[Pw_forum] why total energy vs. lattice parameter is not a parabola?
Stefano Baroni
baroni at sissa.it
Fri Oct 20 15:43:06 CEST 2006
On Oct 20, 2006, at 2:53 PM, H.S.Domingos wrote:
> I would suggest that you test all the potentials that you are using
> individually. By, for example, making small bulks with just one
> element.
> After you have made certain that the convergence of the cutoffs is
> addequate and that the k-point density also converges every
> calculation, then you consider a strontium titanate cell with all
> well tested.
Hi Helder: I think your suggestion is a sensible one, particularly in
what concerns the choice of the cutoff (which is an atomic property,
hence independent of the structure) vs. potential. As for k-point
sampling, instead, it depends on the specific band structure, and so
a k-point set that is adequate for a material may prove to be
inadequate (or even meaningless, if the structure is totally
different) for another ...
S.
> I have had a similar problem with ZnO and it is essential to get
> potentials, cutoffs, k-points and geometries right.
>
> I would also warn you that strontium titanate has displacive
> transitions and that for very large bulks your results should be
> different since there are coordination polyhedra that will be rotated.
>
>
> Helder
>
>
> ======================================================================
> =
> | Dr. Helder S.
> Domingos |
> |
> |
> | INESC Microsyst & Nanotechnol, Lisbon, P-1000
> Portugal |
> |
> and |
> | R&D unit for Molecular Chemical
> Physics |
> | Chemistry Department, University of
> Coimbra |
> ======================================================================
> =
>
>
> On Thu, 19 Oct 2006, vu ongphuong wrote:
>
>> Dear all users,
>>
>> I calculate the lattice canstant of SrTiO3. When I plot the
>> total energy vs. lattice parameter, the shape is not a parabola
>> even the lattice parameter is taken in very near-minimum-region.
>> The the lattice canstant obtained is 3.851Angstrong (the
>> experimental value 3.905)
>>
>> When I calculate with VASP package the result is 3.86 and the
>> total energy vs. lattice parameter is really a parabola.
>>
>> Anybody can explain me?
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> Do you Yahoo!?
>> Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail.
> _______________________________________________
> Pw_forum mailing list
> Pw_forum at pwscf.org
> http://www.democritos.it/mailman/listinfo/pw_forum
---
Stefano Baroni - SISSA & DEMOCRITOS National Simulation Center -
Trieste
[+39] 040 3787 406 (tel) -528 (fax) / stefanobaroni (skype)
Please, if possible, don't send me MS Word or PowerPoint attachments
Why? See: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/attachments/20061020/1aceb484/attachment.htm
More information about the Pw_forum
mailing list