RE: [gmx-users] Transition difficulties: version 3.3.3 to 4.0.3 regarding pull_geometry=distance

2009-01-28 Thread Berk Hess
Hi, This issue has been resolved. It was indeed a problem of a pull group consisting of multiple molecules. In this case the choice of the pull_pbcatom mdp parameter was critical. If you do not set this, it takes the numerically middle atom of the group. In this case that was an atom in a lipid h

Re: [gmx-users] Question about the dihedrals in top file using OPLS force field in GROMACS

2009-01-28 Thread Mark Abraham
Yanmei Song wrote: [ dihedrals ] ; ai aj ak al fuc0, c1, m, ... 1 2 5 6 10.03.77 30.03.77 3 ; dih CAA CBF OAW CBH 2 5 6 9 10.03.77 30.03.77 3 ; dih CBF OAW CBH OAY 5 6 9 10 10.03.77 30.03.77

Re: [gmx-users] Question about the dihedrals in top file using OPLS force field in GROMACS

2009-01-28 Thread Yanmei Song
[ dihedrals ] ; ai aj ak al fuc0, c1, m, ... 1 2 5 6 10.03.77 30.03.77 3 ; dih CAA CBF OAW CBH 2 5 6 9 10.03.77 30.03.77 3 ; dih CBF OAW CBH OAY 5 6 9 10 10.03.77 30.03.77 3 ; dih OAW CBH

Re: [gmx-users] Question about the dihedrals in top file using OPLS force field in GROMACS

2009-01-28 Thread Justin A. Lemkul
Yanmei Song wrote: What makes me so confused is that I used this top for the MD run using ffoplsaa.itp and the there are no error message. Also I got a good result compared to experiment. Does it mean that what I did is totally wrong with using this top in combination with OPLS? Well, the nu

Re: [gmx-users] Question about the dihedrals in top file using OPLS force field in GROMACS

2009-01-28 Thread Yanmei Song
What makes me so confused is that I used this top for the MD run using ffoplsaa.itp and the there are no error message. Also I got a good result compared to experiment. Does it mean that what I did is totally wrong with using this top in combination with OPLS? Also if I used the atom type in opls_

Re: [gmx-users] Question about the dihedrals in top file using OPLS force field in GROMACS

2009-01-28 Thread Justin A. Lemkul
Yanmei Song wrote: Hi,Justin: Thanks for your response. I have read that part and still confused. Does it mean that if I choose the ffoplsaa.itp in my top, I used the RB potential for Dihedrals or the periodic type? Also actually I can only get the parameters for phi, cp and mult (listed abov

Re: [gmx-users] Question about the dihedrals in top file using OPLS force field in GROMACS

2009-01-28 Thread Yanmei Song
Hi,Justin: Thanks for your response. I have read that part and still confused. Does it mean that if I choose the ffoplsaa.itp in my top, I used the RB potential for Dihedrals or the periodic type? Also actually I can only get the parameters for phi, cp and mult (listed above) Can I use these para

Re: [gmx-users] Question about the dihedrals in top file using OPLS force field in GROMACS

2009-01-28 Thread Mark Abraham
Yanmei Song wrote: Hi, I am using ffoplsaa.itp as my force field to do a simulation using GROMACS. I have a question about how to write the parameters in dihedrals in the itp file. [ dihedrals ] ; ai aj ak al fuc0, c1, m, ... 1 2 5 6 10.03.77 30.03.77 3 ;

Re: [gmx-users] Question about the dihedrals in top file using OPLS force field in GROMACS

2009-01-28 Thread Justin A. Lemkul
Yanmei Song wrote: Hi, I am using ffoplsaa.itp as my force field to do a simulation using GROMACS. I have a question about how to write the parameters in dihedrals in the itp file. [ dihedrals ] ; ai aj ak al fuc0, c1, m, ... 1 2 5 6 10.03.77 30.03.77 3

[gmx-users] Question about the dihedrals in top file using OPLS force field in GROMACS

2009-01-28 Thread Yanmei Song
Hi, I am using ffoplsaa.itp as my force field to do a simulation using GROMACS. I have a question about how to write the parameters in dihedrals in the itp file. [ dihedrals ] ; ai aj ak al fuc0, c1, m, ... 1 2 5 6 10.03.77 30.03.77 3 ; dih CAA CBF OAW

RE: [gmx-users] "nstlist=-1" and performance problem

2009-01-28 Thread LuLanyuan
Hi, It's in the gmx4.0 manual. Just check the part for mdp options. I guess it is the method in DLPOLY and many text books. Lanyuan From: x.peri...@rug.nl To: gmx-users@gromacs.org Subject: Re: [gmx-users] "nstlist=-1" and performance problem Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 23:28:25 +0100 Hi, Any docume

RE: [gmx-users] "nstlist=-1" and performance problem

2009-01-28 Thread LuLanyuan
Hi, No warning was found. Is it because the use of "User" vdw potential? The mdp file is the following: title= A cpp = cpp include = -I../top define = integrator = md dt = 0.001 nsteps

Re: Fwd: [gmx-users] Invalid atom number 6415 in indexfile

2009-01-28 Thread Justin A. Lemkul
Liu Shiyong wrote: Hi, Thank for your helpful reply. I understand your feeling. If you have time, please see the following. mdrun has an option to output the final structure(-c). I just knew it after reading your post and checked again :< Thanks . Firstly, I run a minimized com

Re: Fwd: [gmx-users] Invalid atom number 6415 in indexfile

2009-01-28 Thread Mark Abraham
Liu Shiyong wrote: Hi, *Step 2:* Starting structure: clean2.pdb I am trying to calculate the energy according to energy groups pdb2gmx -ff G53a6 -f clean2.pdb -p clean2_0.6.top -i clean2_0.6.posre.itp -o clean2_0.6.gro > clean2_0.6.output.pdb2gmx 2>&1 make_ndx -f clean2.pdb -o clean

Fwd: [gmx-users] Invalid atom number 6415 in indexfile

2009-01-28 Thread Liu Shiyong
Hi, Thank for your helpful reply. I understand your feeling. If you have time, please see the following. mdrun has an option to output the final structure(-c). I just knew it after reading your post and checked again :< Thanks . Firstly, I run a minimized command to get the minimized

Re: [gmx-users] "nstlist=-1" and performance problem

2009-01-28 Thread XAvier Periole
Hi, Any documentation on how this is actually done? Sounds interesting! XAvier. On Jan 28, 2009, at 11:12 PM, LuLanyuan wrote: Hi Berk, Thanks very much. I've found the problem. As you said I forgot to increase rvdw. So the buffer is zero and the system needs to update the nblist every s

RE: [gmx-users] "nstlist=-1" and performance problem

2009-01-28 Thread Berk Hess
Hi, But grompp should have given a warning about this. You should have only obtained a tpr file when using the -maxwarn option of grompp. Or did grompp not give a warning about the buffer being too small? Berk From: lulany...@msn.com To: gmx-users@gromacs.org Subject: RE: [gmx-users] "nstlist=

RE: [gmx-users] "nstlist=-1" and performance problem

2009-01-28 Thread LuLanyuan
Hi Berk, Thanks very much. I've found the problem. As you said I forgot to increase rvdw. So the buffer is zero and the system needs to update the nblist every step, which is obviously wrong. After I corrected the mistake, the speed for "nstlist=-1" is roughly three times faster as I expected.

[gmx-users] Re: decoupling charge while maintaining intramolecular potentials

2009-01-28 Thread Michael Shirts
> I guess that what you want to do is exactly what the decouple mdp options do. > You probably don't need modify any topology files. > If couple-intramol=no (default) than all intra-molecular interactions are not > turned > off and are plain LJ/Coulomb without cut-off. Ah, this was implemented, t

RE: [gmx-users] free_energy = yes & init_lambda = 0.00 does not yield identical energies to free_energy = no.

2009-01-28 Thread Berk Hess
Hi, This looks like a bug, unless you have very exotic settings. Could you mail me all your input files required to run grompp? Berk > Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:46:46 -0500 > From: chris.ne...@utoronto.ca > To: gmx-users@gromacs.org > Subject: [gmx-users] free_energy = yes & init_lambda = 0.0

[gmx-users] free_energy = yes & init_lambda = 0.00 does not yield identical energies to free_energy = no.

2009-01-28 Thread chris . neale
Hi Berk, the difference remains when utilizing double precision: free energy code on with lambda=0.00: Coulomb (SR) = -3.23064e+05 free energy code off: Coulomb (SR) = -3.22653e+05 Here are the full double precision values: ; Free energy control stuff free_energy = no Energies

Re: [gmx-users] Invalid atom number 6415 in indexfile

2009-01-28 Thread Justin A. Lemkul
Liu Shiyong wrote: Hi, Did you get my script ? As I said just a few days ago, I don't run jobs for people. I only have allocated time on our University's cluster, which I need for myself. That said, it is also very difficult to go through someone's scripting, laden with variables that

Re: [gmx-users] charge groups

2009-01-28 Thread Justin A. Lemkul
Liu Shiyong wrote: Fatal error: atoms 4176 and 4182 in charge group 1767 are in different energy groups PDB: ATOM 4176 OG SER A 541 -13.599 44.346 39.228 1.00 0.00 S1 ATOM 4177 N ALA A 542 -12.827 48.211 42.079 1.00 0.00 A1 ATOM 4178 CA ALA A 5

[gmx-users] charge groups

2009-01-28 Thread Liu Shiyong
Hi, In the manual: " Consider a water molecule interacting with another atom. When we would apply the cutoff an on atom-atom basis we might include the atom-Oxygen interaction(with a charge of -0.82) without the compensating charge of the protons and so induce a large dipole moment over t

Re: [gmx-users] Invalid atom number 6415 in indexfile

2009-01-28 Thread Liu Shiyong
Hi, Did you get my script ? I dump a frame from .trr file. I did not define xtc-grps On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Justin A. Lemkul wrote: > > > Liu Shiyong wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I got an error when do grompp: The input PDB file comes from the output >> of GROMACS by trajconv command. >>

[gmx-users] range of magnitude for force constant

2009-01-28 Thread chris . neale
I see two potential problems that might arise with very large force constants. 1. If you start far from equilibrium your system will most definitely crash. It appears that this is not going to be an issue for you here though. 2. The less mass in your groups and the higher the force constant

[gmx-users] decoupling charge while maintaining intramolecular potentials

2009-01-28 Thread chris . neale
Thanks Berk and Michael for all of your assistance, Chris. -- original message -- I guess that what you want to do is exactly what the decouple mdp options do. You probably don't need modify any topology files. If couple-intramol=no (default) than all intra-molecular interactions are not turn

[gmx-users] range of magnitude for force constant

2009-01-28 Thread Terry Nelson
Hi, I have rather elementary questions regarding force constants used in restraining position/orientation: - I have imposed a force with constants kx, ky, and kz =10^6 kJ/mol/nm^2 on a particular atom of a peptide to harmonically position restrain the molecule inside a bilayer. Is it a

[gmx-users] PhD position in Computational Structural Biology at Cambridge, UK

2009-01-28 Thread Swanand Gore
A PhD student position is available to develop new protein modelling methods which can be applied to drug design. The successful candidate will work in collaboration with the Blundell and Hyvonen groups in the Cambridge University Biochemistry Department and industrial CASE award sponsors Eli Lilly

RE: [gmx-users] Re: decoupling charge while maintaining intramolecular potentials

2009-01-28 Thread Berk Hess
Hi, I guess that what you want to do is exactly what the decouple mdp options do. You probably don't need modify any topology files. If couple-intramol=no (default) than all intra-molecular interactions are not turned off and are plain LJ/Coulomb without cut-off. Berk > Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009

Re: [gmx-users] Help

2009-01-28 Thread Tsjerk Wassenaar
Hi Jason, Unfortunately for you this is not the gmx.com-mail-users forum, but the gmx-shorthand-for-the-gromacs-program-users forum. So unless you want to try and simulate wildlife - for which there are better programs - you're probably better off at www.gmx.com. Now, if I help you out, am I ellig

RE: [gmx-users] free_energy = yes & init_lambda = 0.00 does not yield identical energies to free_energy = no.

2009-01-28 Thread Berk Hess
From: g...@hotmail.com To: gmx-users@gromacs.org Subject: RE: [gmx-users] free_energy = yes & init_lambda = 0.00 does not yield identical energies to free_energy = no. Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 10:48:57 +0100 Hi, I would also expect the same results. I have no clue what kind of sys

RE: [gmx-users] free_energy = yes & init_lambda = 0.00 does not yield identical energies to free_energy = no.

2009-01-28 Thread Berk Hess
Hi, I would also expect the same results. I have no clue what kind of system you have. But check that it is not an accuracy issue. Could you recalculate the energies in double results. Berk > Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 20:00:23 -0500 > From: chris.ne...@utoronto.ca > To: gmx-users@gromacs.org > Sub

RE: [gmx-users] Transition difficulties: version 3.3.3 to 4.0.3 regarding pull_geometry=distance

2009-01-28 Thread Berk Hess
Hi, You can mail the system to me. Please include all the details required to run the system and the different results you get with the exact Gromacs version numbers. Berk > Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 00:52:06 -0500 > From: fied...@umich.edu > To: gmx-users@gromacs.org > Subject: Re: [gmx-users] Tr

RE: [gmx-users] "nstlist=-1" and performance problem

2009-01-28 Thread Berk Hess
Hi, I assume you did not only change nstlist, but also other mdp settings, or not? Changing only nstlist from 1 to -1 should result in nearly equal or much faster speeds. For efficient simulations with nslist=-1 you need to set an appropriate buffer region (rlist > rcoulomb=rvdw). In 4.0 you h

[gmx-users] Help

2009-01-28 Thread Jason Holley - Untamed African Safaris
Please advise how I can contact a GMX administrator if I am having trouble with my Email * * * * * * * * * * * * Untamed African Safaris P.O. Box 041, Maun, Botswana. Tel: +267 72449047; Fax: +267 6800665 Email: jason-unt