I modified atom coordinates of C2H2 and problem solved. But I don't know why.
- Welcome to iRASPA Community.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages1
#1
Output files / Re: WARNING: ENERGY DRIFT (INTERNAL CONSISTENCY ERROR IN THE CODE)
January 13, 2021, 06:53:12 AM #2
Output files / WARNING: ENERGY DRIFT (INTERNAL CONSISTENCY ERROR IN THE CODE)
January 12, 2021, 07:14:15 AM
Dear Prof. Dubbeldam and RASPA community,
I have used RASPA 2.0.37 for gas adsorption simulations in a Cu-MOF in last months.
I built myown forcefiled files based on Dubbeldam2012MIL-101, and got reasonable isotherm data for CH4 and CO2 adsorption. But encountered ENERGY DRIFT warning when I move to C2H2 (acetylene) adsorption, even at low pressure (e.g. 24Pa, 298K).
I found this warning would be eliminated when the charge of C_C2H2 and H_C2H2 equal to zero, but it leads to very low absolute adsorption (i.e., 0.02 cm^3/g. the experimental result is ~52 cm^3/g). When I set the charge of C_C2H2 and H_C2H2 as 0.278, I got close adsorption as experiment but ENERGY DRIFT warning occurs.
I tried to change, respectively, radii of Cu, C_C2H2 and H_C2H2 in pseudoatom.def, L-J parameters of Cu, C_C2H2 and H_C2H2 in force_field_mixing_rules.def. All of attempts led to dramatically changes in amount of total ENERGY DRIFT and seems no rules. Besides, I performed two runs, respectively, with the same input files, it gives very different total energy drift.
So how can I fix this problem, and how to build a proper forcefield for specific systems, is there some guidelines or skills?
Some parameters used in one of my jobs with the smallest total energy drift (1.11544) is attached :
I have used RASPA 2.0.37 for gas adsorption simulations in a Cu-MOF in last months.
I built myown forcefiled files based on Dubbeldam2012MIL-101, and got reasonable isotherm data for CH4 and CO2 adsorption. But encountered ENERGY DRIFT warning when I move to C2H2 (acetylene) adsorption, even at low pressure (e.g. 24Pa, 298K).
I found this warning would be eliminated when the charge of C_C2H2 and H_C2H2 equal to zero, but it leads to very low absolute adsorption (i.e., 0.02 cm^3/g. the experimental result is ~52 cm^3/g). When I set the charge of C_C2H2 and H_C2H2 as 0.278, I got close adsorption as experiment but ENERGY DRIFT warning occurs.
I tried to change, respectively, radii of Cu, C_C2H2 and H_C2H2 in pseudoatom.def, L-J parameters of Cu, C_C2H2 and H_C2H2 in force_field_mixing_rules.def. All of attempts led to dramatically changes in amount of total ENERGY DRIFT and seems no rules. Besides, I performed two runs, respectively, with the same input files, it gives very different total energy drift.
So how can I fix this problem, and how to build a proper forcefield for specific systems, is there some guidelines or skills?
Some parameters used in one of my jobs with the smallest total energy drift (1.11544) is attached :
Pages1