[Wien] accuracy problem after running x sgroup

Stefaan Cottenier Stefaan.Cottenier at UGent.be
Tue Oct 26 13:51:37 CEST 2010


My guess might be wrong, but it looks like you call two atoms 
'bonded/unbonded' if there is/isn't a connecting rod between them in a 
3D display? If so, then you shouldn't worry. This is just a way of 
drawing (determined by the interatomic distance and the Z-value of the 
atoms involved). It has nothing to do with real chemical bonding. It is 
a display option that can be given as input in most (all) crystal viewers.

Stefaan


On 26/10/2010 11:06, shamik chakrabarti wrote:
> Dear Peter Blaha Sir and wien2k users,
>
>                                We have implemented your suggestion and
> was able to remove the space group tolerence problem. But still I have a
> question regarding the structure. In the energy and force optimized
> structure there are some atomic networks and atoms which are not bonded
> with each other. The networks and atoms are remain disconnected with the
> main atomic network. If we repeat the unit cell along x, y and z
> direction, some networks get bonded but still there remain some free
> networks and atoms. Thise happened as we replaced C atom in A2BCO4 by D
> atom. Due to this replacement lattice parameter enhances but the space
> group symmetry remains same. Hence the atoms which remain bonded in
> A2BCO4 separated much from each other and get unbonded in A2BDO4. *Now
> my question is this types of unbonded atomic structure is really
> feasible although the energy and force are minimum in that structure??....*
>
> In some experimentally generated pure phase structure also we have seen
> such unbonded atoms and atomic network. As they are already
> experimentally prepared they are feasible although in the unit cell some
> atoms can be shown to be remaind unbonded. *Then how can we explain the
> presence of the unbonded atomic networks in this experimentally prepared
> materials??...*
> *
> *
> *with best regards,*
> *Shamik Chakrabarti
> *
> On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 12:21 PM, shamik chakrabarti
> <shamikphy at gmail.com <mailto:shamikphy at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Dear Peter Blaha Sir,
>
>                                  Thank you very much for your reply. I
>     have understand what you have said and will try to implement the
>     same. Yes it should solve the problem. Thank you sir, thank you very
>     much!!....
>
>     with best regards,
>     Shamik Chakrabarti
>
>
>     On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 12:17 PM, Peter Blaha
>     <pblaha at theochem.tuwien.ac.at <mailto:pblaha at theochem.tuwien.ac.at>>
>     wrote:
>
>         Then it simply means, that after min_lapw your atoms arrived at
>         positions, which made them nearly equivalent, so that sgroup
>         does not know within its accuracy limits if two atoms are
>         equivalent or not.
>
>         Eventually "correct" positions manually, eg. setting atoms at
>         0.50002 to 0.50000  and so on.
>
>         Am 23.10.2010 08:42, schrieb shamik chakrabarti:
>
>             Dear Peter Blaha Sir,
>                                            I am using wien2k_08. No it
>             is not an
>             hexagonal lattice. Actually the space group is unknown. We
>             have taken a
>             structure A2BCO4 which has space group Pnma and then
>             *replace atom C
>             with atom D *considering *primitive space group*. We have
>             used the
>             atomic coordinates and lattice constants of A2BCO4. But we
>             have made all
>             the atoms inequivalent in the new material A2BDO4 by considering
>             primitive space group. It was done as we *do not want to
>             include the
>             symmetry constraints* for the atoms of this new material as
>             A2BDO4 may
>             have some different structure than A2BCO4. We want to see if
>             A2BDO4
>             structure is feasible or not and infact DFT has found a
>             structure with
>             minimum energy and minimum force on the atoms.
>
>             with best regards,
>             Shamik Chakrabarti
>             On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Peter Blaha
>             <pblaha at theochem.tuwien.ac.at
>             <mailto:pblaha at theochem.tuwien.ac.at>
>             <mailto:pblaha at theochem.tuwien.ac.at
>             <mailto:pblaha at theochem.tuwien.ac.at>>> wrote:
>
>                 Are you using WIEN2k_10 ???  It should not happen anymore.
>
>                 Hexagonal lattice ???  min_lapw could have produced atomic
>                 positions, which are not completely equivalent anymore (like
>                 0.3333333 and 0.666666) because of rounding errors.
>
>                 Check your atomic positions manually.
>
>                 Am 23.10.2010 06:22, schrieb shamik chakrabarti:
>
>                     Dear wien2k users,
>
>                                                  we have done structure
>             optimization
>                     (both
>                     volume and force) of a A2BCO4 type material. After
>             optimization the
>                     maximum force on an atom is *2.036 mRy/a.u.* After
>             optimization
>                     if we
>                     view the structure with xcrysden we can see that
>             some atoms remain
>                     unbonded i.e. one or two free atom and the rest of
>             the structure is
>                     connected through bond. Now my questions are:
>
>                                (1) Can such a structure be stable
>             although DFT has
>                     able to
>                     found a solution in which the energy of the unit
>             cell and forces
>                     on the
>                     atoms are minimum?
>
>                                (2) When I take this optimized struct
>             file and tried to
>                     initilize and run a SCF with this struct file, after
>             *x sgroup*
>                     command
>                     it will show :
>                     *Accuracy problem. Please run with different
>             tolerance (x sgroup
>                     -settol
>                     .00000100)*
>                     *
>                     *
>                                    Now if we ignore this problem or we
>             run the command x
>                     sgroup -settol 0.00000100, irrespective of that all
>             the atoms got
>                     deleted after x symmetry command!!
>
>                                    So, my question is whether this
>             optimized struct
>                     file is
>                     not feasible or is their any way to remove this
>             accuracy problem?
>
>                     any response will be very helpful for us. Thanking you,
>
>                     with regards,
>
>
>                     --
>                     Shamik Chakrabarti
>                     Research Scholar
>                     Dept. of Physics & Meteorology
>                     Material Processing & Solid State Ionics Lab
>                     IIT Kharagpur
>                     Kharagpur 721302
>                     INDIA
>
>
>
>                     _______________________________________________
>                     Wien mailing list
>             Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
>             <mailto:Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at>
>             <mailto:Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
>             <mailto:Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at>>
>
>             http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien
>
>
>                 --
>                 Peter Blaha
>                 Inst.Materials Chemistry
>                 TU Vienna
>                 Getreidemarkt 9
>                 A-1060 Vienna
>                 Austria
>                 +43-1-5880115671
>                 _______________________________________________
>                 Wien mailing list
>             Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
>             <mailto:Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at>
>             <mailto:Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
>             <mailto:Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at>>
>
>             http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien
>
>
>
>
>             --
>             Shamik Chakrabarti
>             Research Scholar
>             Dept. of Physics & Meteorology
>             Material Processing & Solid State Ionics Lab
>             IIT Kharagpur
>             Kharagpur 721302
>             INDIA
>
>
>
>             _______________________________________________
>             Wien mailing list
>             Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
>             <mailto:Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at>
>             http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien
>
>
>         --
>         Peter Blaha
>         Inst.Materials Chemistry
>         TU Vienna
>         Getreidemarkt 9
>         A-1060 Vienna
>         Austria
>         +43-1-5880115671
>         _______________________________________________
>         Wien mailing list
>         Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
>         <mailto:Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at>
>         http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien
>
>
>
>
>     --
>     Shamik Chakrabarti
>     Research Scholar
>     Dept. of Physics & Meteorology
>     Material Processing & Solid State Ionics Lab
>     IIT Kharagpur
>     Kharagpur 721302
>     INDIA
>
>
>
>
> --
> Shamik Chakrabarti
> Research Scholar
> Dept. of Physics & Meteorology
> Material Processing & Solid State Ionics Lab
> IIT Kharagpur
> Kharagpur 721302
> INDIA
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wien mailing list
> Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
> http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien



More information about the Wien mailing list