[Wien] resolution dependent F(HKL)s from lapw3

Georg Eickerling georg.eickerling at physik.uni-augsburg.de
Thu Aug 23 08:50:08 CEST 2012


Thank you very much for the replies!

Here are some more details:

Sphere part:

st/l = 1.1:
  5 -3 -5  1.0767  -0.7523  -0.7411  0.00244  0.00000  0.00107
0.00000 -0.01465
  3 -1 -7  1.0767  -0.7386  -0.7411 -0.00127  0.00000 -0.00030
0.00000  0.00410

st/l = 1.2:
  3 -1 -7  1.0767  -0.7386  -0.7411 -0.00127  0.00000 -0.00030
0.00000  0.00410
  5 -3 -5  1.0767  -0.7523  -0.7411  0.00244  0.00000  0.00107
0.00000 -0.01465

st/l = 1.3:
 -3 -5 -5  1.0767  -0.7523  -0.7411  0.00244  0.00000  0.00107
0.00000 -0.01465
 -1 -3 -7  1.0767  -0.7386  -0.7411 -0.00127  0.00000 -0.00030
0.00000  0.00410

st/l = 1.8
 -3 -5 -5  1.0767  -0.7523  -0.7411  0.00244  0.00000  0.00107
0.00000 -0.01465
 -1 -3 -7  1.0767  -0.7386  -0.7411 -0.00127  0.00000 -0.00030
0.00000  0.00410

PW part:

st/l = 1.1:
   -3   -5   -5      0.0665201058405473      1.0766653378172495
   -1   -3   -7      0.0345681054384858      1.0766653378172495

st/l = 1.2:
   -3   -5   -5      0.0665201058405473      1.0766653378172495
   -1   -3   -7      0.0345681054384858      1.0766653378172495

st/l = 1.3:
   -3   -5   -5      0.0665201058405473      1.0766653378172495
   -1   -3   -7      0.0345681054384858      1.0766653378172495


stl/l = 1.8:
   -3   -5   -5      0.0665201058405473      1.0766653378172495
   -1   -3   -7      0.0345681054384858      1.0766653378172495


But then:


"Sum":

st/l = 1.1:
   -3   -5   -5   1.0766653       -1.4379800081
   -1   -3   -7   1.0766653       -1.4425910379

st/l = 1.2:
   -3   -5   -5   1.0766653       -1.4106390375
   -1   -3   -7   1.0766653       -1.4699320085

st/l = 1.3:
   -3   -5   -5   1.0766653       -1.4379800081
   -1   -3   -7   1.0766653       -1.4425910379

stl/l = 1.8:
   -3   -5   -5   1.0766653       -1.4379800081
   -1   -3   -7   1.0766653       -1.4425910379



Second example at higher res (data in the order st/l =1.2,  1.3,  1.8):

Sphere:
  6  0 -6  1.1894   0.8887   0.8902 -0.00212  0.00000  0.00068
0.00000  0.00000
  6  0 -6  1.1894   0.8887   0.8902 -0.00212  0.00000  0.00068
0.00000  0.00000
  0 -6 -6  1.1894  -0.8887  -0.8902  0.00212  0.00000 -0.00068
0.00000  0.00000

PW:
    0   -6   -6     -0.0362599474060042      1.1893809383585805
    0   -6   -6     -0.0362599474060042      1.1893809383585805
    0   -6   -6     -0.0362599474060042      1.1893809383585805

Sum:
    0   -6   -6   1.1893809        1.7411783356
    0   -6   -6   1.1893809       -1.8246688899
    0   -6   -6   1.1893809       -1.8136982305


This is a "default" run by the way, so I am using a GMAX of 12 which
gives st/l = 1.8. What I see in addition in output3 is this:

 KVEC            0          -8          -8 IN DENSITY
  LIST NOT FOUND IN GENERATED K LIST
 KVEC           -1          -7          -9 IN DENSITY
  LIST NOT FOUND IN GENERATED K LIST
 KVEC           -2          -8          -8 IN DENSITY
  LIST NOT FOUND IN GENERATED K LIST
 KVEC            0          -6         -10 IN DENSITY
  LIST NOT FOUND IN GENERATED K LIST
 KVEC           -3          -7          -9 IN DENSITY
  LIST NOT FOUND IN GENERATED K LIST
 KVEC           -2          -6         -10 IN DENSITY
  LIST NOT FOUND IN GENERATED K LIST
 KVEC           -4          -8          -8 IN DENSITY
  LIST NOT FOUND IN GENERATED K LIST
 KVEC           -1          -5         -11 IN DENSITY
  LIST NOT FOUND IN GENERATED K LIST
 KVEC           -4          -6         -10 IN DENSITY
  LIST NOT FOUND IN GENERATED K LIST
 KVEC           -5          -7          -9 IN DENSITY
  LIST NOT FOUND IN GENERATED K LIST
 KVEC           -3          -5         -11 IN DENSITY
  LIST NOT FOUND IN GENERATED K LIST
 KVEC            0          -4         -12 IN DENSITY
  LIST NOT FOUND IN GENERATED K LIST
 KVEC           -6          -8          -8 IN DENSITY
  LIST NOT FOUND IN GENERATED K LIST
 KVEC           -2          -4         -12 IN DENSITY
  LIST NOT FOUND IN GENERATED K LIST




Am 23.08.2012 07:37, schrieb Peter Blaha:
> Thank's for the report. I'll check that.
> 
> But in the meantime you could do some more analysis and compare the
> case.output3 files of two different runs.
> Are the differences coming from inside the spheres or from the
> interstital
> region ? (I expect the latter !)
> 
> Am 22.08.2012 18:32, schrieb Georg Eickerling:
>> Dear WIEN users,
>>
>> I noticed a strange behavior of lapw3 which I do not understand:
>>
>> Take for example a simple diamond case and calculate structure
>> factors from clmsum, lets say up to sin theta/lambda = 1.0:
>>
>>      0    0    0   0.0000000       12.0000251726
>>     -1   -1   -1   0.2427814       -4.6536716863
>>      0    0   -2   0.2803398        0.0000000000
>>      0   -2   -2   0.3964603       -3.9459734623
>>     -1   -1   -3   0.4648909       -2.3988162763
>>     -2   -2   -2   0.4855627        0.2266152403
>>      0    0   -4   0.5606796       -3.1297582248
>>     -1   -3   -3   0.6109864        2.2069300710
>>      0   -2   -4   0.6268588        0.0000000000
>>     -2   -2   -4   0.6866894        2.8777607788
>>     -3   -3   -3   0.7283441        1.9393120414
>>     -1   -1   -5   0.7283441        1.9663566686
>>      0   -4   -4   0.7929206        2.6458269883
>>     -1   -3   -5   0.8292562        1.8056937118
>>     -2   -4   -4   0.8410193       -0.0171687161
>>      0    0   -6   0.8410193        0.0000000000
>>      0   -2   -6   0.8865122        2.4363270068
>>     -3   -3   -5   0.9191554       -1.6841664183
>>     -2   -2   -6   0.9297818       -0.0087306004
>>     -4   -4   -4   0.9711255       -2.2589221048
>>
>> Repeating this calculation with sin theta/lambda = 1.1 and a diff
>> with the old hkl will just show the additional reflections as
>> expected:
>>
>> diff hkl.10 hkl.11
>> 20a21,26
>>>     -1   -5   -5   1.0010132        1.6970975057
>>>     -1   -1   -7   1.0010132        1.5391902602
>>>      0   -4   -6   1.0107794        0.0000000000
>>>     -2   -4   -6   1.0489354       -2.0944311378
>>>     -3   -5   -5   1.0766653       -1.4379800081
>>>     -1   -3   -7   1.0766653       -1.4425910379
>>
>> Now again repeat the calculation with sin theta/lambda = 1.2:
>>
>> diff hkl.11 hkl.12
>> 25,26c25,32
>> <    -3   -5   -5   1.0766653       -1.4379800081
>> <    -1   -3   -7   1.0766653       -1.4425910379
>> ---
>>>     -3   -5   -5   1.0766653       -1.4106390375
>>>     -1   -3   -7   1.0766653       -1.4699320085
>>>      0    0   -8   1.1213591        1.9443586030
>>>     -3   -3   -7   1.1473400        1.3618747163
>>>     -4   -4   -6   1.1558705        0.0030399053
>>>      0   -2   -8   1.1558705        0.0000000000
>>>      0   -6   -6   1.1893809        1.7411783356
>>>     -2   -2   -8   1.1893809       -1.8133181764
>>
>> What happens here? Why are reflections which were exactly the same
>> before suddenly different? Why I worry about this is, that if you go
>> on increasing the resolution, the differences become more severe
>> than in the example above, i.e. sin theta/lambda = 1.3:
>>
>> diff hkl.12 hkl.13
>> 21,22c21,22
>> <    -1   -5   -5   1.0010132        1.6970975057
>> <    -1   -1   -7   1.0010132        1.5391902602
>> ---
>>>     -1   -5   -5   1.0010132       -1.5542465484
>>>     -1   -1   -7   1.0010132        1.5480881986
>>
>> On the other hand, the differences "converge" for a given reflection
>> but more and more become "affected",  i.e. sin theta/lambda = 1.8
>> vs. 1.2:
>>
>>
>> diff hkl.12 hkl.18
>> 21,22c21,22
>> <    -1   -5   -5   1.0010132        1.6970975057
>> <    -1   -1   -7   1.0010132        1.5391902602
>> ---
>>>     -1   -5   -5   1.0010132       -1.5542465484
>>>     -1   -1   -7   1.0010132        1.5480881986
>> 25,26c25,26
>> <    -3   -5   -5   1.0766653       -1.4106390375
>> <    -1   -3   -7   1.0766653       -1.4699320085
>> ---
>>>     -3   -5   -5   1.0766653       -1.4379800081
>>>     -1   -3   -7   1.0766653       -1.4425910379
>> 28c28
>> <    -3   -3   -7   1.1473400        1.3618747163
>> ---
>>>     -3   -3   -7   1.1473400       -1.3370357923
>> 31c31
>> <     0   -6   -6   1.1893809        1.7411783356
>> ---
>>>      0   -6   -6   1.1893809       -1.8136982305
>>
>>
>> Looking at the result of a refinement of a structural model against
>> the different HKLs, the "high resolution version" seems to be
>> "wrong" compared to the low-res one.
>>
>> Thank you very much in advance for any comments on this.
>>
>> regards
>>
>> Georg Eickerling
>>
>>
> 


-- 
============================
Dr. Georg Eickerling
Universitaet Augsburg
Institut fuer Physik
Lehrstuhl fuer Chemische Physik und Materialwissenschaften
Universitaetsstr. 1
86159 Augsburg

E-Mail:	georg.eickerling at physik.uni-augsburg.de
Phone:	+49-821-598-3362
FAX:	+49-821-598-3227
WWW:	http://www.physik.uni-augsburg.de/cpm/
=====================================================


More information about the Wien mailing list