Re: [gmx-users] Re: Re: Re: umbrella potential

2009-09-26 Thread Justin A. Lemkul
Stefan Hoorman wrote: Well, I tried again, this time simulating 1ns each window. I thought about simulating more, but thought of making a test before making longer simulations for nothing. And again, my histogram looks like a chromatographic peak, but the range this time is different. The re

[gmx-users] Re: Re: Re: umbrella potential

2009-09-26 Thread Stefan Hoorman
> Stefan Hoorman wrote: > > > I simulate 400 ps for each window. I have a total of 20 windows. My > > 400 ps is relatively short, especially given the speed of current hardware > and > of Gromacs 4.0. I generally see longer time periods in the literature. > > > histogram looks like a chromatograph

Re: [gmx-users] Re: Re: Re: umbrella potential

2009-09-21 Thread Justin A. Lemkul
Stefan Hoorman wrote: I have a test set which is comprised of the same constituents of my real system, except the solvent (i mean, it is in vacuum. This test set I use to (as the name says) test different different parameters without having to wait too much. I know it would not serve as a ve

[gmx-users] Re: Re: Re: umbrella potential

2009-09-21 Thread Stefan Hoorman
> > > Stefan Hoorman wrote: > > > > > > > The distances between the two structures in each of the windows > > are (in nm): > > > 0ps = 1.56 ; 500ps = 1.54; 1000ps = 1.56; 1500 = 1.56; 2000 = > > 1.52; 2500 > > > = 1.65; 3000 = 1.66; 3500 = 1.77; 4000 = 1.63; 4500 = 1.62; 5000