Re: [AMBER-Developers] ff14SB strange parameter assignment

From: B. Lachele Foley <lfoley.ccrc.uga.edu>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 17:23:09 +0000

Hi!

I'll take a look at the table. It might need updating.

We now use uppercase-lowercase type names, e.g., Cg rather than CG. The various ffs decided this mutually to avoid parms clashes.

:-) Lachele

Dr. B. Lachele Foley
Associate Research Scientist
Complex Carbohydrate Research Center
The University of Georgia
Athens, GA USA
lfoley.uga.edu
http://glycam.org

________________________________________
From: Gerald Monard <Gerald.Monard.univ-lorraine.fr>
Sent: Friday, June 26, 2015 7:42 AM
To: AMBER Developers Mailing List
Subject: Re: [AMBER-Developers] ff14SB strange parameter assignment

Hello,

I don't know if every body is aware of this: there is a web page
(http://ambermd.org/doc/AtomTypesTableWorkspace.xhtml) that lists all
the atom types that are defined in the different "amber" force fields.

Thanks to "git blame", the author is Daniel from a
AtomTypesTableWorkspace.lyx file (available in the doc/ directory of the
amber master tree) by Lachele. Thanks to both of them for providing this
useful information :-).
 From that file, it seems that CG is already defined in GLYCAM...

Gerald.

P.S.: It dates from 2012 and does not include ff14SB, but there should
be some way to automate the process.

On 06/26/2015 04:13 AM, James Maier wrote:
> Thanks, Jason.
>
> I have deleted the line in the master branch. We can safely move on :-)
>
> Best,
>
> James
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Jason Swails <jason.swails.gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone (although probably James in particular),
>>
>> Someone recently brought up a potential concern within frcmod.ff14SB. In
>> particular, there is a line:
>>
>> HP-CX-CG 50.0 109.50 changed based on NMA nmodes (was CT-CT-HP)
>>
>> that defines an angle parameter involving atom type CG. However, atom type
>> CG doesn't exist in the ff14SB force field (it's not defined in parm10.dat
>> or anywhere else). As-is, this line is a no-op and has no effect on the
>> force field at all. But could this be a typo? Perhaps it was *intended*
>> that CG be replaced with a different atom type? Or can we just delete this
>> line and move on?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jason
>>
>> --
>> Jason M. Swails
>> BioMaPS,
>> Rutgers University
>> Postdoctoral Researcher
>> _______________________________________________
>> AMBER-Developers mailing list
>> AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
>> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
>>
> _______________________________________________
> AMBER-Developers mailing list
> AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
>

--
____________________________________________________________________________
  Prof. Gerald MONARD
  SRSMC, Université de Lorraine, CNRS
  Boulevard des Aiguillettes B.P. 70239
  F-54506 Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy, FRANCE
  e-mail : Gerald.Monard.univ-lorraine.fr
  tel.   : +33 (0)383.684.381
  fax    : +33 (0)383.684.371
  web    : http://www.monard.info
____________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
AMBER-Developers mailing list
AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
_______________________________________________
AMBER-Developers mailing list
AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
Received on Fri Jun 26 2015 - 10:30:02 PDT
Custom Search