[gmx-users] Potential Energy

[Yanmei Song]

I did not develop the force field of my molecule by myself. In stead I use
the literature force field parameters. I guess not all the force field need
the [pairs]. As long as I can get reasonable experimental observables, I can
use such force field, right?

On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 6:50 PM, Mark Abraham <mark.abraham at anu.edu.au>wrote:

>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Yanmei Song <ysong30 at asu.edu>
> Date: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 10:58
> Subject: Re: [gmx-users] Potential Energy
> To: jalemkul at vt.edu, Discussion list for GROMACS users <
> gmx-users at gromacs.org>
>
> > Dear Justin:
> >
> > I finally figure out that the problem comes from the Coulomb 1-4
> interactions defined by [pairs] part. When I remove this parts, the energy
> minimization ends with a big negative number. Thanks for your help.
>
> That's not a solution, that's a random number generator. Whether or not you
> need such pairs is force-field dependent. Ad hoc changes are ridiculous.
> Messing with force fields is an expert topic, and parameterizing a new
> molecule is difficult and risky.
>
> Mark
> --
> gmx-users mailing list    gmx-users at gromacs.org
> http://lists.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
>



-- 
Yanmei Song
Ph.D. Candidate
Department of Chemical Engineering
Arizona State University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://maillist.sys.kth.se/pipermail/gromacs.org_gmx-users/attachments/20100127/9b8bdbc0/attachment.html>