(I think) these matrices are roughly 180 degrees apart, so they may just correspond to different signs of the axes
Phil
On 28 Dec 2014, at 21:37, Igor Petrik <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I am working on a small project which requires me to obtain the proper orientation of a crystal lattice with respect to the gonistat and source. I have until now successfully used the matrices from Mosflm and DENZO, which are consistent with each other and define the orientation of the reciprocal lattice in the lab space when the spindle is at 0deg.
>
> I am trying to use the orientation computed by XDS, but this seems to not be consistent with the others. Here is an example:
>
> mosflm .mat file:
> -0.00458796 -0.01054146 -0.01052990
> 0.00600652 0.01617284 -0.00696834
> 0.02352343 -0.00618559 -0.00027442
> 0.000 0.000 0.000
> -0.1856881 -0.5200068 -0.8337343
> 0.2431015 0.7978011 -0.5517381
> 0.9520617 -0.3051332 -0.0217278
> 39.6412 48.3160 77.5507 90.0000 90.0000 90.0000
> 0.000 0.000 0.000
> SYMM P222
>
> (top part is reciprocal matrix in the format:
> a*x b*x c*x
> a*y b*y c*y
> a*z b*z c*z
> where x is the x-ray beam axis and z is the spindle axis)
>
> DENZO (HKL2000) gives an equivalent matrix.
>
> XDS orientation parameters:
> CORRECT.LP
> ...
> REFINED VALUES OF DIFFRACTION PARAMETERS DERIVED FROM 30955 INDEXED SPOTS
> REFINED PARAMETERS: DISTANCE BEAM ORIENTATION CELL AXIS
> STANDARD DEVIATION OF SPOT POSITION (PIXELS) 0.70
> STANDARD DEVIATION OF SPINDLE POSITION (DEGREES) 0.08
> SPACE GROUP NUMBER 16
> UNIT CELL PARAMETERS 39.528 48.153 77.542 90.000 90.000 90.000
> E.S.D. OF CELL PARAMETERS 4.0E-02 3.3E-02 3.8E-02 0.0E+00 0.0E+00 0.0E+00
> REC. CELL PARAMETERS 0.025299 0.020767 0.012896 90.000 90.000 90.000
> COORDINATES OF UNIT CELL A-AXIS -37.650 11.269 -4.236
> COORDINATES OF UNIT CELL B-AXIS 14.624 41.546 -19.461
> COORDINATES OF UNIT CELL C-AXIS -1.764 -32.374 -70.439
> CRYSTAL MOSAICITY (DEGREES) 0.211
> LAB COORDINATES OF ROTATION AXIS 0.999962 0.007232 -0.004834
> DIRECT BEAM COORDINATES (REC. ANGSTROEM) 0.003134 0.005401 1.020962
> DETECTOR COORDINATES (PIXELS) OF DIRECT BEAM 1230.87 1260.93
> DETECTOR ORIGIN (PIXELS) AT 1226.25 1252.96
> CRYSTAL TO DETECTOR DISTANCE (mm) 259.04
> LAB COORDINATES OF DETECTOR X-AXIS 1.000000 0.000000 0.000000
> LAB COORDINATES OF DETECTOR Y-AXIS 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000
> ...
>
> (XDS defines spindle as X and beam as Z)
>
> Converted to reciprocal lattice orientation matrix in mosflm axis conventions:
> (output from xds2mos; manual calculation is consistent with this output)
> -0.00273114 -0.00809777 -0.01150308
> -0.00724876 -0.01754758 0.00521075
> -0.02353677 0.00634416 -0.00027012
> 0.000 0.000 0.000
> -0.11022162 -0.39811300 -0.91068616
> -0.29254071 -0.86269689 0.41252918
> -0.94988163 0.31189970 -0.02138535
> 39.5280 48.1530 77.5420 90.0000 90.0000 90.0000
> 0.000 0.000 0.000
>
>
> As you can see they are different. You can note that the component of each vector along the mosflm-Z (spindle) axis is consistent, suggesting that it is only the angle of rotation around the spindle axis that is inconsistent between the two. I know that for mosflm and DENZO the orientation matrix defines the orientation of the reciprocal lattice when the spindle is at 0 deg. XDS seems to be using a different reference point. Why is this and what is the proper way to obtain the absolute reciprocal orientation at 0 deg from XDS?
>
> (If anyone wants to test this on their own, I can provide the frames I used to obtain these files.)
>
> Thanks,
> - Igor Petrik
> University of Illinois
>
|