what's wrong? why don't you use non-zero gaussian spreading?
The purpose of using smearing is to avoid a step function at Fermi
level. If the system is metallic, gaussian spreading must be non-zero.
If it is not metallic, a non-zero gaussion spreading won't harm your
calculation.
--------------------------------------------------
Duy Le
PhD Student
Department of Physics
University of Central Florida.

"Men don't need hand to do things"



On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 3:29 PM, chengyu yang <chengyu.young at gmail.com> 
wrote:
> Dear all,
> ????????? If I have a copper/carbon nanotube system, and the nanotube is
> semiconducting, what value should the degauss be ?Is it still a metallic
> system? I used the degauss as 0,but it was wrong. I'm a little confused.
> ?thank you.
>
> &CONTROL
> ???????????????? calculation = 'scf' ,
> ??????????????? restart_mode = 'from_scratch' ,
> ?????????????????????? prefix = '22' ,
> ?/
> ?&SYSTEM
> ?????????????????????? ibrav = 6,celldm(1) = 21.764541128,celldm(3)=0.
> 213765379
> ???????????????????????? nat = 10,ntyp = 2,ecutwfc = 75 ,
> ???????????????????? occupations='smearing', smearing='gaussian', degauss=0
> ?/
> &ELECTRONS
> ??????????????????? conv_thr = 1.0d-8 ,
> ???????????????? mixing_beta = 0.7 ,
> ?/
> ATOMIC_SPECIES
> ??? C?? 12.01100? C.pz-vbc.UPF
> ??? Cu? 63.55???? Cu.pz-d-rrkjus.UPF
>
> ATOMIC_POSITIONS angstrom
> ? C??????? 1.402181??? -0.000000??? -1.233916
> ? C??????? 0.682146???? 1.225067??? -1.233916
> ? C?????? -0.000000???? 1.402181??? -0.000000
> ? C?????? -1.225067???? 0.682146??? -0.000000
> ? C?????? -1.402181??? -0.000000??? -1.233916
> ? C?????? -0.682146??? -1.225067??? -1.233916
> ? C?????? -0.000000??? -1.402181??? -0.000000
> ? C??????? 1.225067??? -0.682146??? -0.000000
> ? Cu?????? 0??????????? 2.804362????? 0
> ? Cu????? -1.402181???? 2.428648737?? 0
>
>
> K_POINTS automatic
> ??? 1 1 5 0 0 0
> _______________________________________________
> Pw_forum mailing list
> Pw_forum at pwscf.org
> http://www.democritos.it/mailman/listinfo/pw_forum
>
>

Reply via email to