Hi,


I'm calculating the Hubbard U for Fe (octahedral) and Fe (tetrahedral) in bulk 
Fe3O4. The ultrasoft pseudopotential (USPP) I'm using now was downloaded from 
QE website called "Fe.pbe-nd-rrkjus.UPF". I'm using QE-5.0.2-pgi-13.4



But I got inconsistent U(Fe,oct) and U(Fe,tet) values when I use different type 
of cell to do the linear perturbation. When I use cubic cell (56 atoms in 
total, 16 Fe_oct, 8 Fe_tet and 32 O), I got U(Fe,oct) < U(Fe,tet). When I use 
hexagonal cell (42 atoms
 in total, 12 Fe_oct, 6 Fe_tet and 24 O), or rhombohedral primitive cell (14 
atoms in total, 4 Fe_oct, 2 Fe_tet and 8 O), I got U(Fe,oct) > U(Fe,tet).



I changed the CELL_PARAMETERS to make the Fe_oct and Fe_tet in cubic cell have 
the same Fe-O bond directions as those in hexagonal or rhombohedral cell. But 
still, it gave U(Fe,oct) < U(Fe,tet).



I don't know if the problem is from the USPP or from the linear perturbation 
theory itself implemented in QE. People keep treating these two types of Fe the 
same in magnetite Fe3O4 studies. I read papers from Emily Carter's group using 
different U(Fe,oct) and
 U(Fe,tet). But their U values were not derived by calculation or by Fe3O4 
itself, but from empirical combination obtained by FeO and Fe2O3. I got stuck 
with those inconsistent U values of Fe3O4 from QE and have no idea about how to 
deal with it.



Thank you,

Xu Huang









_______________________________________________
Pw_forum mailing list
[email protected]
http://pwscf.org/mailman/listinfo/pw_forum

Reply via email to