Jump to content
Geochemist's Workbench Support Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About maki

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. Hi, Brian, To begin with, I’m working on the problem of ver. 10.0.9. According to your advice, I downloaded and installed the latest one. I think that it got a little faster than previous upgrade. Opening time of files is about two minutes in the case that the files are opened from both saved script and dashboard. Is it normal speed in ver. 10.0.9? The followings are the responses to your questions. Regarding the slowness in 10.0.8, is a new instance of a program like React slow to open from the Dashboard? Or is it only slow when you're trying to open a saved React script? ---> Both of them. Can you please install the latest release and send us a screenshot of the GWB Activation Utility if the program is still slow? Finally, do you have the "Show Announcements" checkbox selected on the Settings pane of the GWB dashboard? If so, does unchecking it make the GWB programs any faster to load? ---> Originally, I haven’t checked "Show Announcements" in any version. In addition, when I select the tab of “Upgrade” on dashboard in 10.0.9, it took about two minutes for opening menu, too. Thanks. Best regards, Maki
  2. Hi, Brian, Thank you for your reply, and sorry for little information. There are two problems. First, opening time of GWB programs got longer after upgrading to 10.0.8. It took several minutes to open in any files. Then, I carried out downgrade from 10.0.8 to 10.0.6. It seems to get back to original speed to open. Second, however, “Save as...” function doesn’t work after downgrading with the message of “Error: Must specify a file to save to”. The followings are the response to your questions. Are you trying to save input files for any of the GWB programs (Rxn, Act2, SpecE8, etc.)? Or one program in particular? ---> Mainly, React, X1t, and X2t. Or by script files are you referring to script files written in the Basic language for use with the Custom Rate Law or Heterogeneity features? ---> In both case with or without referring script files. Have you experienced this problem during the entire time you've been running 10.0.6? Or has the problem only arisen recently? ---> I didn’t have this problem before. I have the problem recently after downgrading. Can you please tell me what Windows OS you're using, whether you're running the 64 bit or 32 bit installer, and any other details that may be important? ---> Windows 7 with 64 bit. Is the dashboard slow to open, or only the individual programs? ---> Both of them in 10.0.8. Calculation works well, and the problems can be avoided by making a new script without renaming in 10.0.6. If you need any other information, could you let me know? Best regards, Maki
  3. Hi I'm using GWB, ver 10.0.6. I haven't been able to save script files by using "Save as ... " with message "Error: Must specify a file to save to", these days. I tried to save the files after renaming in new folder, which was normal way to make new calculation files, since I bought GWB software. I have no idea why it suddenly happened. In addition, I downgraded the software from the latest version to 10.0.6 because handling (ex. opening software, scripts, and so on) got much heavier than before upgrade. Could you give me any idea to handle it? Thank you for your time. Best regards, Maki
  4. Hi Brian, Thank you for your suggestion. I'll adopt that concept. Best regards, Maki
  5. Hi, I hope to describe the microbial reaction catalyzing decomposition of aqueous species like below. Glutamine(aq) + H2O → NH3(aq) + Glutamic_acid(aq) If I set the above reaction in the reactant pane as a microbial kinetics, calculation of equilibrium status seems to be completed in preference to kinetic reaction, and there wasn't any changes in pH, species concentrations, and so on. I am trying some calculations under the below condition, so far. I transferred the information of Glutamine(aq) from Aqueous species to Redox couples in thermodynamic database. The transfer allowed the reaction to depend on microbial kinetics by decoupling Glutamine(aq)/NH3(aq) in trial calculations. The result values seemed to be appropriate. I would like to adopt this modification of thermodynamic database if the concept is correct. I would be grateful if you would give me some suggestions. Best regards, Maki
  6. Hi Brian, Thank you for your reply. As soon as I can, I will upgrade to ver.10. Best regards, Maki
  7. Hi Brian, Thank you for your reply. Although I’m using ver9.0.9 of GWB, the phenomenon appears in the version. How should I handle it? Best regards, Maki
  8. Hi I’m still using ver9 of GWB. I have sometimes encountered the display collapse in Reactants pane of X2t program. ‘Add’ button and “Delete” button spread longitudinally. The phenomenon has been inconvenient to set some parameters in Reactants pane. I, however, could find the procedure causing the collapse. When kinetic reaction of mineral with value of power as ninth reactant is set in X1t and X2t, the problem appears. I have attached the corresponding x2t file. Unless the value of power is add, the problem disappears. I have no idea whether this is my-PC-specific problem or not. In addition, I have not checked it in ver.10, yet. Could you check the procedure of the problem? If my explanation is inadequate, please let me know. Best regards, Maki Example.x2t
  9. Hi Brian, It is useful to export the values from plots to other files (e.g. Excel sheet). On the other hand, although values of volume% could be exported, values of delta volume% could not be exported. I confirmed that the Xtplot had the title of ‘Pyrite (delta volume%)’ in the Y-axis and the XY graph certainly showed the change of delta volume%. Then I chose ‘copy as Spreadsheet (Tab delimited)’ from menu bar and pasted it on the excel sheet. The result, however, was same as ‘volume%’. I’m still using ver.9 of GWB. It would be grateful if you could check it. Thank you for your time. Best regards, Maki
  10. Hi Brian, I’m sorry for delay to reply. Volumes of node in my calculation were set in over 100 m3, and vol% of mineral was very large in each node. Although the dissolution level of them was very small, I needed to obtain precise amount of change. The values, however, were rounded off in X2t_output and X2t_plot. They seem to be four decimal place in both linear and log scales. For the above reason, I have checked the contents of the plot file. It will be very convenient if I may be able to set the digits in X2t_output and X2t_plot. Best regards, Maki
  11. Hi I would like to confirm the units of minerals in the text file of X2t plot. In my calculation, I set four minerals. After the calculation, the text file of X2t plot showed ‘Nmin = 4’ and four numbers below the Nmin’s line. I couldn’t find the explanation in the last paragraph of the text file. What kind of unit do their numbers have? I have no idea whether it is ‘mol/cm3’, ‘mol/bulk volume’, or ‘mol’. e.g. -------------------------------- Nmin = 4 1.4619883e-05 0.014985896 4.676259e-06 0.0055111601 -------------------------------- Do you provide the instruction manual of the text file of X2t plot? Thank you for your consideration. Best regards, Maki
  12. Hi Brian, I have been trying the calculations of kinetic pyrite oxidation under the various conditions according to your advice. I found that the calculation was well converged by setting ‘1’ in ‘power(O2(aq))’ of Kinetic-pyrite in Reactant pane in many cases. The GWB text book says that the exponential number in rate law of kinetic mineral is empirically decided. Indeed, when I set the ‘power = 1’ as the exponent of the relating chemical concentration, reaction rate seems to be larger based on the rate law equation. For example, in pyrite oxidation, O2(aq) is easily imaged as the promoting chemical, and the rule is easy to understand. On the other hand, the calculations in Kinetic Quarts and Kinetic K-feldspar also got converged and got faster by setting “power = 1” of SiO2(aq) and K+, respectively. Their chemicals and ions are put in the right side of their dissolution equations. I think it is unlikely for the dissolution, but the calculations became to be converged. As a technique of GWB calculation, should the ‘power’ be set ‘1’ in chemicals which constitute the mineral and relating chemicals as below when a kinetic-mineral is used? e.g. Kinetic pyrite: O2(aq), Fe++, SO4-- (or only O2(aq)?) --> ‘power = 1’ Kinetic smectite: Al+++, Mg++, SiO2(aq), Fe++ --> ‘power = 1’ Thank you for your consideration. Best regards, Maki
  13. Hi Brian, Thank you for your quick response and help. Best regards, Maki
  14. Hi Brian, Thank you very much for the detailed explanations. I will try the calculations considering the initial equilibrium with pyrite and the fluid in the first model. As I have other cases with actual water analyses, I will apply the advised thinking process to their simulations. Does it seem to take a long time to fix the problem of imported flow fields in ver. 10? In addition, not only in the flow fields, but the other inputs (chemicals in Initial pane, kinetic parameters in Reactants, porosity in Medium and so on) also have same problems. I don’t have so much time to wait for the maintenance in my work. If possible, could you provide the temporary license of ver.9 or the temporary downgrade exe file to ver. 9, please? (I’m not sure if the latest release of ver.9 was 9.0.3 or not, but I am thankful for that you have fixed the same problem of ver.9 before.) If I should send the e-mail about this problem, please let me know that. Thank you for your kind consideration. Best regards, Maki
  15. Hi Brian, In addition to the previous question, I have the other important inquiry. I have tried the calculation that was two dimensional analyses with same chemical composition of Pyrite_oxidation_2. Heterogeneity function in the “importing flow field” didn’t seem to work correctly again. I attached PO_2D.x2t. The calculated flow field was carried out. On the other hand, “node by node” setting and “table file” setting didn't work and the script was compulsorily shut down. Could you check the function, please? It would be great if you could also resolve this matter soon. Best regards, Maki PO_2D.x2t
  • Create New...