Hey,
You don't actually need to copy the trajectory. trjconv and other
tools are comfortable operating on an unfinished trajectory. They'll
just bail out at the end. As an alternative, here's a python one-liner
to extract the last frame (along with unfinished frames) from an XTC
trajectory:
python -c 'X=open("'$X'").read(); print X[X.rfind(X[:8]):]' > last.xtc
It will read in the whole trajectory in memory, so better not do it
with very large files ;)
Cheers,
Tsjerk
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Mark Abraham <mark.abra...@anu.edu.au> wrote:
> On 25/11/2011 6:53 PM, James Starlight wrote:
>
> This way I've already used but is this possible to extract Gro and trp files
> from uncompleated runs and not stopping this simulation ?
>
> Copy the trajectory file. Then use trjconv on the copy however suits you.
> You don't need a new .tpr, you need either the original .tpr or one that
> suits your analysis.
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> James
>
> 2011/11/25 Mark Abraham <mark.abra...@anu.edu.au>
>>
>> On 25/11/2011 6:38 PM, James Starlight wrote:
>>
>> Mark, Tsjerk thanks!
>>
>> I've check my uncompleated produced MD run by G_energy and find that
>> average pressure is 1.1 Bar that is most close to ref.
>>
>>
>> By the way could you tell me about extra possible ways of checking running
>> simmulation? ( E.g I'm calculating long produce trajectory and want to check
>> my uncompleated system ).
>>
>> As I understood One of the possible way is the ussage of G_energy but how
>> I could obtain GRO and TPR file from uncompleated MD trajectory ( .trr)
>> (recently I've asked about this but I've missed that topic ;o) ?
>>
>> Choose a length of time in advance that you are happy to risk being
>> wasted. Run that length of time, make a backup, check whatever you want to
>> check, then continue the simulation. As you acquire confidence, you will
>> want to increase that time (and like everyone you will regret that decision
>> at least once!)
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks again
>>
>> James
>>
>> 2011/11/25 Tsjerk Wassenaar <tsje...@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> Hi James,
>>>
>>> There have been extensive discussions about this on the list. Check the
>>> archives. In short, smaller systems give larger fluctuations, and shorter
>>> simulations give larger deviations from the expected average.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Tsjerk
>>>
>>> On Nov 25, 2011 7:23 AM, "James Starlight" <jmsstarli...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear Gromacs Users!
>>>
>>>
>>> At the present time I'm simulating small peptide (11 a.c in coiled
>>> conformation) in water.
>>>
>>> I've desided to use parameters from Lysozyme simmulation ( opls ff for
>>> parametrisation and all mdp parameters from that simulation).
>>>
>>> Because my peptide was smaller than typical globular protein I've desided
>>> to use bigger periodical box than in tutorial
>>>
>>> I've used editconf -c -d 1.5 -bt cubic instead of 1.0 nm in tutorial
>>> wich resulted in bigger box relative peptide size.
>>>
>>> so i have this box vectors 5.39318 5.39318 5.39318
>>>
>>> My experiment was in full agreement with the above tutorial until NVP
>>> phase was conducted. I have conducted 100ps equilibration but When I've
>>> checked average pressure it was 0.75 atm instead of 1 BAR and have big RMSD-
>>> 200. (also I've checked my system visually but it looks fine- I have not
>>> pointed any artifacts linked with unstable pressure like voids in the
>>> solvent etc). Should I equilibrate my sustem longer until pressure would not
>>> be stabilized to reference BAR? What another options should i take into
>>> account during simulation of the small peptides ?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> James
>>>
>>> --
>>> gmx-users mailing list gmx-users@gromacs.org
>>> http://lists.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-users
>>> Please search the archive at
>>> http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists/Search before posting!
>>> Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the
>>> www interface or send it to gmx-users-requ...@gromacs.org.
>>> Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists
>>>
>>> --
>>> gmx-users mailing list gmx-users@gromacs.org
>>> http://lists.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-users
>>> Please search the archive at
>>> http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists/Search before posting!
>>> Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the
>>> www interface or send it to gmx-users-requ...@gromacs.org.
>>> Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> gmx-users mailing list gmx-users@gromacs.org
>> http://lists.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-users
>> Please search the archive at
>> http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists/Search before posting!
>> Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the
>> www interface or send it to gmx-users-requ...@gromacs.org.
>> Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> gmx-users mailing list gmx-users@gromacs.org
> http://lists.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-users
> Please search the archive at
> http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists/Search before posting!
> Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the
> www interface or send it to gmx-users-requ...@gromacs.org.
> Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists
>
--
Tsjerk A. Wassenaar, Ph.D.
post-doctoral researcher
Molecular Dynamics Group
* Groningen Institute for Biomolecular Research and Biotechnology
* Zernike Institute for Advanced Materials
University of Groningen
The Netherlands
--
gmx-users mailing list gmx-users@gromacs.org
http://lists.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-users
Please search the archive at
http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists/Search before posting!
Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the
www interface or send it to gmx-users-requ...@gromacs.org.
Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists
