Any computational chemists have any advice?

  • Thread starter Thread starter gravenewworld
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Computational
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on performing QST2 calculations for transition states using Gaussian software, specifically after obtaining geometry-optimized structures through DFT calculations. The user reports that while the QST2 calculation successfully identifies a transition state with one imaginary frequency, optimizing the structures adjacent to this transition state yields results that do not align with the original input structure in terms of energy. The user seeks alternatives to QST2 for finding transition states and methods to ensure the geometry to the left of the transition state optimizes back to the original energy level. Additionally, the user mentions a journal article discussing the B3LYP/6-31++G** basis set for lithium-containing organic compounds and inquires about its effectiveness and computational demands. Responses indicate that while this basis set may provide improved results, it will significantly increase computational time and resource requirements, especially on older hardware, with estimates suggesting calculations could take much longer than standard DFT methods.
gravenewworld
Messages
1,128
Reaction score
27
I am trying to do a QST2 calculation on two geometry optimized structures that I obtained by doing DFT calcs. The QST2 calc runs fine and finds 1 imaginary frequency resulting in a transition state that appears reasonable. However, when I pick points to the "left" and "right" of the transition state structure and optimize them back down, I find that the 1 optimized strucutre matches exactly to the input strucuture I originally put in, even in total energy. The structure to the "left" of the transition state optimizes back down but results in a structure that is similar to the original input structure but is off by almost 6kcal/mol in energy to my original input structure. Are there any alternatives to the QST2 calc that can be done in order to find transition states between 2 optimized geometries? Are there any tricks I can do in order to get the geometry to the "left" of the transition state to optimize back down to my original input structure (energy wise)? BTW I am currently using gaussian to do the calcs.

-Thanks, GNW.
 
Chemistry news on Phys.org
I also just found a journal article by a guy from Yale who uses the B3LYP/6-31++G** basis set for calculations involving lithium containing organic compounds. Is anyone familiar with using this basis set and what kind of results did you get? Will this take much longer than a DFT calc (or any idea of how much cpu power this will chew up)? The reaction I am trying to optimize is the is a Biphenylene ring, which when introduced to Li2, opens up to give biphenyl. One structure I have tried to optimize is the Biphenylene system with 2 Lithiums exactly over the center the biphenylene, with 1 lithium on top and the other on the bottom.
 
I think that basis set is pretty standard for computational chemistry. It's going to be a lot more intensive than a standard DFT calculation. The results will be better, but it's going to take longer and require more CPU power.
 
Great, my worst suspicions came true. The computer I am using is a 10 year old Mac. The DFT calcs took several days, the 6-31g++** calcs will probably take a week .
 
Yeah, sorry to break the news, but that's probably about right.
 
Thread 'How to make Sodium Chlorate by Electrolysis of salt water?'
I have a power supply for electrolysis of salt water brine, variable 3v to 6v up to 30 amps. Cathode is stainless steel, anode is carbon rods. Carbon rod surface area 42" sq. the Stainless steel cathode should be 21" sq. Salt is pure 100% salt dissolved into distilled water. I have been making saturated salt wrong. Today I learn saturated salt is, dissolve pure salt into 150°f water cool to 100°f pour into the 2 gallon brine tank. I find conflicting information about brine tank...
Engineers slash iridium use in electrolyzer catalyst by 80%, boosting path to affordable green hydrogen https://news.rice.edu/news/2025/engineers-slash-iridium-use-electrolyzer-catalyst-80-boosting-path-affordable-green Ruthenium is also fairly expensive (a year ago it was about $490/ troy oz, but has nearly doubled in price over the past year, now about $910/ troy oz). I tracks prices of Pt, Pd, Ru, Ir and Ru. Of the 5 metals, rhodium (Rh) is the most expensive. A year ago, Rh and Ir...
Back
Top