[gmx-users] Re: How to set the sigma and epsilon for Cu2+ in OPLS-AA/L

fantasticqhl fantasticqhl at gmail.com
Mon Apr 8 15:36:13 CEST 2013


Dear Dr. Vitaly Chaban,

Thanks very much for your patient explanation. Yeah, you are right, that 
is what I want to know: how you tuned this parameter?

Since then, if I want to set a new atom type and I know its vdw radius, 
so how should I set the sigma for it based on the vdw radius,
which should be in agreement with OPLS-AA/L force filed? Could you give 
me some suggestions?
I guess that I have to tune it by myself this time, right? Thanks in 
advance!

All the best,
Qinghua Liao




On 04/08/2013 03:21 PM, Dr. Vitaly Chaban wrote:
> I think your misunderstanding comes from the belief that sigma (as 
> they are tabulated in the force field files) should *exactly 
> correspond* to the VDW diameter, as in encyclopedia.
>
> This is simply not the case. In reality, sigmas in the force fields 
> are "tuned" in order to give right interatomic distances AFTER you 
> turn on all the necessary potentials (Coulombic attraction in case of 
> OPLS).
>
> Dr. Vitaly Chaban
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 3:14 PM, fantasticqhl <fantasticqhl at gmail.com 
> <mailto:fantasticqhl at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Dear Dr. Vitaly Chaban,
>
>     Thanks very much for concern on my research! We are going to the
>     use the bonded model together with Coulomb and LJ potentials.
>
>     My problem is that vdw radius and its sigma do not follow the
>     equation of  Rvdw = pow(2, 1/6)*sigma in the OPLS force field files,
>     not just for copper. That's why I sent these e-mails for
>     suggestions. I am sorry for the unclear.
>
>     All the best,
>     Qinghua Liao
>
>
>     On 04/08/2013 01:22 PM, Dr. Vitaly Chaban wrote:
>>     Dear Qinghua Liao -
>>
>>     In that case, I am just wishing you luck with the copper
>>     containing systems.
>>
>>     Are you going to simulate copper-ligand interactions using
>>     Coulomb+LJ potential only? I would guess it is a chemical bonding
>>     case. Maybe the Morse potential (additionally) can be of better
>>     service?
>>
>>
>>     Dr. Vitaly Chaban
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 1:09 PM, fantasticqhl
>>     <fantasticqhl at gmail.com <mailto:fantasticqhl at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         Dear Dr. Vitaly Chaban,
>>
>>         Thanks very much for your explanation. I guess that I get
>>         what you mean now! Thanks!
>>
>>         All the best,
>>         Qinghua Liao
>>
>>         On 04/07/2013 11:35 AM, Dr. Vitaly Chaban wrote:
>>>         The equation is a direct consequence of LJ-12-6 equation.
>>>         This equation is used in OPLS and most other force fields.
>>>
>>>         The difference you found originate from the fact that,
>>>         besides LJ potential, there is much stronger Coulomb
>>>         potential in the copper-ion case. If you run simulations,
>>>         you will see that copper-ligand distance is smaller than the
>>>         sum of their sigmas multiplied by pow (2, 1/6).
>>>
>>>
>>>         Dr. Vitaly Chaban
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>         On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 11:28 AM, fantasticqhl
>>>         <fantasticqhl at gmail.com <mailto:fantasticqhl at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>             Dear Dr. Vitaly Chaban,
>>>
>>>             Thanks for the explanation. I know this equation.
>>>             However, the van der Waals radius and its counterpart
>>>             sigma in OPLS-AA/L force field files do not follow this
>>>             equation.
>>>
>>>             For example, the vdw radius of copper ion is 1.4
>>>             angstrom, and its sigma is  2.08470e-01 (I guess the
>>>             unit is nm). pow(2, 1/6) is more than 1, so obviously
>>>             this equation
>>>             does not work with copper. So do other atoms. I guess
>>>             that there might be an additional coefficient for this
>>>             equation in gromacs. That's the purpose for asking.
>>>             Thanks very much!
>>>
>>>
>>>             All the best,
>>>             Qinghua
>>>
>>>             On 04/07/2013 10:48 AM, Dr. Vitaly Chaban wrote:
>>>>             Dear Qinghua -
>>>>
>>>>             The formal relation is diameter = pow (2, 1/6) * sigma,
>>>>             provided that you have only LJ potential in your
>>>>             interacting subsystem.
>>>>
>>>>             If this is not the case, an optimal sigma can only be
>>>>             found iteratively.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>             Dr. Vitaly Chaban
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>             On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 10:36 AM, fantasticqhl
>>>>             <fantasticqhl at gmail.com
>>>>             <mailto:fantasticqhl at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>                 Dear Dr. Vitaly Chaban,
>>>>
>>>>                 Thanks very much for your reply. My question is the
>>>>                 relationship between van der Waals radius and sigma
>>>>                 in the OPLS-AA/L force filed files of Gromacs.
>>>>
>>>>                 Of course I did ab initio optimizations of my
>>>>                 system, but I do not know there is some relation
>>>>                 between the optimal bond length (copper--atom of
>>>>                 the ligand) and sigma.
>>>>                 Could you please be more clear and give a little
>>>>                 detailed explanation? Thanks very much!
>>>>
>>>>                 All the best,
>>>>                 Qinghua
>>>>
>>>>                 On 04/06/2013 06:07 PM, Dr. Vitaly Chaban wrote:
>>>>
>>>>                     In systems of such kind, everything will depend
>>>>                     on the atom of the ligand,
>>>>                     which coordinated by copper ion.
>>>>
>>>>                     Perform ab initio geometry optimization and
>>>>                     find the optimal distance. Then
>>>>                     adjust sigma(s).
>>>>
>>>>                     Dr. Vitaly Chaban
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>                     There is a copper ion with four ligands in my
>>>>                     system. I am going to
>>>>
>>>>                         study this system using MD simulations.
>>>>                         For the vdW parameters, R*=1.74 angstrom
>>>>                         and epsilon=1.14 kcal.mol from
>>>>                         one paper will be used in our
>>>>                         simulations. I already found the parameters
>>>>                         of copper ion (Cu2+) in the
>>>>                         OPLS-AA/L force field files:
>>>>                         sigma= 2.08470e-01, epsilon=4.76976e+00,
>>>>                         which are for Cu2+ without
>>>>                         ligands. The two epsilon are the same,
>>>>                         just with different units.
>>>>
>>>>                         My question is that I do not know how to
>>>>                         convert the vdW radius to
>>>>                         sigma. I found that the vdw radius of copper is
>>>>                         1.4 angstrom, and the sigma in the force
>>>>                         field file is 2.08470e-01.
>>>>                         Could someone tell me how to do the converting?
>>>>
>>>>                         Thanks very much!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>




More information about the gromacs.org_gmx-users mailing list