Hi,
I tried using the regular PME method with and without corrections. The
results don't depend on the choice of ewald-geometry at all!
I used (Gromacs 5.1):
wall-ewald-zfac = 3
ewald-geometry = 3d ; This prompts a warning because I am using 2 walls
- 2d system. I forced this with maxwarn.
Hi,
I am using gmx potential to measure the electric field. I've reported the
values from field.xvg in my previous email. The field at the edges of the
ionic liquid near the walls will oscillate because of the electric double
layer but it is the bulk field I am concerned with.
I read the
On 11/11/17 16:44, Dan Gil wrote:
Hi,
Just wanted to see if anyone had any thoughts...
For more information, if I use:
wall-ewald-zfac = 3
E-z= 1 5 0
The electric field from ionic liquid has a magnitude of 7.5 V/nm in the
opposite direction to the applied electric field.
Hi,
Just wanted to see if anyone had any thoughts...
For more information, if I use:
wall-ewald-zfac = 3
E-z= 1 5 0
The electric field from ionic liquid has a magnitude of 7.5 V/nm in the
opposite direction to the applied electric field. This makes no sense to me
at all.
Hello,
I am studying room-temperature ionic liquids in slab geometry and I am
experiencing that I cannot get rid of the interactions between periodic
images in the z-direction. Is there something wrong with what I am doing or
is this inevitable?
The reason I think this is because when I change
