Dear Gromacs users:

I have been working on creating a topology for an exotic molecule. It contains 
aromatic rings and my parameters always seemed to allow the rings to buckle and 
become non-planer, much like a glucose ring would (though a little less 
extensively). However, I have managed to solve the problem by switching my 
proper (type 9) dihedral angles from angle = 0 degrees, multiplicity = 2 to 
angle = 180 degrees, multiplicity = 2. I thought that those two conditions 
should be equivalent and it was only by seriously simplifying the molecule down 
to a single ring and then toying with every conceivable parameter that I even 
hit on this. I am using gromacs 4.6.3 and have not tried other versions of 
gromacs, but this makes so little sense to me that I thought I would ask about 
it here. There are lots of proper dihedrals in the available force fields that 
use dihedrals with a set angle of zero degrees, though I do note that for any 
aromatic ring that I have seen they are always 180 deg (with mul
 tiplicity of 2 so that they can handle both cis and trans). Presumably I have 
just missed some obvious definition, but at least I can verify that if I switch 
even one proper dihedral from angle = 180 back to angle = 0 (with multiplicity 
= 2 in each case), then I start to see deformation of the ring's planarity.

Thank you for your help,
Chris.
-- 
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
https://maillist.sys.kth.se/mailman/listinfo/gromacs.org_gmx-users or send a 
mail to gmx-users-requ...@gromacs.org.

Reply via email to