[gmx-users] Conversion of charmm36 parameters from namd to gromacs
Daniel Bauer
bauer at cbs.tu-darmstadt.de
Sun Dec 3 22:26:02 CET 2017
Hello,
I compared the LJ parameters for the interaction Potassium - backbone
carbonyl oxygen for CHARMM36 between the Gromacs and NAMD version of the
forcefield. I found different numbers for the sigma value i cannot
explain to myself:
The stock charmm36 implementation has the following LJ parameters for
potassium and oxygen:
; atom Emin (kcal/mol) Rmin/2 (A)
POT 0.087 1.76375
O 0.120 1.7
Converting the above values to units used in gromacs (kJ/mol and nm) and
applying standard combination rules this should give the following
nonbonded energy parameters:
[ pairtypes]
; sig = (Rmin,i/2 + Rmin,j/2)/10
; eps = sqrt(Emin,i * Emin,j) * 5.184 kcal/kJ
; i j func sig (nm) eps (kj/mol)
O POT 1 0.346 0.4275
However, the actual entry for the interaction in GROMACS/charmm36 has
the energy minimum at a much smaller distance (epsilon is on the point
though!)
; i j func sig (nm) eps (kJ/mol)
O POT 1 0.282 0.4275
Can somebody tell me the reason for this huge difference? Is there an
error in my calculation? I am trying to convert an NBFIX applied to this
specific interaction to gromacs. However, I am not sure how to proceed
without doing the reparametrization in gromacs again, because the stock
values differ that much.
Best regards,
Daniel
--
Daniel Bauer, M.Sc.
TU Darmstadt
Computational Biology & Simulation
Schnittspahnstr. 2
64287 Darmstadt
bauer at cbs.tu-darmstadt.de
Don't trust atoms, they make up everything.
More information about the gromacs.org_gmx-users
mailing list