[gmx-users] on NVE and pressure
stelzer at umich.edu
Mon Apr 16 17:03:48 CEST 2007
sure, what room number in Palmer?
The University of Michigan
Chemical Biology Doctoral Program
Department of Chemistry &
Biophysics Research Division
900 N. University
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
On Apr 16, 2007, at 9:33 AM, lorix wrote:
> The goal of mine is to see whether I can simulate a large
> conformational change on an protein.
> A relative movement of one part respect another one, a rearrangment
> of on enzyme inactive state to its active one.
> When I started more than I year ago I thought this was the MD
> I am modifing the inactive state, present in a crystallographic
> structure, in a way that would lead to the conformational change
> and then simulating as accurate as possible.
> I guess that what I am interesting in is the conformation evolution
> of the protein system rather than monitoring parameters. For what I
> can understand this evolution is deterministically correlated with
> the atom velocities. So far I appreciated how trajectories changed
> depending on the initial conditions and on the used settings and
> Statistics over 624001 steps [ 114.0000 thru 738.0000 ps ], 1 data
> Energy Average RMSD Fluct.
> Drift Tot-Drift
> Total-Energy -464122 10572.6 0
> -58.7363 -36651.5
> The drift seems to me quite large compare to other simulations.
> Shouldn't the energy be constant in NVE?
> thanks for helping,
> Berk Hess wrote:
>>> From: lorix <Loris.Moretti at pharm.unige.ch>
>>> Reply-To: Discussion list for GROMACS users <gmx-users at gromacs.org>
>>> To: Discussion list for GROMACS users <gmx-users at gromacs.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [gmx-users] on NVE and pressure
>>> Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 12:25:15 +0200
>>> Hi Berk and Jelger,
>>> Thanks for your comments...
>>> Yes I equilibrated the system with Berendsen thermostat and
>>> barostat for 100ps and 200 ps and then switched them off.
>>> I thought that the coupling could have an influence in the final
>>> trajectory, because of the atom velocities scaling (?).
>>> Why does not make sense to run NVE after NPT?
>> You don't specify what your goals are, so I have to guess what you
>> MD is inherently chaotic and velocity correlations decay quickly,
>> so using NVE does, in general, not provide "better" velocities
>> than NVT.
>> NVT is usually what you want when your system is in thermal
>> Only when you have energy dissipation after an event which takes
>> your system
>> out of thermal equilibrium, i.e. pumps energy into the system,
>> it makes sense to use NVE.
>> However, when you equilibrate using NVT, this energy will already
>> be dissipated.
>>> The two systems (15000 and 40000 atoms) I am simulating at NVE
>>> both show increasing total energy:
>>> The first system had -154442 kJ mol^-1 as average for the 7-207
>>> psec NPT equilibration and -168837 kJ mol^-1 as average value for
>>> 1500-2000 ps of NVE.
>>> The second system had -445679 kJ mol^-1 as average for the 14-114
>>> psec NPT equilibration and -465630 kJ mol^-1 as average for the
>>> 300-600 ps of NVE equilibration.
>> For energy conservation you should not look at the average energy,
>> but the energy drift during your NVE simulation.
>> The average US Credit Score is 675. The cost to see yours: $0 by
>> Experian. http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?
>> gmx-users mailing list gmx-users at gromacs.org
>> Please search the archive at http://www.gromacs.org/search before
>> Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the www
>> interface or send it to gmx-users-request at gromacs.org.
>> Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/mailing_lists/users.php
> gmx-users mailing list gmx-users at gromacs.org
> Please search the archive at http://www.gromacs.org/search before
> Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the www
> interface or send it to gmx-users-request at gromacs.org.
> Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/mailing_lists/users.php
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the gmx-users