Re: [gmx-users] puzzling about ffnonbonded.itp

On 3/09/2012 6:02 PM, Wu Chaofu wrote: Dear gmxers, While I try to make one customed force field by studying some existing force fields, I find that bond_type and at.num defining [atomtypes ] in the ffnonbonded.itp are included in some force fields (i.e. oplsaa), but not in other force fields (i.

[gmx-users] puzzling about ffnonbonded.itp

Dear gmxers, While I try to make one customed force field by studying some existing force fields, I find that bond_type and at.num defining [atomtypes ] in the ffnonbonded.itp are included in some force fields (i.e. oplsaa), but not in other force fields (i.e gmx). I wonder how gmx identifies the d