There is no problem with the rhombic dodecahedron in and of itself. Note that editconf -d does not actually yield the -d that you ask it to and that it errs on different sides of your request for different box types. To prove this to yourself, run your starting structure through editconf -d with a variety of -bt options and then run g_mindist -pi on the output .gro. You will see the variation straight off.

Stick with the rhombic dodecahedron... just use a larger one. Use g_mindist -pi to get an idea of the actual separation that you have obtained, and keep in mind that the surface of the vesicle is rugged and fluctuating, therefore you will need to have enough of a water layer to prevent spontaneous fluctuation-based merger events.

On the up-side, you seem to have a system that can shed light on the process of vesicle merger...

Chris.

-- original message --

Ok, I guess in future I will have to make sure the box is big enough to contain the entire vesicle in the triclinic representation. It's kind of a shame though, as the main reason for using the rhombic dodecahedron box was to minimize the amount of bulk solvent required.

Thanks for your help though.

Daniel



Hi Daniel,

The problem is likely that your vesicle is interacting with itself
over the periodic boundaries. There are regions where there is no
solvent inbetween. That means that lipids can go over from one image
to the other by diffusion, which will not be compensated by using -pbc
nojump. You seem to be out of luck there.
The solution to solve this problem would be to rebuild the vesicle by
minimizing the sum of squared deviations from the center using shifts
over the lattice. But that is not implemented.

Cheers,

Tsjerk


--
gmx-users mailing list    gmx-users@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-requ...@gromacs.org.
Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/mailing_lists/users.php

Reply via email to