prasad.gajula at uni-osnabrueck.de
Tue Sep 19 11:18:11 CEST 2006
Thanks for your answer. I hope I did not catch your points well.
So, you mean I can use 'gen_vel = no' for the md runs (MD without position
restraints, after the completion of PR run with position restarints)
my procedure as follows......
EM ---> PR(300ps @ 300K) ----> MD (30ps @ 80K. no postion restraints)---> MD
(30 ps @ 100K, no postion restraints ) ---> MD (30 ps @ 200K, no postion
restraints) ----> relaxation MD(250ps @ 300K, no postion restraints) ---->
final MD (300K, no postion restraints)
After Energy minimization, I apply position restarints and generate new
velocities at 300K.
I take the output of PR run as input to the next MD run which started at 80K
( no position restraints from now). And also from here onwards i dont
generate any new velocities, but with the velocities which are written in
the previous runs.
Looking forward for your reply.
Please let me know
> Dear Gromacs Users,
> I am getting different results for simulations with " gen_vel=yes" and
> "gen_vel= no".
This is expected. No two simulations will be the same unless you run
then on the same hardware with exactly the same inputs. gen_vel requires
the use of a random number seed. What you want to do, is after
equilibration, be sampling from the correct ensemble.
> I have generated velocities only for PR MD at 300K. after that I set '
> gen_vel= no ' in mdp file. After the position restrained MD , I slowly
> increased the temparature from 80K , 100K , 200K and last 300K. (with
> 'gen_vel=no' for all MD)
> Is it correct? Because I read both 'yes' and 'no' as possibilites in some
> references. Iam bit confused which to use for exact simulations.
Personally, I don't think the practice of velocity reassignment in
incremental heating while using position restraints is demonstrably
better than not using reassignment in incremental heating.
More information about the gromacs.org_gmx-users