Re: [gmx-users] Atomic charges

2015-09-17 Thread M.Cristina Donnamaria
Hello, from my own expierence I can say that atomic charges calculated with Gaussian are good charges. 2015-09-17 1:37 GMT-03:00 Pallavi Banerjee < pallavis...@students.iiserpune.ac.in>: > Thanks Justin. Things are clearer now. > > -Pallavi Banerjee > -- > Gromacs Users mailing list > > * Please

Re: [gmx-users] Atomic charges

2015-09-16 Thread Pallavi Banerjee
Thanks Justin. Things are clearer now. -Pallavi Banerjee -- Gromacs Users mailing list * Please search the archive at http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists/GMX-Users_List before posting! * Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists * For (un)subscribe requests visit

Re: [gmx-users] Atomic charges

2015-09-16 Thread Justin Lemkul
On 9/16/15 12:27 AM, Pallavi Banerjee wrote: Hello users, I have this confusion regarding the atomic charges that gromacs sees. I have defined my residues in aminoacids.rtp file with my own charges, but the atom types for the same in the ffnonbonded.itp have different charges on them. Which of

Re: [gmx-users] Atomic charges

2015-09-16 Thread Pallavi Banerjee
The forcefield is OPLS-AA. I put in the modified charges for the residue in the aminoacids.rtp file. The topology generated also shows the same charges that I put. But I was wondering if the charges defined for the atomtypes in the ffnonbonded.itp overrride these. Thanks and regards, -Pallavi Ban

Re: [gmx-users] Atomic charges

2015-09-15 Thread Chandan Choudhury
Which force field are you using? How did you obtain the charges? OPLSAA has its own charges., which can be modified for new molecules. Chandan On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Pallavi Banerjee < pallavis...@students.iiserpune.ac.in> wrote: > Hello users, > > I have this confusion regarding the a

[gmx-users] Atomic charges

2015-09-15 Thread Pallavi Banerjee
Hello users, I have this confusion regarding the atomic charges that gromacs sees. I have defined my residues in aminoacids.rtp file with my own charges, but the atom types for the same in the ffnonbonded.itp have different charges on them. Which of the two charges would Gromacs pick? Thank you.

Re: [gmx-users] Atomic charges: RESP or AM1-BCC

2014-05-19 Thread Alan
Dear Oliver, I’d recommend to try http://q4md-forcefieldtools.org/REDS/. If you did all right, it should t least confirm your RESP results. Alan On 19 May 2014 07:20, Oliver Schillinger wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I am trying to parametrize a ligand for use with the amber force fields > (amber99

[gmx-users] Atomic charges: RESP or AM1-BCC

2014-05-19 Thread Oliver Schillinger
Hi everyone, I am trying to parametrize a ligand for use with the amber force fields (amber99sb-nmr1 in particular: https://research.chemistry.ohio-state.edu/bruschweiler/protein-force-field/). The ligand is EGCG (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigallocatechin_gallate). The main focus of our s