work, we may need a closer
look at your input model.
Cheers,
Robbie
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 20:48:49 -0500
From: satys...@wisc.edu
Subject: [ccp4bb] refmac 5.6 ccp4 6.2.0
To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Has anyone had problems with Refmac 5.6? I tried refining our stucture at
1.24 A,
aniso
d'envoi : vendredi 28 octobre 2011 09:42
À : CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Objet : Re: [ccp4bb] refmac 5.6 ccp4 6.2.0
Hi Kenneth,
This looks like an off-by-one bug in the restraint generation. Typical sources
are weird LINKs, wrong atom names and bad luck. I suggest you make sure you
have the very latest
Objet : Re: [ccp4bb] refmac 5.6 ccp4 6.2.0
Hi Kenneth,
This looks like an off-by-one bug in the restraint generation. Typical
sources are weird LINKs, wrong atom names and bad luck. I suggest you make
sure you have the very latest Refmac and dictionary and try setting up a new
refinement
Just to verify, is this by any chance *unrestrained* refinement?
On Fri, 2011-10-28 at 09:37 +0200, Tim Gruene wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dear Kenneth A. Satyshur,
what is your weight set to? If it is set to 'auto', try setting it to a
specific value and lower
Pozharski
[epozh...@umaryland.edu]
Date d'envoi : vendredi 28 octobre 2011 16:00
À : CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Objet : Re: [ccp4bb] refmac 5.6 ccp4 6.2.0
Just to verify, is this by any chance *unrestrained* refinement?
On Fri, 2011-10-28 at 09:37 +0200, Tim Gruene wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dear all,
If those hydrogens are in riding position, their coordinates are
calculated and should not be refined at all, isn't it? Hence they should
appear in the list of deviations at all.
Are the hydrogens present in the PDB file? Does it work to
:00
À : CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Objet : Re: [ccp4bb] refmac 5.6 ccp4 6.2.0
Just to verify, is this by any chance *unrestrained*
refinement?
On Fri, 2011-10-28 at 09:37 +0200, Tim Gruene wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dear Kenneth A. Satyshur,
what is your
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sorry, should NOT appear in the list of deviations, of course!
- Original Message
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] refmac 5.6 ccp4 6.2.0
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 17:39:06 +0200
From: Tim Gruene t...@shelx.uni-ac.gwdg.de
Reply-To: Tim Gruene t
:00
À : CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Objet : Re: [ccp4bb] refmac 5.6 ccp4 6.2.0
Just to verify, is this by any chance *unrestrained* refinement?
On Fri, 2011-10-28 at 09:37 +0200, Tim Gruene wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dear Kenneth A. Satyshur,
what is your weight
part de Garib N
Murshudov [ga...@mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk]
Date d'envoi : vendredi 28 octobre 2011 17:49
À : LEGRAND Pierre
Cc : CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Objet : Re: [ccp4bb] RE : [ccp4bb] refmac 5.6 ccp4 6.2.0
Dear Pierre
Resolution seems to be good enough for full anisotropic refinement. Why don't
you
Has anyone had problems with Refmac 5.6? I tried refining our stucture at 1.24
A,
aniso with H in riding position and it just exploded! I get error in distances
such as
Standard External All
Bonds: 3270 0 3270
11 matches
Mail list logo