Re: [AMBER] cutoff distance again

From: David A Case <case.biomaps.rutgers.edu>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 09:31:19 -0500

On Sat, Nov 26, 2011, Yun Shi wrote:
>
> I wonder, if I could implement different cutoff values for VDW and
> electrostatic interactions (i.e. in GROMACS), would that be theoretically
> better to use 9 angstroms for electrostatic cutoff and 14 angstroms for the
> VDW?

Yes, it would theoretically be better. Van der Waals interactions beyond the
cutoff are estimated from a continuum model, which works best for nearly
isotropic systems. If you have structures that are very different in one
direction than another, you might want to play around with using a longer
cutoff for vdW interactions than for electrostatics. This is easy to do in
the cpu version of pmemd; not yet implemented (as far as I know) in the cuda
version.

....dac


_______________________________________________
AMBER mailing list
AMBER.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
Received on Mon Nov 28 2011 - 07:00:03 PST
Custom Search