Unable to observe Insertion/Deletion in a GCMC simulation of xylene in zeolite

  • aagarwa6
  • aagarwa6's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • New Member
  • New Member
More
3 years 10 months ago #725 by aagarwa6
Thanks Ryan!

I generated the dihedrals in mcf file from the LigParGen web server for OPLS/AA atomic force field. I ended up using a mix of CHARMM and OPLS in mcf file because the atomistic file contained dihedrals of two types (in gromacs terms): mcf file "OPLS" = Ryckaert-Bellemans dihedral type3, and mcf file "CHARMM" = periodic improper dihedral type4.

Let me check the dihedrals more closely and incorporate conversion between dihedrals and test simulation. Thanks again for your valuable input!

Ankur

File Attachment:

File Name: Toluene_it...6-02.txt
File Size:7 KB
Attachments:

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
3 years 10 months ago - 3 years 10 months ago #726 by ryangmullen
Ah, if your last 6 dihedrals are intended to be improper dihedrals, then the order of the atoms is important. The central atom needs to be listed first. It looks like carbon 2 is bonded to carbons 1, 3, and 7, so dihedral 31 should have indices 2 1 3 7 rather than 7 2 1 3.

Also, the 3 parameters for the CHARMM dihedral need to be listed in the order: force_constant multiplicity angle_offset. For dihedral 31, I suspect your force_constant is 10.5 [kJ/mol], multiplicity is 4.0, and angle_offset is 180 [degrees], yes?
Last Edit: 3 years 10 months ago by ryangmullen.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • aagarwa6
  • aagarwa6's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • New Member
  • New Member
More
3 years 10 months ago #727 by aagarwa6
Oh yes, that makes sense.
I have wrongly used the order of dihedrals as-is when converting from topology to mcf. In addition, the multiplicity listed in my mcf is supposed to be 2.0, instead 4.0 (I just found it out) - for the improper dihedrals. You are correct, the angle_offset is 180 [degrees] and force_constant is 10.5 [kJ/mol].
Let me correct all these. Thanks!

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
3 years 10 months ago - 3 years 10 months ago #728 by ryangmullen
The force constants of your angle terms look to be too small. Are they in units of Kelvin/rad^2?
Last Edit: 3 years 10 months ago by ryangmullen.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • aagarwa6
  • aagarwa6's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • New Member
  • New Member
More
3 years 10 months ago #729 by aagarwa6
I see what you mean, the Cassandra bond angle force constant has units of K/rad^2, whereas the ones in gromacs topology is kJ/mol/rad^2. The force constants that I used in the mcf file therefore have the wrong units of kJ/mol/rad^2. That explains a lot about why my system was not working.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • aagarwa6
  • aagarwa6's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • New Member
  • New Member
More
3 years 10 months ago #730 by aagarwa6
I will use the conversion of 1 kJ/mol = 120.27311595710411 K to obtain correct mcf. Thanks for going through this minutely!

Ankur

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.128 seconds