Slow Cool Input

Mark Banfield M.Banfield at bris.ac.uk
Fri Aug 21 03:16:34 EST 1998


Tristan J. Fiedler M.Sc. wrote:
> 
> I am using a bulk solvent refinement model and see no difference between
> the slowcool_w_bulksol.inp and the standard slowcool.inp.
> 
> The only difference apparent is the file names and the low resolution
> boundary.  Does anyone have any experience with these files?
> 
> Thank you always.
> --
> Tristan J. Fiedler, M.Sc.
> Graduate Program in Biochemistry & Molecular Biology
> University of Miami Medical School
> 
> email: tfiedler at newssun.med.miami.edu

Tristan,

You've got it exactly write.......
The only differences I have noticed in the two .inp files are the file
names and resolution cut-offs. 

When you apply a bulksolvent correction with setup_bulksol.inp you add
an F-PART to your reflections in the new  file you generate. This is the
information on the Bulk-solvent model for your data and is read into
slowcool with the reflection file.

There are two test .inp files for the sole reason that you can run them
as examples.


Good Luck with the rest of your refinement.

Mark

-- 
##
##"In reciprocal space, noone can hear you scream......"
##
## Dr. Mark Banfield
## Dept. of Biochemistry
## University of Bristol
## University Walk
## Bristol
## BS8 1TD
## UK
## email: M.Banfield at bris.ac.uk
## web: http://www.bch.bris.ac.uk/staff/lb/MarkB/index.html
## Phone: 44-(0)117-9289000 x4359
## Fax: 44-(0)117-9288274



More information about the X-plor mailing list