy (Dchlphy = 2,4-di­chloro­phen­yl) hydrogen bonds and C—HDchlphy⋯π (ring) inter­actions. These double chains are further linked by C—HDchlphy⋯OThz hydrogen bonds, forming stepped layers approximately parallel to (012). The Hirshfeld surface analysis of the crystal structure indicates that the most important contributions for the crystal packing are from H⋯H (44.7%), C⋯H/H⋯C (23.7%), Cl⋯H/H⋯Cl (18.9%), O⋯H/H⋯O (5.0%) and S⋯H/H⋯S (4.8%) inter­actions. Hydrogen-bonding and van der Waals inter­actions are the dominant inter­actions in the crystal packing. Computational chemistry indicates that in the crystal, C—HDchlphy⋯OThz, C—HBnz⋯OThz and C—HBnz⋯ClDchlphy hydrogen-bond energies are 134.3, 71.2 and 34.4 kJ mol−1, respectively. Density functional theory (DFT) optimized structures at the B3LYP/6–311 G(d,p) level are compared with the experimentally determined mol­ecular structure in the solid state. The HOMO–LUMO behaviour was elucidated to determine the energy gap. The two carbon atoms at the end of the nonyl chain are disordered in a 0.562 (4)/0.438 (4) ratio.

The asymmetric unit of the title compound, C23H28O4, comprises two half-mol­ecules, with the other half of each mol­ecule being completed by the application of twofold rotation symmetry. The two completed mol­ecules both have a V-shaped appearance but differ in their conformations. In the crystal, each independent mol­ecule forms chains extending parallel to the b axis with its symmetry-related counterparts through C—H⋯π(ring) inter­actions. Hirshfeld surface analysis of the crystal structure indicates that the most important contributions for the crystal packing are from H⋯H (65.4%), H⋯C/C⋯H (21.8%) and H⋯O/O⋯H (12.3%) inter­actions. Optimized structures using density functional theory (DFT) at the B3LYP/6–311 G(d,p) level are compared with the experimentally determined mol­ecular structures in the solid state. The HOMO–LUMO behaviour was elucidated to determine the energy gap.

In the title mol­ecule, C12H13N3O2S, the benzo­thia­zine moiety is slightly non-planar, with the imidazolidine portion twisted only a few degrees out of the mean plane of the former. In the crystal, a layer structure parallel to the bc plane is formed by a combination of O—HHydethy⋯NThz hydrogen bonds and weak C—HImdz⋯OImdz and C—HBnz⋯OImdz (Hydethy = hy­droxy­ethyl, Thz = thia­zole, Imdz = imidazolidine and Bnz = benzene) inter­actions, together with C—HImdz⋯π(ring) and head-to-tail slipped π-stacking [centroid-to-centroid distances = 3.6507 (7) and 3.6866 (7) Å] inter­actions between thia­zole rings. The Hirshfeld surface analysis of the crystal structure indicates that the most important contributions for the crystal packing are from H⋯H (47.0%), H⋯O/O⋯H (16.9%), H⋯C/C⋯H (8.0%) and H⋯S/S⋯H (7.6%) inter­actions. Hydrogen bonding and van der Waals inter­actions are the dominant inter­actions in the crystal packing. Computational chemistry indicates that in the crystal, C—H⋯N and C—H⋯O hydrogen-bond energies are 68.5 (for O—HHydethy⋯NThz), 60.1 (for C—HBnz⋯OImdz) and 41.8 kJ mol−1 (for C—HImdz⋯OImdz). Density functional theory (DFT) optimized structures at the B3LYP/6–311 G(d,p) level are compared with the experimentally determined mol­ecular structure in the solid state.

A new conjugated carbazole chalcone compound, (E)-3-[4-(9,9a-di­hydro-8aH-carbazol-9-yl)phen­yl]-1-(4-nitro­phen­yl)prop-2-en-1-one (CPNC), C27H18N2O3, was synthesized using a Claisen–Schmidt condensation reaction. CPNC crystallizes in the monoclinic non-centrosymmetric space group Cc and adopts an s-cis conformation with respect to the ethyl­enic double bonds (C=O and C=C). The crystal packing features C—H⋯O and C—H⋯π inter­actions whose percentage contribution was qu­anti­fied by Hirshfeld surface analysis. Quantum chemistry calculations including geometrical optimization and mol­ecular electrostatic potential (MEP) were analysed by density functional theory (DFT) with a B3LYP/6–311 G++(d,p) basis set.

In the title compound, C22H27NO, the piperidine ring adopts a chair conformation. The dihedral angles between the mean plane of the piperidine ring and the phenyl rings are 89.78 (7) and 48.30 (8)°. In the crystal, mol­ecules are linked into chains along the b-axis direction by C—H⋯O hydrogen bonds. The DFT/B3LYP/6–311 G(d,p) method was used to determine the HOMO–LUMO energy levels. The mol­ecular electrostatic potential surfaces were investigated by Hirshfeld surface analysis and two-dimensional fingerprint plots were used to analyse the inter­molecular inter­actions in the mol­ecule.

The title compound, C15H14N2O2, consists of pyrrole and benzodiazepine units linked to a propargyl moiety, where the pyrrole and diazepine rings adopt half-chair and boat conformations, respectively. The absolute configuration was assigned on the the basis of l-proline, which was used in the synthesis of benzodiazepine. In the crystal, weak C—HBnz⋯ODiazp and C—HProprg⋯ODiazp (Bnz = benzene, Diazp = diazepine and Proprg = proparg­yl) hydrogen bonds link the mol­ecules into two-dimensional networks parallel to the bc plane, enclosing R44(28) ring motifs, with the networks forming oblique stacks along the a-axis direction. The Hirshfeld surface analysis of the crystal structure indicates that the most important contributions for the crystal packing are from H⋯H (49.8%), H⋯C/C⋯H (25.7%) and H⋯O/O⋯H (20.1%) inter­actions. Hydrogen bonding and van der Waals inter­actions are the dominant inter­actions in the crystal packing. Computational chemistry indicates that in the crystal, C—H⋯O hydrogen-bond energies are 38.8 (for C—HBnz⋯ODiazp) and 27.1 (for C—HProprg⋯ODiazp) kJ mol−1. Density functional theory (DFT) optimized structures at the B3LYP/6–311 G(d,p) level are compared with the experimentally determined mol­ecular structure in the solid state. The HOMO–LUMO behaviour was elucidated to determine the energy gap.

The title compound, C19H16ClNO3S, consists of chloro­phenyl methyl­idene and di­hydro­benzo­thia­zine units linked to an acetate moiety, where the thia­zine ring adopts a screw-boat conformation. In the crystal, two sets of weak C—HPh⋯ODbt (Ph = phenyl and Dbt = di­hydro­benzo­thia­zine) hydrogen bonds form layers of mol­ecules parallel to the bc plane. The layers stack along the a-axis direction with inter­calation of the ester chains. The crystal studied was a two component twin with a refined BASF of 0.34961 (5). The Hirshfeld surface analysis of the crystal structure indicates that the most important contributions to the crystal packing are from H⋯H (37.5%), H⋯C/C⋯H (24.6%) and H⋯O/O⋯H (16.7%) inter­actions. Hydrogen-bonding and van der Waals inter­actions are the dominant inter­actions in the crystal packing. Computational chemistry indicates that in the crystal, C—HPh⋯ODbt hydrogen bond energies are 38.3 and 30.3 kJ mol−1. Density functional theory (DFT) optimized structures at the B3LYP/ 6–311 G(d,p) level are compared with the experimentally determined mol­ecular structure in the solid state. The HOMO–LUMO behaviour was elucidated to determine the energy gap. Moreover, the anti­bacterial activity of the title compound has been evaluated against gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria.

The title compound, C18H16N2O2, consists of perimidine and meth­oxy­phenol units, where the tricyclic perimidine unit contains a naphthalene ring system and a non-planar C4N2 ring adopting an envelope conformation with the NCN group hinged by 47.44 (7)° with respect to the best plane of the other five atoms. In the crystal, O—HPhnl⋯NPrmdn and N—HPrmdn⋯OPhnl (Phnl = phenol and Prmdn = perimidine) hydrogen bonds link the mol­ecules into infinite chains along the b-axis direction. Weak C—H⋯π inter­actions may further stabilize the crystal structure. The Hirshfeld surface analysis of the crystal structure indicates that the most important contributions for the crystal packing are from H⋯H (49.0%), H⋯C/C⋯H (35.8%) and H⋯O/O⋯H (12.0%) inter­actions. Hydrogen bonding and van der Waals inter­actions are the dominant inter­actions in the crystal packing. Computational chemistry indicates that in the crystal, the O—HPhnl⋯NPrmdn and N—HPrmdn⋯OPhnl hydrogen-bond energies are 58.4 and 38.0 kJ mol−1, respectively. Density functional theory (DFT) optimized structures at the B3LYP/ 6–311 G(d,p) level are compared with the experimentally determined mol­ecular structure in the solid state. The HOMO–LUMO behaviour was elucidated to determine the energy gap.

The title compound, C21H23F2NO, consists of two fluoro­phenyl groups and one butyl group equatorially oriented on a piperidine ring, which adopts a chair conformation. The dihedral angle between the mean planes of the phenyl rings is 72.1 (1)°. In the crystal, N—H⋯O and weak C—H⋯F inter­actions, which form R22[14] motifs, link the mol­ecules into infinite C(6) chains propagating along [001]. A weak C—H⋯π inter­action is also observed. A Hirshfeld surface analysis of the crystal structure indicates that the most significant contributions to the crystal packing are from H⋯H (53.3%), H⋯C/C⋯H (19.1%), H⋯F/F⋯H (15.7%) and H⋯O/O⋯H (7.7%) contacts. Density functional theory geometry-optimized calculations were compared to the experimentally determined structure in the solid state and used to determine the HOMO–LUMO energy gap and compare it to the UV–vis experimental spectrum.

The title compound, C24H30Br2N4O2, consists of a 2-(4-nitro­phen­yl)-4H-imidazo[4,5-b]pyridine entity with a 12-bromo­dodecyl substituent attached to the pyridine N atom. The middle eight-carbon portion of the side chain is planar to within 0.09 (1) Å and makes a dihedral angle of 21.9 (8)° with the mean plane of the imidazolo­pyridine moiety, giving the mol­ecule a V-shape. In the crystal, the imidazolo­pyridine units are associated through slipped π–π stacking inter­actions together with weak C—HPyr⋯ONtr and C—HBrmdc­yl⋯ONtr (Pyr = pyridine, Ntr = nitro and Brmdcyl = bromo­dodec­yl) hydrogen bonds. The 12-bromo­dodecyl chains overlap with each other between the stacks. The terminal –CH2Br group of the side chain shows disorder over two resolved sites in a 0.902 (3):0.098 (3) ratio. Hirshfeld surface analysis indicates that the most important contributions for the crystal packing are from H⋯H (48.1%), H⋯Br/Br⋯H (15.0%) and H⋯O/O⋯H (12.8%) inter­actions. The optimized mol­ecular structure, using density functional theory at the B3LYP/ 6–311 G(d,p) level, is compared with the experimentally determined structure in the solid state. The HOMO–LUMO behaviour was elucidated to determine the energy gap.

The title compound, C23H28F3NO, is an ortho-hy­droxy Schiff base compound, which adopts the enol–imine tautomeric form in the solid state. The mol­ecular structure is not planar and the dihedral angle between the planes of the aromatic rings is 85.52 (10)°. The tri­fluoro­methyl group shows rotational disorder over two sites, with occupancies of 0.798 (6) and 0.202 (6). An intra­molecular O—H⋯N hydrogen bonding generates an S(6) ring motif. The crystal structure is consolidated by C—H⋯π inter­actions. The mol­ecular structure was optimized via density functional theory (DFT) methods with the B3LYP functional and LanL2DZ basis set. The theoretical structure is in good agreement with the experimental data. The frontier orbitals and mol­ecular electrostatic potential map were also examined by DFT computations.

The asymmetric unit of the title compound contains two independent mol­ecules, consisting of perimidine and phenol units, which are linked through an N—H⋯O hydrogen bond. Intra­molecular O—H⋯N hydrogen bonds are observed in both independent mol­ecules.

The title complex, Cu(L)2 or [Cu(C15HF10O2)2], comprising one copper ion and two fully fluorinated ligands (L−), was crystallized with 3,4-ethyl­ene­dioxy­thio­phene (EDOT, C6H6O2S) as a guest mol­ecule to give in a di­chloro­methane solution a unique co-crystal, Cu(L)2·3C6H6O2S.

The asymmetric unit of the title compound, C17H14N2O, contains two independent molecules each consisting of perimidine and phenol units. The tricyclic perimidine units contain naphthalene ring systems and non-planar C4N2 rings adopting envelope conformations with the C atoms of the NCN groups hinged by 44.11 (7) and 48.50 (6)° with respect to the best planes of the other five atoms. Intramolecular O—H...N hydrogen bonds may help to consolidate the molecular conformations. The two independent molecules are linked through an N—H...O hydrogen bond. The Hirshfeld surface analysis of the crystal structure indicates that the most important contributions for the crystal packing are from H...H (52.9%) and H...C/C...H (39.5%) interactions. Hydrogen bonding and van der Waals interactions are the dominant interactions in the crystal packing. Density functional theory (DFT) optimized structures at the B3LYP/ 6–311 G(d,p) level are compared with the experimentally determined molecular structure in the solid state. The HOMO–LUMO behaviour was elucidated to determine the energy gap.

Dear member, Please find below a letter sent to me last night 25 March by Secretary of State for Transport, Grant Shapps.

DFT (Design for testing) Engineer: 4-6 years of experience Experience with Synopsys Toolset is mandatory. Scan insertion, Debug DRC, ATPG patterns Gate Level Simulation ( timing and no-timing) Knowledge in P1500 and JTAG is an advantage. Knowledge in MBIST is an advantage. Phy

Hi all,

I am using ADE assembler.

I ran transient simulation and swept the input frequency (Fin) of the circuit. And I use Spectrum Measurement to return a value of the fundamental tone magnitude (Sig_fund) for each sweep point. 

Previously, I use "plot across design points" to plot both "Fin" and "Sig_fund", and then use "Y vs Y" to get a waveform of Sig_fund vs Fin. Measure the 1dB Bandwidth with markers. 

Can I realized above measurement with an expression in "output setup" ? And how?

I know to set the "Eval type" to "sweep" to process the data across sweep points. But here, it has to return an interpolated value from "Fin" with a criteria "(value(calcVal("Sig_fund"  0) - 1)". I am not sure whether it can be done in ADE assembler.

Thanks and regards,

Yutao

Background On 16 October 2019 the Department for Transport (“DfT”) issued its “Rail Network Enhancements Pipeline Update” for Autumn 2019 (the “Enhancements Pipeline Update”). A copy of the Enhancements Pipeline U...

IEEE / Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Incorporated

IEEE Computer Society