In fact, I tried setting nscm=0 and also the dsum_tol an order of
magnitude lower, but by this morning the energy loss was pretty much the
same. I set the SHAKE tolerance to 1.0e-6, so a full order of magnitude
lower rather than half its default value, and that seems to have finally
worked--the total energy is now stable. I actuallly had two systems I was
trying to do this for--the second had 136 glycerols and 1024 waters.
That second system was also lossing energy, though only about half as
severely; half as many glycerols, half as many SHAKE-constrained
hydrogens, half the rate of energy loss. (Water was constrained by SETTLE,
though I think I recall that pure water systems are also sensitive to the
SHAKE tolerance for some reason.) I don't know if anyone might find that
interesting...
Dave
On Mon, 17 Mar 2008, David Cerutti wrote:
> Heathen! Burn him!
>
> Yes, I mentioned at the coda to my query that I had looked very hard to make
> sure this system hard truly equilibrated, and have simulated it for many ns
> in NPT as well as NVT before beginning NVE dynamics. I suspected that the
> nscm may be slowly bleeding away energy; I think that my problems are solved,
> so thank you!
>
> Dave
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> The AMBER Mail Reflector
> To post, send mail to amber.scripps.edu
> To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amber" to majordomo.scripps.edu
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The AMBER Mail Reflector
To post, send mail to amber.scripps.edu
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amber" to majordomo.scripps.edu
Received on Fri Apr 18 2008 - 21:12:04 PDT
