Trappe Cyclohexane

  • MonteCarlo83
  • MonteCarlo83's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Junior Member
  • Junior Member
More
7 years 9 months ago #211 by MonteCarlo83
Dear Cassandra-Developers and users,

I started to simulate Cyclohexane in the GEMC ensemble (your example) and in the NpT-Ensemble (1 bar and 298.15 K).
When I visualize the ensembles, I get very flat benzene-like molecules, which is kind of strange to me. Does not the Trappe force field give the right structure for cyclohexane or did I have make any mistakes.
For the NpT-ensemble I took your mcf-file and psb-file for creating a fragment library and for the GEMC ensemble I just used your example.

Best regards,
Mark

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
7 years 9 months ago #214 by emarin
Hi Mark!

There is an error in the input MCF dihedral parameters. Cassandra by default uses an OPLS functional form of the type

c0+c1[1+cos(ϕ)]+c2[1−cos(2ϕ)]+c3[1+cos(3ϕ)]

while the TraPPE cyclohexane dihedral functional form is

c0+c1cos(ϕ)+c2cos(2ϕ)+c3cos(3ϕ)

I did a quick conversion between the functional forms and I got the following parameters

Cyclohexane [K] OPLS[K] OPLS[KJ/mol]


c0 5073 1736 14.43
c1 6840 6840 56.87
c2 3509 -3509 -29.17
c3 63 63 0.5239

Can you confirm this numbers and see if you get right conformations?

Thanks!

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • MonteCarlo83
  • MonteCarlo83's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Junior Member
  • Junior Member
More
7 years 9 months ago #216 by MonteCarlo83
Hi emarin,

thanks for your quick reply. I will check it and try a new run.
I will tell you..

Best regards
Mark

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • MonteCarlo83
  • MonteCarlo83's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Junior Member
  • Junior Member
More
7 years 9 months ago #217 by MonteCarlo83
Hi,

I just calculated the parameters again. For c0 I get 13.959 kJ/mol.
I have the same values for the c1,c2 and c3.
I just started a new NpT with the new calculated parameters and after a quick check
the simulations started from the expected chair-like conformations (in contrast to the simulations with the wrong parameters).
Thanks a lot!

Best regards,
Mark

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
7 years 9 months ago #218 by emarin
You're right, it is 13.95.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.114 seconds