Mrthfx

Can we hide a text first in a picture and then hide that image again in one more image?

Are all CP/M-80 implementations binary compatible?

Expansion//Explosion and Siren Stormtamer

What was Apollo 13's "Little Jolt" after MECO?

How long after the last departure shall the airport stay open for an emergency return?

How to get even lighting when using flash for group photos near wall?

finding a tangent line to a parabola

What is a 'Key' in computer science?

Raising a bilingual kid. When should we introduce the majority language?

Is Diceware more secure than a long passphrase?

Passing args from the bash script to the function in the script

Multiple fireplaces in an apartment building?

Rolling a die 1000 times , a string of the product will be a cube

A faster way to compute the largest prime factor

Is there any hidden 'W' sound after 'comment' in : Comment est-elle?

Would reducing the reference voltage of an ADC have any effect on accuracy?

Was Sri Krishna's vishwaroopam seen by anyone before the Gita Upadesha?

Map material from china not allowed to leave the country

Will I lose my paid in full property

What's the difference between using dependency injection with a container and using a service locator?

Israeli soda type drink

As an international instructor, should I openly talk about my accent?

Why didn't the Space Shuttle bounce back into space as many times as possible so as to lose a lot of kinetic energy up there?

Do I need to protect SFP ports and optics from dust/contaminants? If so, how?

Forked arrows with chemfig

6

1

How can one make a forked arrow in chemfig?

Semantically it is exactly opposite to merge command but seems like it's not implemented in a package. I don't have any experience with TikZ graphics but any solution would be highly appreciated.

I'd like to get something like the following scheme:

arrows chemfig tikz-arrows

share|improve this question

edited 16 mins ago

Glorfindel

295139

asked Sep 9 '13 at 11:42

lastpooklastpook

13717

add a comment | 

6

1

How can one make a forked arrow in chemfig?

Semantically it is exactly opposite to merge command but seems like it's not implemented in a package. I don't have any experience with TikZ graphics but any solution would be highly appreciated.

I'd like to get something like the following scheme:

arrows chemfig tikz-arrows

share|improve this question

edited 16 mins ago

Glorfindel

295139

asked Sep 9 '13 at 11:42

lastpooklastpook

13717

add a comment | 

How can one make a forked arrow in chemfig?

Semantically it is exactly opposite to merge command but seems like it's not implemented in a package. I don't have any experience with TikZ graphics but any solution would be highly appreciated.

I'd like to get something like the following scheme:

arrows chemfig tikz-arrows

share|improve this question

edited 16 mins ago

Glorfindel

295139

asked Sep 9 '13 at 11:42

lastpooklastpook

13717

share|improve this question

edited 16 mins ago

Glorfindel

295139

asked Sep 9 '13 at 11:42

lastpooklastpook

13717

share|improve this question

edited 16 mins ago

Glorfindel

295139

asked Sep 9 '13 at 11:42

lastpooklastpook

13717

edited 16 mins ago

Glorfindel

295139

edited 16 mins ago

Glorfindel

295139

asked Sep 9 '13 at 11:42

lastpooklastpook

13717

asked Sep 9 '13 at 11:42

lastpooklastpook

13717

2 Answers
2

active

oldest

votes

7

Since you can use chemfig inside a tikzpicture environment, you can place the three compounds (forgive me if that's not the right name) inside nodes and then use draw to draw the arrows:

documentclass{article}

usepackage{chemfig}

usetikzlibrary{positioning,calc}



begin{document}



definesubmolMe[H_3C]{CH_3}



begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=0cm and 2cm]

node (A) 

  {chemfig{R-C-[::-60]O-[::-60]C-[::-60]R}};

node[above right=of A] (B) 

  {chemfig{*6((-!Me)=(-!Me)-(-!Me)=(-!Me)-(-!Me)=(-!Me)-)}

};

node[below right=of A] (C)    

  {chemfig{CH_3CH_2-[:-60,,3]C(-[:-120]H_3C)=C(-[:-60]H)-[:60]C{(}CH_3{)}_3}};

draw[-stealth] (A) -- ( $ (A.0)!0.5!(B.west|-A.0) $ ) |- (B.west) node[auto,pos=0.7] {i,j};

draw[-stealth] (A) -- ( $ (A.0)!0.5!(C.west|-A.0) $ ) |- (C.west) node[auto,pos=0.7] {j};

end{tikzpicture}



end{document}

share|improve this answer

answered Sep 9 '13 at 14:10

Gonzalo MedinaGonzalo Medina

405k4213231585

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Thank you for the solution. I was thinking in exactly opposite direction - placing tikz code inside chemmove command. But your solution looks much better than my attempts.
  
  – lastpook
  Sep 9 '13 at 14:27
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

2

You say »Semantically it is exactly opposite to merge command« so lets define a command fork that is the opposite of merge. For this I patch the necessary commands with etoolbox's patchcmd. The idea is simple: define a boolean switch iffork and add arrow heads depending on the status. Then define merge so it sets forkfalse and fork the same way but with forktrue.

Here we go:

documentclass{article}

usepackage{chemfig}

usepackage{etoolbox}



makeatletter

newififfork



patchcmdCF@merge@ii{-CF@full}{ifforkelse -CF@fullfi}{}{}%

% CF@merge@iii needs to be patched twice:

patchcmdCF@merge@iii{>=0]}{>=0,iffork CF@full-fi]}{}{}%

patchcmdCF@merge@iii{>=0]}{>=0,iffork CF@full-fi]}{}{}%

patchcmdCF@schemestart@i

  {letmergeCF@merge}

  {%

    defmerge{forkfalseCF@merge}%

    deffork{forktrueCF@merge}%

  }

  {}{}

patchcmdCF@schemestart@v{merge}{mergefork}{}{}



makeatother



begin{document}



schemestart

 a arrow{0} b arrow{0} c

 merge{v}(c1)(c2)(c3)--() d

schemestop



bigskip



schemestart

 a arrow{0} b arrow{0} c

 fork{v}(c1)(c2)(c3)--() d

schemestop



end{document}

share|improve this answer

edited Sep 9 '13 at 17:18

answered Sep 9 '13 at 17:13

clemensclemens

51.9k5132284

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  That's just brilliant!
  
  – lastpook
  Sep 9 '13 at 17:25
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  After careful consideration I've decided to give back the answer to Gonsalo Medina, since his solution is better suited to my actual needs: I'd like to put labels near each arrow head and merge doesn't allow it, so does this solution. Also some additional tweaking is needed to make your code to work in horisontal direction.
  
  – lastpook
  Sep 9 '13 at 17:44
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @lastpook well, since you didn't say that you need it in your question I didn't add anything. Indeed this would require some more work...
  
  – clemens
  Sep 9 '13 at 18:08
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  nevertheless, I think that your approach is more elegant
  
  – lastpook
  Sep 9 '13 at 18:16
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "85"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f132386%2fforked-arrows-with-chemfig%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

7

Since you can use chemfig inside a tikzpicture environment, you can place the three compounds (forgive me if that's not the right name) inside nodes and then use draw to draw the arrows:

documentclass{article}

usepackage{chemfig}

usetikzlibrary{positioning,calc}



begin{document}



definesubmolMe[H_3C]{CH_3}



begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=0cm and 2cm]

node (A) 

  {chemfig{R-C-[::-60]O-[::-60]C-[::-60]R}};

node[above right=of A] (B) 

  {chemfig{*6((-!Me)=(-!Me)-(-!Me)=(-!Me)-(-!Me)=(-!Me)-)}

};

node[below right=of A] (C)    

  {chemfig{CH_3CH_2-[:-60,,3]C(-[:-120]H_3C)=C(-[:-60]H)-[:60]C{(}CH_3{)}_3}};

draw[-stealth] (A) -- ( $ (A.0)!0.5!(B.west|-A.0) $ ) |- (B.west) node[auto,pos=0.7] {i,j};

draw[-stealth] (A) -- ( $ (A.0)!0.5!(C.west|-A.0) $ ) |- (C.west) node[auto,pos=0.7] {j};

end{tikzpicture}



end{document}

share|improve this answer

answered Sep 9 '13 at 14:10

Gonzalo MedinaGonzalo Medina

405k4213231585

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Thank you for the solution. I was thinking in exactly opposite direction - placing tikz code inside chemmove command. But your solution looks much better than my attempts.
  
  – lastpook
  Sep 9 '13 at 14:27
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

7

Since you can use chemfig inside a tikzpicture environment, you can place the three compounds (forgive me if that's not the right name) inside nodes and then use draw to draw the arrows:

documentclass{article}

usepackage{chemfig}

usetikzlibrary{positioning,calc}



begin{document}



definesubmolMe[H_3C]{CH_3}



begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=0cm and 2cm]

node (A) 

  {chemfig{R-C-[::-60]O-[::-60]C-[::-60]R}};

node[above right=of A] (B) 

  {chemfig{*6((-!Me)=(-!Me)-(-!Me)=(-!Me)-(-!Me)=(-!Me)-)}

};

node[below right=of A] (C)    

  {chemfig{CH_3CH_2-[:-60,,3]C(-[:-120]H_3C)=C(-[:-60]H)-[:60]C{(}CH_3{)}_3}};

draw[-stealth] (A) -- ( $ (A.0)!0.5!(B.west|-A.0) $ ) |- (B.west) node[auto,pos=0.7] {i,j};

draw[-stealth] (A) -- ( $ (A.0)!0.5!(C.west|-A.0) $ ) |- (C.west) node[auto,pos=0.7] {j};

end{tikzpicture}



end{document}

share|improve this answer

answered Sep 9 '13 at 14:10

Gonzalo MedinaGonzalo Medina

405k4213231585

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Thank you for the solution. I was thinking in exactly opposite direction - placing tikz code inside chemmove command. But your solution looks much better than my attempts.
  
  – lastpook
  Sep 9 '13 at 14:27
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

Since you can use chemfig inside a tikzpicture environment, you can place the three compounds (forgive me if that's not the right name) inside nodes and then use draw to draw the arrows:

documentclass{article}

usepackage{chemfig}

usetikzlibrary{positioning,calc}



begin{document}



definesubmolMe[H_3C]{CH_3}



begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=0cm and 2cm]

node (A) 

  {chemfig{R-C-[::-60]O-[::-60]C-[::-60]R}};

node[above right=of A] (B) 

  {chemfig{*6((-!Me)=(-!Me)-(-!Me)=(-!Me)-(-!Me)=(-!Me)-)}

};

node[below right=of A] (C)    

  {chemfig{CH_3CH_2-[:-60,,3]C(-[:-120]H_3C)=C(-[:-60]H)-[:60]C{(}CH_3{)}_3}};

draw[-stealth] (A) -- ( $ (A.0)!0.5!(B.west|-A.0) $ ) |- (B.west) node[auto,pos=0.7] {i,j};

draw[-stealth] (A) -- ( $ (A.0)!0.5!(C.west|-A.0) $ ) |- (C.west) node[auto,pos=0.7] {j};

end{tikzpicture}



end{document}

share|improve this answer

answered Sep 9 '13 at 14:10

Gonzalo MedinaGonzalo Medina

405k4213231585

documentclass{article}

usepackage{chemfig}

usetikzlibrary{positioning,calc}



begin{document}



definesubmolMe[H_3C]{CH_3}



begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=0cm and 2cm]

node (A) 

  {chemfig{R-C-[::-60]O-[::-60]C-[::-60]R}};

node[above right=of A] (B) 

  {chemfig{*6((-!Me)=(-!Me)-(-!Me)=(-!Me)-(-!Me)=(-!Me)-)}

};

node[below right=of A] (C)    

  {chemfig{CH_3CH_2-[:-60,,3]C(-[:-120]H_3C)=C(-[:-60]H)-[:60]C{(}CH_3{)}_3}};

draw[-stealth] (A) -- ( $ (A.0)!0.5!(B.west|-A.0) $ ) |- (B.west) node[auto,pos=0.7] {i,j};

draw[-stealth] (A) -- ( $ (A.0)!0.5!(C.west|-A.0) $ ) |- (C.west) node[auto,pos=0.7] {j};

end{tikzpicture}



end{document}

share|improve this answer

answered Sep 9 '13 at 14:10

Gonzalo MedinaGonzalo Medina

405k4213231585

answered Sep 9 '13 at 14:10

Gonzalo MedinaGonzalo Medina

405k4213231585

answered Sep 9 '13 at 14:10

Gonzalo MedinaGonzalo Medina

405k4213231585

2

You say »Semantically it is exactly opposite to merge command« so lets define a command fork that is the opposite of merge. For this I patch the necessary commands with etoolbox's patchcmd. The idea is simple: define a boolean switch iffork and add arrow heads depending on the status. Then define merge so it sets forkfalse and fork the same way but with forktrue.

Here we go:

documentclass{article}

usepackage{chemfig}

usepackage{etoolbox}



makeatletter

newififfork



patchcmdCF@merge@ii{-CF@full}{ifforkelse -CF@fullfi}{}{}%

% CF@merge@iii needs to be patched twice:

patchcmdCF@merge@iii{>=0]}{>=0,iffork CF@full-fi]}{}{}%

patchcmdCF@merge@iii{>=0]}{>=0,iffork CF@full-fi]}{}{}%

patchcmdCF@schemestart@i

  {letmergeCF@merge}

  {%

    defmerge{forkfalseCF@merge}%

    deffork{forktrueCF@merge}%

  }

  {}{}

patchcmdCF@schemestart@v{merge}{mergefork}{}{}



makeatother



begin{document}



schemestart

 a arrow{0} b arrow{0} c

 merge{v}(c1)(c2)(c3)--() d

schemestop



bigskip



schemestart

 a arrow{0} b arrow{0} c

 fork{v}(c1)(c2)(c3)--() d

schemestop



end{document}

share|improve this answer

edited Sep 9 '13 at 17:18

answered Sep 9 '13 at 17:13

clemensclemens

51.9k5132284

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  That's just brilliant!
  
  – lastpook
  Sep 9 '13 at 17:25
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  After careful consideration I've decided to give back the answer to Gonsalo Medina, since his solution is better suited to my actual needs: I'd like to put labels near each arrow head and merge doesn't allow it, so does this solution. Also some additional tweaking is needed to make your code to work in horisontal direction.
  
  – lastpook
  Sep 9 '13 at 17:44
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @lastpook well, since you didn't say that you need it in your question I didn't add anything. Indeed this would require some more work...
  
  – clemens
  Sep 9 '13 at 18:08
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  nevertheless, I think that your approach is more elegant
  
  – lastpook
  Sep 9 '13 at 18:16
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

2

You say »Semantically it is exactly opposite to merge command« so lets define a command fork that is the opposite of merge. For this I patch the necessary commands with etoolbox's patchcmd. The idea is simple: define a boolean switch iffork and add arrow heads depending on the status. Then define merge so it sets forkfalse and fork the same way but with forktrue.

Here we go:

documentclass{article}

usepackage{chemfig}

usepackage{etoolbox}



makeatletter

newififfork



patchcmdCF@merge@ii{-CF@full}{ifforkelse -CF@fullfi}{}{}%

% CF@merge@iii needs to be patched twice:

patchcmdCF@merge@iii{>=0]}{>=0,iffork CF@full-fi]}{}{}%

patchcmdCF@merge@iii{>=0]}{>=0,iffork CF@full-fi]}{}{}%

patchcmdCF@schemestart@i

  {letmergeCF@merge}

  {%

    defmerge{forkfalseCF@merge}%

    deffork{forktrueCF@merge}%

  }

  {}{}

patchcmdCF@schemestart@v{merge}{mergefork}{}{}



makeatother



begin{document}



schemestart

 a arrow{0} b arrow{0} c

 merge{v}(c1)(c2)(c3)--() d

schemestop



bigskip



schemestart

 a arrow{0} b arrow{0} c

 fork{v}(c1)(c2)(c3)--() d

schemestop



end{document}

share|improve this answer

edited Sep 9 '13 at 17:18

answered Sep 9 '13 at 17:13

clemensclemens

51.9k5132284

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  That's just brilliant!
  
  – lastpook
  Sep 9 '13 at 17:25
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  After careful consideration I've decided to give back the answer to Gonsalo Medina, since his solution is better suited to my actual needs: I'd like to put labels near each arrow head and merge doesn't allow it, so does this solution. Also some additional tweaking is needed to make your code to work in horisontal direction.
  
  – lastpook
  Sep 9 '13 at 17:44
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @lastpook well, since you didn't say that you need it in your question I didn't add anything. Indeed this would require some more work...
  
  – clemens
  Sep 9 '13 at 18:08
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  nevertheless, I think that your approach is more elegant
  
  – lastpook
  Sep 9 '13 at 18:16
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

You say »Semantically it is exactly opposite to merge command« so lets define a command fork that is the opposite of merge. For this I patch the necessary commands with etoolbox's patchcmd. The idea is simple: define a boolean switch iffork and add arrow heads depending on the status. Then define merge so it sets forkfalse and fork the same way but with forktrue.

Here we go:

documentclass{article}

usepackage{chemfig}

usepackage{etoolbox}



makeatletter

newififfork



patchcmdCF@merge@ii{-CF@full}{ifforkelse -CF@fullfi}{}{}%

% CF@merge@iii needs to be patched twice:

patchcmdCF@merge@iii{>=0]}{>=0,iffork CF@full-fi]}{}{}%

patchcmdCF@merge@iii{>=0]}{>=0,iffork CF@full-fi]}{}{}%

patchcmdCF@schemestart@i

  {letmergeCF@merge}

  {%

    defmerge{forkfalseCF@merge}%

    deffork{forktrueCF@merge}%

  }

  {}{}

patchcmdCF@schemestart@v{merge}{mergefork}{}{}



makeatother



begin{document}



schemestart

 a arrow{0} b arrow{0} c

 merge{v}(c1)(c2)(c3)--() d

schemestop



bigskip



schemestart

 a arrow{0} b arrow{0} c

 fork{v}(c1)(c2)(c3)--() d

schemestop



end{document}

share|improve this answer

edited Sep 9 '13 at 17:18

answered Sep 9 '13 at 17:13

clemensclemens

51.9k5132284

documentclass{article}

usepackage{chemfig}

usepackage{etoolbox}



makeatletter

newififfork



patchcmdCF@merge@ii{-CF@full}{ifforkelse -CF@fullfi}{}{}%

% CF@merge@iii needs to be patched twice:

patchcmdCF@merge@iii{>=0]}{>=0,iffork CF@full-fi]}{}{}%

patchcmdCF@merge@iii{>=0]}{>=0,iffork CF@full-fi]}{}{}%

patchcmdCF@schemestart@i

  {letmergeCF@merge}

  {%

    defmerge{forkfalseCF@merge}%

    deffork{forktrueCF@merge}%

  }

  {}{}

patchcmdCF@schemestart@v{merge}{mergefork}{}{}



makeatother



begin{document}



schemestart

 a arrow{0} b arrow{0} c

 merge{v}(c1)(c2)(c3)--() d

schemestop



bigskip



schemestart

 a arrow{0} b arrow{0} c

 fork{v}(c1)(c2)(c3)--() d

schemestop



end{document}

share|improve this answer

edited Sep 9 '13 at 17:18

answered Sep 9 '13 at 17:13

clemensclemens

51.9k5132284

answered Sep 9 '13 at 17:13

clemensclemens

51.9k5132284

answered Sep 9 '13 at 17:13

clemensclemens

51.9k5132284