[gmx-users] Re: grompp warnings/errors I haven't seen before

[bharat v. adkar]

On Thu, 3 Jan 2008, David Mobley wrote:

> OK, I seem to have traced at least the latter problems back to
> something new in gromacs 3.3.2 relative to 3.3.1, in that my system
> works fine in 3.3.1 but not in 3.3.2. Is there something new with
> handling of constraints or settles for water in 3.3.2 relative to
> 3.3.1?

the prior part is due to the problem with top/itp.. most probably the 
cosolvent one. As the warnings say, the HO, HO and H1 are declared second 
time, so the first parameters read will be overwritten by second ones. 
check all the topologies and changes you made.

bharat



>
> I will try submitting a bugzilla with an example input file, I think.
> It's possible the problem is on my end somewhere, but as far as I can
> tell I'm not doing anything I'm not supposed to...
>
> Thanks,
> David
>
>
> On Jan 3, 2008 2:33 PM, David Mobley <dmobley at gmail.com> wrote:
>> All,
>>
>> I'm trying to simulate a peptide/water/cosolvent mix in gromacs
>> (3.3.2). I've set up a topology and coordinates and everything seems
>> fine until I run grompp, at which point I get
>>
>> WARNING 1 [file "solvated.top", line 17]:
>>   Overriding atomtype HO
>> WARNING 2 [file "solvated.top", line 22]:
>>   Overriding atomtype OH
>> WARNING 3 [file "solvated.top", line 26]:
>>   Overriding atomtype H1
>> Generated 210 of the 210 non-bonded parameter combinations
>> Generating 1-4 interactions: fudge = 0.5
>> Generated 210 of the 210 1-4 parameter combinations
>> Excluding 3 bonded neighbours for solute 1
>> turning H bonds into constraints...
>> Excluding 1 bonded neighbours for SOL 4816
>> turning H bonds into constraints...
>> Excluding 3 bonded neighbours for TFE 805
>> turning H bonds into constraints...
>> processing coordinates...
>> double-checking input for internal consistency...
>> renumbering atomtypes...
>> converting bonded parameters...
>> #      BONDS:   4234
>> #     ANGLES:   11205
>> #     RBDIHS:   10605
>> #       LJ14:   10714
>> #     CONSTR:   2615
>> #     SETTLE:   4816
>> Walking down the molecule graph to make shake-blocks
>> Double sids (903, 904) for atom 22086
>> Double sids (903, 904) for atom 22087
>> Double sids (903, 904) for atom 22088
>> Double sids (903, 904) for atom 22089
>> Double sids (903, 904) for atom 22090
>> Double sids (903, 904) for atom 22091
>> Double sids (903, 904) for atom 22092
>> Assertion failed for "n == natoms" in file splitter.c, line 668
>> dump core ? (y/n):n
>>
>> I've never seen this stuff before. First off, I don't understand the
>> warnings -- what's overriding those atom types? I don't see anything
>> wrong with them or anythign that should override them.
>>
>> Second, what does the business about "Double sids" and "shake blocks"
>> mean? Clearly I've got something wrong in my topology or in the
>> relationship between my topology and gro file, but this is not at all
>> transparent.
>>
>> I'll poke around in the source and see if I can figure out what's
>> going on but I thought I might be able to expedite things by an e-mail
>> to the list.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> David Mobley
>> http://www.dillgroup.ucsf.edu/~dmobley
>>
> _______________________________________________
> gmx-users mailing list    gmx-users at gromacs.org
> http://www.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-users
> Please search the archive at http://www.gromacs.org/search before posting!
> Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the
> www interface or send it to gmx-users-request at gromacs.org.
> Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/mailing_lists/users.php
>
>

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.