From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Mon Apr 28 09:14:01 2008 From: "Yin Wei yin.wei+*+cup.uni-muenchen.de" To: CCL Subject: CCL: free energy perturbation by BOSS 4.6 program Message-Id: <-36842-080428081343-6398-z9mzxn4dAfHNW0X8wq0aRA(a)server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: "Yin Wei" Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 08:13:39 -0400 Sent to CCL by: "Yin Wei" [yin.wei[A]cup.uni-muenchen.de] Dear All, I am doing some MC simulation and Free energy perturbation calculations by BOSS4.6 program. I can get the finale output structure by PDB format.I would also like to get the structure to be output every 100 configuration.As far as I know, the coordinate of these structures are printed in SAVE file. However, I don't know which format they use, and how to separate them and visualize them. Cheers, Yin From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Mon Apr 28 09:48:00 2008 From: "Jans H. Alzate-Morales jalzate,,utalca.cl" To: CCL Subject: CCL:G: pka values with quatum methods Message-Id: <-36843-080427173429-30836-Z8JgaTTjLqEwfqz3tPA8Mw ~~ server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: "Jans H. Alzate-Morales" Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 17:34:22 -0400 Sent to CCL by: "Jans H. Alzate-Morales" [jalzate(_)utalca.cl] Dear CCL'ers, I want to perform some pka calculations on dendrimer molecules and it's the first time i have to face this problem. The main question are: where can I find the equations to calculate pka values? Where are the neccesary quatities, in the g03 output, useful to obtain the deltaG values? I solvated the molecules with explicit solvent. Is it the best approach? or is it better to use the continuum solvation methods included in gaussian package? I'll appreciate their advice with respect this topic. Thank you in advance. Regards!!! Jans H. Alzate Morales Bioinformatics and Molecular Simulation Centre University of Talca Talca-Chile From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Mon Apr 28 10:27:00 2008 From: "Chunhui Li baotogo2004 ~~ gmail.com" To: CCL Subject: CCL: geometry opt question Message-Id: <-36844-080428092712-17173-iBf92X4AFubLX7Dx+3n0BQ===server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: "Chunhui Li" Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 09:27:08 -0400 Sent to CCL by: "Chunhui Li" [baotogo2004/a\gmail.com] Hi, Dear All, I run a geometry opt job twice starting from the same structure. One result gave me a structure like V shape, but the other gave me a structure like O shape by forming a hydrogen bond. The setup for these two jobs are exactly same. I wonder how I can find out which one is the "right" one. I don't have experimental results to compare with. Here are some job details: The hydrogen bond is between water and F atom on a flurocarbon. Flurocarbon and water are coordinated with Fe3+. I am using Spartan HF 6-31G*.(I am going to use DFT, but I thought I may have the same problem.) I didn't include solvent effect. I want to know what would be the good practice to do in this situation. and also, I don't have good literature access, could anybody tell me the "exact" bond length for the hydrogen bond between F and H-O-H? Thank you very much in advance! -Lily From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Mon Apr 28 11:15:01 2008 From: "Nicholas Labello label030(0)umn.edu" To: CCL Subject: CCL: geometry opt question Message-Id: <-36845-080428110304-18044-2Dd60tiueh6OGtTv/TBOtA__server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: Nicholas Labello Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------080500070403040505040507" Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 10:02:43 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Sent to CCL by: Nicholas Labello [label030###umn.edu] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------080500070403040505040507 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Lily, If both are valid minimums on the energy surface you've calculated some things to consider are: 1. What process are you trying to model? Does one geometry fit better for your study? 2. Is one significantly lower in energy than the other? If so, consider pulling out a pchem book and looking around in the equilibriums and distributions sections to find a way to calculate the relative populations of the two states. Cheers, -- *Nicholas Labello Postdoctoral Associate* /Center for Drug Design The University of Minnesota 308 Harvard Street Minneapolis, MN 55455 (612) 626-4429/ Chunhui Li baotogo2004 ~~ gmail.com wrote: > Sent to CCL by: "Chunhui Li" [baotogo2004/a\gmail.com] > Hi, Dear All, > > I run a geometry opt job twice starting from the same structure. One result gave me a structure like V shape, but the other gave me a structure like O shape by forming a hydrogen bond. The setup for these two jobs are exactly same. I wonder how I can find out which one is the "right" one. I don't have experimental results to compare with. > > Here are some job details: > > The hydrogen bond is between water and F atom on a flurocarbon. Flurocarbon and water are coordinated with Fe3+. > I am using Spartan HF 6-31G*.(I am going to use DFT, but I thought I may have the same problem.) > I didn't include solvent effect. > > I want to know what would be the good practice to do in this situation. and also, I don't have good literature access, could anybody tell me the "exact" bond length for the hydrogen bond between F and H-O-H? > > Thank you very much in advance! > > -Lily> > > // --------------080500070403040505040507 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Lily,

If both are valid minimums on the energy surface you've calculated some things to consider are:
1.  What process are you trying to model?  Does one geometry fit better for your study?
2.  Is one significantly lower in energy than the other?  If so, consider pulling out a pchem book and looking around in the equilibriums and distributions sections to find a way to calculate the relative populations of the two states. 

Cheers,

--
Nicholas Labello
Postdoctoral Associate

Center for Drug Design
The University of Minnesota
308 Harvard Street
Minneapolis, MN 55455
(612) 626-4429


Chunhui Li baotogo2004 ~~ gmail.com wrote:
Sent to CCL by: "Chunhui  Li" [baotogo2004/a\gmail.com]
Hi, Dear All,

I run a geometry opt job twice starting from the same structure. One result gave me a structure like V shape, but the other gave me a structure like O shape by forming a hydrogen bond. The setup for these two jobs are exactly same. I wonder how I can find out which one is the "right" one. I don't have experimental results to compare with. 

Here are some job details:

The hydrogen bond is between water and F atom on a flurocarbon. Flurocarbon and water are coordinated with Fe3+.
I am using Spartan HF 6-31G*.(I am going to use DFT, but I thought I may have the same problem.)
I didn't include solvent effect.

I want to know what would be the good practice to do in this situation. and also, I don't have good literature access, could anybody tell me the "exact" bond length for the hydrogen bond between F and H-O-H?

Thank you very much in advance!

-LilyE-mail to subscribers: CHEMISTRY=-=ccl.net or use:
      http://www.ccl.net/cgi-bin/ccl/send_ccl_message

E-mail to administrators: CHEMISTRY-REQUEST=-=ccl.net or use
      http://www.ccl.net/cgi-bin/ccl/send_ccl_messagehttp://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/htdig  (login: ccl, Password: search)http://www.ccl.net/spammers.txt

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


  


--------------080500070403040505040507-- From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Mon Apr 28 12:01:01 2008 From: "Olegas Eicher-Lorka lorka,,ktl.mii.lt" To: CCL Subject: CCL:G: pka values with quatum methods Message-Id: <-36846-080428115253-15086-GYHusExZavBa6ZJ3UjxeaA*o*server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: "Olegas Eicher-Lorka" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="windows-1257"; reply-type=original Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 18:01:09 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Sent to CCL by: "Olegas Eicher-Lorka" [lorka ~ ktl.mii.lt] You may try as this has been done in the following article: L. Riauba, G. Niaura, O. Eicher-Lorka, E. Butkus. A study of cysteamine ionization in solution by Raman spectroscopy and theoretical modelling. J. Phys. Chem. A, 2006, 110, 13394-13404 Olegas ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jans H. Alzate-Morales jalzate,,utalca.cl" To: "Eicher-Lorka, Olegas " Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 12:34 AM Subject: CCL:G: pka values with quatum methods > > Sent to CCL by: "Jans H. Alzate-Morales" [jalzate(_)utalca.cl] > Dear CCL'ers, > I want to perform some pka calculations on dendrimer molecules and it's > the first time i have to face this problem. The main question are: where > can I find the equations to calculate pka values? Where are the neccesary > quatities, in the g03 output, useful to obtain the deltaG values? > I solvated the molecules with explicit solvent. Is it the best approach? > or is it better to use the continuum solvation methods included in > gaussian package? > I'll appreciate their advice with respect this topic. > > Thank you in advance. > > Regards!!! > > Jans H. Alzate Morales > Bioinformatics and Molecular Simulation Centre > University of Talca > Talca-Chile> > > __________ NOD32 2962 (20080320) Information __________ > > This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. > http://www.eset.com > > From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Mon Apr 28 12:33:00 2008 From: "nee MI neerajmisra++hotmail.com" To: CCL Subject: CCL: spectra Message-Id: <-36847-080428122150-32489-nc+F6JSxqm54tP2/2VMurg-$-server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: "nee MI" Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 12:21:46 -0400 Sent to CCL by: "nee MI" [neerajmisra[A]hotmail.com] HOW CAN I DRAW A COMPARATIVE SIMULATED SPECTRA ALONG WITH AN OBSERVED ONE? From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Mon Apr 28 13:08:01 2008 From: "Lukasz Cwiklik cwiklik~!~gmail.com" To: CCL Subject: CCL: geometry opt question Message-Id: <-36848-080428122254-1085-qlnzTn4N7Ks43B6psRskfw[A]server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: "Lukasz Cwiklik" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 19:22:40 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Sent to CCL by: "Lukasz Cwiklik" [cwiklik[-]gmail.com] On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 4:27 PM, Chunhui Li baotogo2004 ~~ gmail.com wrote: > > Sent to CCL by: "Chunhui Li" [baotogo2004/a\gmail.com] > Hi, Dear All, > > I run a geometry opt job twice starting from the same structure. One result gave me a structure like V shape, but the other gave me a structure like O shape by forming a hydrogen bond. The setup for these two jobs are exactly same. I wonder how I can find out which one is the "right" one. I don't have experimental results to compare with. Dear Lily, Most likely none of your structures is "right", however, the one with lower energy is better than the other. This is the only criterion. In practice, your problems indicate that the HF method combined with your basis set is to simple the properly describe your system. If you minimize a system you should check the minimum with another/better method/basis (for example, check your HF minimum with any method which accounts for electron correllation - even DFT with local functional and small basis can be a good test). Best, Lukasz -- Lukasz Cwiklik http://cwiklik.wordpress.com From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Mon Apr 28 13:44:01 2008 From: "David Gallagher gallagher.da{=}gmail.com" To: CCL Subject: CCL:G: pka values with quatum methods Message-Id: <-36849-080428130111-31363-yOZkG3mV2ruB3cwK00uDJA::server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: David Gallagher Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 08:58:28 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Sent to CCL by: David Gallagher [gallagher.da^-^gmail.com] Hi Jans, A simpler method would be MOPAC2007 which predicts pKa directly and is very fast (and it's free for academics). The methodology is based on O-H bond length and partial charge from PM6 and COSMO calculations. The 109 examples* listed give an average unsigned error of 0.31 log units. There is more information* at http://www.openmopac.net/pKa_table.html and at http://www.openmopac.net/manual/index.html (select "Keywords" then "pKa"). MOPAC2007 can be downloaded at http://www.openmopac.net/downloads.html COSMOtherm is another tool that predicts pKa directly, and in a variety of solvents. COSMOtherm methodology is based on DFT and statistical thermodynamics. There is more information at http://www.cacheresearch.com/cosmo.html The only reliable way I know to determine the 'best approach', is to compare the predictions with experimental measurements for your specific classes of compounds. Indeed, calibrating predicted results with experimental data can improve the accuracy further. Regards, David Gallagher CACheResearch.com At 02:34 PM 4/27/2008, Jans H. Alzate-Morales jalzate,,utalca.cl wrote: >Sent to CCL by: "Jans H. Alzate-Morales" [jalzate(_)utalca.cl] >Dear CCL'ers, >I want to perform some pka calculations on dendrimer molecules and >it's the first time i have to face this problem. The main question >are: where can I find the equations to calculate pka values? Where >are the neccesary quatities, in the g03 output, useful to obtain the >deltaG values? >I solvated the molecules with explicit solvent. Is it the best >approach? or is it better to use the continuum solvation methods >included in gaussian package? >I'll appreciate their advice with respect this topic. > >Thank you in advance. > >Regards!!! > >Jans H. Alzate Morales >Bioinformatics and Molecular Simulation Centre >University of Talca >Talca-Chile From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Mon Apr 28 15:45:01 2008 From: "John McKelvey jmmckel-x-gmail.com" To: CCL Subject: CCL: geometry opt question Message-Id: <-36850-080428144324-3639-rBPBFXdK2UEHKeWiLLcBpw]*[server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: "John McKelvey" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_9709_12832632.1209404729515" Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 13:45:29 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Sent to CCL by: "John McKelvey" [jmmckel:gmail.com] ------=_Part_9709_12832632.1209404729515 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Seems to me to be an interesting question why two different structures were found from identical starting and computational conditions. Cheers! John McKelvey On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 12:22 PM, Lukasz Cwiklik cwiklik~!~gmail.com < owner-chemistry(!)ccl.net> wrote: > > Sent to CCL by: "Lukasz Cwiklik" [cwiklik[-]gmail.com] > On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 4:27 PM, Chunhui Li baotogo2004 ~~ gmail.com > wrote: > > > > Sent to CCL by: "Chunhui Li" [baotogo2004/a\gmail.com] > > Hi, Dear All, > > > > I run a geometry opt job twice starting from the same structure. One > result gave me a structure like V shape, but the other gave me a structure > like O shape by forming a hydrogen bond. The setup for these two jobs are > exactly same. I wonder how I can find out which one is the "right" one. I > don't have experimental results to compare with. > > Dear Lily, > Most likely none of your structures is "right", however, the one with > lower energy is better than the other. This is the only criterion. In > practice, your problems indicate that the HF method combined with your > basis set is to simple the properly describe your system. > If you minimize a system you should check the minimum with > another/better method/basis (for example, check your HF minimum with > any method which accounts for electron correllation - even DFT with > local functional and small basis can be a good test). > > Best, > Lukasz > > > -- > Lukasz Cwiklik > http://cwiklik.wordpress.com> > > ------=_Part_9709_12832632.1209404729515 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Seems to me to be an interesting question why two different structures were found from identical starting and computational conditions.

Cheers!

John McKelvey

On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 12:22 PM, Lukasz Cwiklik cwiklik~!~gmail.com <owner-chemistry(!)ccl.net> wrote:

Sent to CCL by: "Lukasz Cwiklik" [cwiklik[-]gmail.com]
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 4:27 PM, Chunhui Li baotogo2004 ~~ gmail.com
<owner-chemistry|a|ccl.net> wrote:
>
>  Sent to CCL by: "Chunhui  Li" [baotogo2004/a\gmail.com]
>  Hi, Dear All,
>
>  I run a geometry opt job twice starting from the same structure. One result gave me a structure like V shape, but the other gave me a structure like O shape by forming a hydrogen bond. The setup for these two jobs are exactly same. I wonder how I can find out which one is the "right" one. I don't have experimental results to compare with.

Dear Lily,
Most likely none of your structures is "right", however, the one with
lower energy is better than the other. This is the only criterion. In
practice, your problems indicate that the HF method combined with your
basis set is to simple the properly describe your system.
If you minimize a system you should check the minimum with
another/better method/basis (for example, check your HF minimum with
any method which accounts for electron correllation - even DFT with
local functional and small basis can be a good test).

Best,
Lukasz


--
Lukasz Cwiklik
http://cwiklik.wordpress.com



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

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

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
     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/htdig  (login: ccl, Password: search)
     http://www.ccl.net/spammers.txt

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



------=_Part_9709_12832632.1209404729515-- From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Mon Apr 28 16:20:01 2008 From: "Maurizzio Argonni m.argonni,+,gmail.com" To: CCL Subject: CCL: Seeking feedback on negative frequencies Message-Id: <-36851-080428154501-10880-6sf86EDJXnJ6JI0ARq/now,+,server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: "Maurizzio Argonni" Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 15:44:57 -0400 Sent to CCL by: "Maurizzio Argonni" [m.argonni%gmail.com] Dear CCL'ers: I am doing geometry optimizations on some PLP (vitamin B6) derivatives using DFT with ultra fine grids, tight convergence and a 6-31G**++ basis set. I followed them with a calculation of vibrational frequencies to ensure that indeed the structures have been minimized. All my minimizations ended normally but some of the structures show small (< 25 cm-1) negative frequencies (1 or 2 at most). It is my understanding that the presence of negative frequencies is a sign that a minimum has not been reached (i.e. we may have for example a saddle point). However, I recall having read in the past about people performing similar calculations and disregarding the presence of negative frequencies provided they are small enough. So, my question is whether there is some rule of thumb to know when it is safe to disregard the negative frequencies. Thanks in advance for your help. Maurizzio From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Mon Apr 28 20:53:00 2008 From: "N. Sukumar nagams- -rpi.edu" To: CCL Subject: CCL:G: Seeking feedback on negative frequencies Message-Id: <-36852-080428184329-13180-SUS4YwTzjYDAT42n+ksySQ..server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: "N. Sukumar" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 17:37:55 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Sent to CCL by: "N. Sukumar" [nagams/./rpi.edu] If you are using Gaussian, see the section "A note about low frequencies" in the White Paper http://www.gaussian.com/g_whitepap/vib.htm N. Sukumar Associate Research Professor of Chemistry and Chemical Biology Center for Biotechnology and Interdisciplinary Studies Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute http://reccr.chem.rpi.edu/ ==============Original message text=============== On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 15:44:57 EDT "Maurizzio Argonni m.argonni,+,gmail.com" wrote: Sent to CCL by: "Maurizzio Argonni" [m.argonni%gmail.com] Dear CCL'ers: I am doing geometry optimizations on some PLP (vitamin B6) derivatives using DFT with ultra fine grids, tight convergence and a 6-31G**++ basis set. I followed them with a calculation of vibrational frequencies to ensure that indeed the structures have been minimized. All my minimizations ended normally but some of the structures show small (< 25 cm-1) negative frequencies (1 or 2 at most). It is my understanding that the presence of negative frequencies is a sign that a minimum has not been reached (i.e. we may have for example a saddle point). However, I recall having read in the past about people performing similar calculations and disregarding the presence of negative frequencies provided they are small enough. So, my question is whether there is some rule of thumb to know when it is safe to disregard the negative frequencies. Thanks in advance for your help. Maurizziohttp://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===========