On 11/15/12 10:55 AM, Steven Neumann wrote:
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Justin Lemkul <[email protected]> wrote:


On 11/15/12 10:41 AM, Steven Neumann wrote:

atomtypes.atp

FE      55.84700 ;      heme iron 56

ffnonbonded

FE     9      18.998    0.000   A     0.115816833358244  -0

aminoacids.rtp

[ FE ]
   [ atoms ]
         FE      FE      2.00    0


Hmmmm, confusing...


What force field is that?  None of those parameters seem to come from any of
the default force fields in Gromacs. The entry in ffnonbonded is clearly
wrong, with the parameters appearing to belong to fluorine rather than iron,
but the line appears to have been mangled.  It looks most like CHARMM, but
someone has messed with ffnonbonded.itp.

Regardless, if you look at the parameters for FE in any of the force fields
in Gromacs, you will see that their nonbonded parameters (C6/C12 or
sigma/epsilon) are generally set to zero.  They interact only via ionic
interactions because they were likely only intended for use in cofactors
like heme, where other bonded parameters fix their geometry.  Using them as
free ions makes little sense.


-Justin


This is charmm27 but modified as you can see. Shall I use:

FE      26      55.84700        2.000   A       0.115816833358  0            0

in original Gromacs charmm it is

FE      26      55.84700        0.000   A       0.115816833358  0.0 ; partial 
charge def not found


These changes will have no effect and will not solve your problem. The charge field in ffnonbonded.itp is never used for anything. I don't know what the extra zero is intended for, but it will probably break the ability of grompp to read the file.

Moreover, the point of my previous comments was that your use of this atom type is not appropriate. The FE atom type still has zero repulsive interactions, unless explicitly calculated with each atom type. As far as I can tell from ffnonbonded.itp, this repulsive term is zero for every interaction, meaning no matter what you do, your Fe ions will always collide with something negatively charged because there are no LJ terms to impede the Coulombic attraction, leading to an infinitely negative potential at a fixed point and thus the crash.

You need to find better parameters entirely if you wish to simulate free Fe 
ions.

-Justin

--
========================================

Justin A. Lemkul, Ph.D.
Research Scientist
Department of Biochemistry
Virginia Tech
Blacksburg, VA
jalemkul[at]vt.edu | (540) 231-9080
http://www.bevanlab.biochem.vt.edu/Pages/Personal/justin

========================================
--
gmx-users mailing list    [email protected]
http://lists.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-users
* Please search the archive at 
http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists/Search before posting!
* Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the www interface or send it to [email protected].
* Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists

Reply via email to