Please reply to the mailing list, thanks.
You would have to convert all the parameters that have units (not dimension-less) to the corresponding unit style. This is tedious and prone to making errors since EAM potential files are complicated.
What is it you are trying to get out of using the nano unit style? Would it be easier and more straightforward to run the simulations in metal units and work out the conversions just on the results/properties of interest?
The problem with metal units is that it is increasing the time of simulation. There is two unite style in order to have a particle which is 10nm in diameter.
I can use “units metal” and in “creates atoms” I should use 100
I can use " units nano" and in " creates atoms" I should use 10
The simulation in the second case is much faster than the first one ( am I right?) because of saving time I want to use nano, but I have that problem about converting the EAM potential to proper file.
No, they would have the same computational cost. 10 nm is 10 nm, no matter how you define it. Your second option of using nano units does not make sense anyway, because you are defining a lattice spacing that is 10 times larger than usual which is then not a correct lattice. I suggest you just use the metal units.