[gmx-users] equilibrium for box of simulation
Mark.Abraham at anu.edu.au
Fri Oct 5 08:04:55 CEST 2012
On 5/10/2012 3:55 PM, mohammad agha wrote:
> Dear Justin,
> Thank you very much.
> So, decreasing of box dimensions is not bad, if all thing process natural, yes?
> The cause of my doubt was because of in the most of articles was said for example " we select box with dimensions 10nm that after equilibrium was converted to 11nm" and I didn't see the report of decreasing of box dimensions! May I know your idea about it, Please?
Following a published method closely and observing an opposite result is
a cause for concern. You have to judge "closely," however. You should
have said earlier this was one of your reasons for doubt, rather than
leave us to guess. The quality of the help you might receive is often in
direct proportion to the quantity of relevant information you give in
asking for it.
More information about the gromacs.org_gmx-users