<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"> <head> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> <meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"> <style></style> </head> <body lang="en-CH" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="word-wrap:break-word"> <div class="WordSection1"> <p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:11.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Hi Jessie<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="DE-CH" style="font-size:11.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">That can happen and Is often due to a different convergence behavior. Also note that the implicit solvent comes not for free, because it introduces another convergence cycle for the polarization charge in each SCF iteration step which can add a significant computational overhead.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">HTH<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Matthias<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;mso-fareast-language:EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:36.0pt"> <b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">From: </span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">cp2k@googlegroups.com <cp2k@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Jessie wang <wangchuyan123@gmail.com><br> <b>Date: </b>Thursday, 23 February 2023 at 04:45<br> <b>To: </b>cp2k <cp2k@googlegroups.com><br> <b>Subject: </b>[CP2K:18481] implicit solvation model calculation was much slower than the explicit solvation model<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Dear all,<o:p></o:p></span></p> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">I hope to use the implicit solvation model to perform geo_opt for a metal cluster with ligand molecules. But it takes much more time than the explicit solvation model for any SCF calculation. Is this normal or did I do something wrong? I would be grateful if you could give me a suggestion. <o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Here I have attached my input files for both calculations. For the explicit model, I added about 690 water molecules to the box for the explicit calculation. For the explicit calculation I needed 32 seconds per scf, for the implicit calculation 78 seconds per scf. All other settings are the same and the same calculation resources were used. <o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Best,<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Jessie<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> </div> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">-- <br> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cp2k" group.<br> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to <a href="mailto:cp2k+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">cp2k+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br> To view this discussion on the web visit <a href="https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cp2k/5f533b72-8445-4c5f-9167-11367e359e6an%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer"> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cp2k/5f533b72-8445-4c5f-9167-11367e359e6an%40googlegroups.com</a>.<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> </body> </html> <p></p> -- <br /> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cp2k" group.<br /> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to <a href="mailto:cp2k+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">cp2k+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br /> To view this discussion on the web visit <a href="https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cp2k/ZRAP278MB0827D7828E7462C4281D4465F4AB9%40ZRAP278MB0827.CHEP278.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer">https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cp2k/ZRAP278MB0827D7828E7462C4281D4465F4AB9%40ZRAP278MB0827.CHEP278.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM</a>.<br />