[gmx-users] pairs types for decoupling
gmx3 at hotmail.com
Wed Apr 4 09:56:32 CEST 2007
>From: "David Mobley" <dmobley at gmail.com>
>Reply-To: Discussion list for GROMACS users <gmx-users at gromacs.org>
>To: "Discussion list for GROMACS development" <gmx-developers at gromacs.org>,
>"Discussion list for GROMACS users" <gmx-users at gromacs.org>
>CC: Berk Hess <hessb at mpip-mainz.mpg.de>
>Subject: [gmx-users] pairs types for decoupling
>Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2007 15:35:19 -0700
>I'm using the CVS version of 3.3.1 from last week, and am trying to
>get the new pairs types Berk Hess has implemented to work for doing
>decoupling. There's an old e-mail here on the subject, which is all
>I've got to go by:
This is not in 3.3.1, only in the development branch.
>Berk wrote this:
>>The idea is that for the solute to be decoupled one would replace
>>the in its [ pairs ] section type 1 by type 2
>>and exclude all intramolecular non-bonded interactions and replace
>>add them again explicitly in a [ pairs ] section as type 3.
>>BTW I tested it and it works.
>Berk, any chance you can provide your test files so I can see how
>exactly you're doing this?
>I've been trying to do this for toluene, using Michael Shirts'
>parameters which were published in supporting information; I've
>previously reproduced his values without using decoupling so I know
>they're correct. So far, I'm getting stuff that's ridiculously wrong
>when I attempt decoupling, so I must be doing something wrong. Here's
>what I'm doing:
>1) I added bonds type 5 between all of the atoms that don't have
>bonded interactions to ensure that the non-bonded interactions are
It is easier to set nrexcl for your moleculetype higher,
or to add an [ exclusions ] section.
>2) I changed all of the existing pairs to pairs type 2 (without
>providing parameters, which I assume will mean they're still generated
>according to teh combination rules for the A state)
>3) Put all intramolecular nonbonded interactions into the pairs
>section using pairs type 3 (again without providing parameters, since
>they should be generated using combination rules for the A state).
That is all correct.
>What am I doing wrong? It would probably be very useful if one of us
>put, either online or in the manual, a simple example topology that
>demonstrates how to do this.
The idea would be to let grompp do all the work.
But up to now this has not been implemented.
Play online games with your friends with Messenger
More information about the gromacs.org_gmx-users