Jump to content
Geochemist's Workbench Support Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About HUAN

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Hi, everyone: I want to buy a new workstation for GWB modelling. Can anyone tell me that how many number of processor cores are the best for X1t and X2t? Based on my understanding, the simulation speed is linearly correlated with the number of cores (just like the following figure). For example, 8 core will reduce simulation time by half than 4 core. In this way, 16 core will reduce half time than 8 core. 32 core will reduce half time than 16 core. So, is it always faster for more cores? Is there a maximum number of core for GWB? Or is there an optimal number of cores for G
  2. Hi, Jia Wang: GWB takes more than 99% of the CPU when I run X1t simulation (the attached figure). So I think CPU of our computer is out of date. This computer was bought in 2013. That is why I want to copy GWB to virtual machine or super computer in our university. Buying a new computer is also an option. I will try your suggestions. But, can you tell me that if it is fesible/legal to copy GWB? Huan
  3. Hi, everyone: Our group has a professional verison of GWB. But the simulation speed is too slow when I use X1t. For example, it may requires more than 3 days or more to finish one run. Sometimes, the simulation calculation just terminate at 30%, or even 90%. So, I think this maybe due to the simulation computer is too old. So I want to copy the GWB software to the virtual machine or super computer in our university. Can anyone tell me that is it feasible? If it is not feasible, I want to buy a new workstation. Can anyone give me some recommendations about the computer parameter
  4. Dear Jia Wang: Deep appreciation. It works after adding the nucleus to the script. It is very useful. What can I say? Maybe just thanks. But you solved a big problem for me. It has confused me for some time. Best wishes for you. Huan
  5. Hi, Jia Wang: Thank you very much for your quick response. 1. Sorry for missing my thermo dataset. I am trying to simulate the influence of CO2 on sandstone diagenesis. So, I give a value for fugacity of CO2 and therefore use pH to balance charge. I attached my dataset. 2. Now, I am testing kinetic precipitation rate law to constrain mineral precipitation, like quartz. But it did not work. Therefore, I just use feldspar (primary) and quartz (secondary) to test the kinetic precipitation rate law. 3. The dissolution rate is set according to the three-mechanism-rate in Palandr
  6. Hi, everyone: I am trying to use kinetic rate law for mineral dissolution and precipitation. Here, I give a simple example. Initial mineral: Albite Secondary mineral: Kaolinite, Quartz, Calcite If I do not use kinetic rate law for precipitation of kaolinite, quartz and calcite, they would precipitate. However, if I use kinetic rate law, they do not precipitate. Can anyone give me some advice? The rate law, nucleus density are set. I cannot figure out what is wrong. Very confusing. Thank you very much. Huan
  • Create New...