Dear Gabriel,
By "consistent box" sizes do you mean that you have
converged the box sizes for all three species?
I rather meant the exact same box size for all
(and this size be converged, ie. large enough for each).

BTW, the systematic differences you observed might be
due to a vdW (or another) term switched on/off
(or a bug/error in code/functional).
Make sure, everything is treated appropriately.
For instance, input_dft can be trickier than you expect 1st.
Doubly disperse the functional (in both input_dft and
vdw_corr) might do sg. similar.
Bests,
  t

On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 2:17 PM Gabriel Bramley <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hello Thomas,
>
> 1/2
>
> They haven't specified any parameters to my knowledge that would lead to such 
> a large error. There may be slight difference in the thresholds of energetic 
> convergence, but they should yield errors on a much smaller scale.
>
> 2/2
>
> RE: box sizes - We did briefly fall foul of having inconsistent box sizes for 
> one or two calculations, but this is definitely a problem we've addressed. 
> (We use slightly different box sizes for the adsorbate, but I've ran a few 
> different cell sizes for this small molecules and it yielded very small 
> differences).
>
> And you're quite right, I do apologise, that should be written as:
> E_adsorption = E_(slab+adsorbate) - (E_slab + E_adsorbate)
>
> Kind regards,
> Gabriel
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: users <[email protected]> on behalf of Tamas 
> Karpati <[email protected]>
> Sent: 07 October 2020 11:57
> To: Quantum ESPRESSO users Forum <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [QE-users] Underestimated Adsorption Energy with optB88-vdW
>
> Dear Gabriel,
>
> 1/2, are your sims. reproducing *all* of the ref. params? (eg. are
> cell parameters the same?)
>       any missing params. would contribute by adding an *unknown*
> magnitude of error...
> 2/2, my guess would be that your evaluation of dE_a is wrong due to
> *different cell sizes*
>       (basis set superposition error?); this would explain the
> systematic character of the deviation
>       and suggest (pain indeed) to increase cell sizes up to the same
> (ie. the largest) of
>       E_slab+ads, E_slab and E_adsorbant.
> +1, your eq. for the heat is recursive (kidding): LHS is to be renamed!
>
> HTH,
>   t
>
> On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 12:19 PM Gabriel Bramley <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Users,
> >
> > Problem:
> >
> > I am performing calculations with the optB88-vdW functional to obtain 
> > adsorption energies of small aromatic molecules on metallic surface facets 
> > (Pt(111) and phenol for the cases discussed here). Unfortunately, the 
> > adsorption energies obtained from these calculations are systematically 50 
> > kJ mol^-1 below comparable studies performed with VASP. I have replicated 
> > their parameters as closely as possible - as such I am also using PBE PAW 
> > pseudopotentials from the psl pseudopotential library.
> >
> > The above underestimation occurs for a fully periodic calculation. Using 
> > the dipole corrections (2D and ESM (bc1)) appears to exacerbate these 
> > issues, leading to a 70 kJ mol^-1 underestimation of the adsorption energy. 
> > (The system is centred in the centre of the cell with 8 Ang of vacuum 
> > either side of the system for 2D, and the system is centred around z=0 for 
> > ESM).
> >
> > The calculation for adsorption energy is performed as:
> > E_ads = E_slab+ads - (E_slab + E_ads)
> > Where the adsorbate is calculated in a 30x30x30 Ang cell with the 
> > Markov-Payne dipole correction (Though this give negligable difference 
> > compared to full PBC).
> >
> > Question:
> >
> > The PBE+rvv10 functional performs significantly better with PBC and 2D 
> > Coulomb Cutoff, giving sensible and expected values for the adsorption 
> > energy. However, I am cautious in trusting these results given the large 
> > errors for the optB88-vdW functional. Is there something obvious I am 
> > missing in these calculations or is this a known issue?
> >
> > A previous email to this list has pointed out other issues with this 
> > functional 
> > (https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mail-archive.com%2Fusers%40lists.quantum-espresso.org%2Fmsg35965.html&amp;data=01%7C01%7CG.A.Bramley%40soton.ac.uk%7Cff146e0c9f8442a6502408d86aaf85d0%7C4a5378f929f44d3ebe89669d03ada9d8%7C0&amp;sdata=XIGDLm5GiwsmCuyJjhxr3hvWbAc7nah5%2BXHAw1JzxHY%3D&amp;reserved=0).
> >  This might help, but could someone please clarify this as well?
> >
> > Additional information:
> >
> > I am using QE v.6.5 compiled with Intel-2018 with the ELPA 2017 library. 
> > Enivron Module installed but not used in these calculations. All QC tests 
> > pass without error.
> >
> > Please find below the input file:
> >
> > ___________________________________
> >
> > &CONTROL
> >    calculation      = 'relax'
> >    restart_mode     = 'from_scratch'
> >    prefix           = 'Pt'
> >    disk_io          = 'low'
> >    pseudo_dir       = '/home/gab1u17/pslib-kj-paw/'
> >    nstep            = 300
> > /
> > &SYSTEM
> >    ibrav            = 0
> >    ecutwfc          = 45
> >    ecutrho          = 360
> >    occupations      = 'smearing'
> >    degauss          = 0.05
> >    smearing         = 'gaussian'
> >    input_dft        = 'vdw-df-obk8'
> >    assume_isolated  = '2D'
> >    ntyp             = 4
> >    nat              = 48
> > /
> > &ELECTRONS
> >    electron_maxstep = 150
> >    conv_thr         = 8e-08
> >    mixing_mode      = 'local-TF'
> >    mixing_beta      = 0.2
> > /
> > &IONS
> >    ion_dynamics     = 'bfgs'
> > /
> > &CELL
> > /
> >
> > ATOMIC_SPECIES
> > Pt 195.084 Pt.pbe-n-kjpaw_psl.1.0.0.UPF
> > C 12.011 C.pbe-n-kjpaw_psl.1.0.0.UPF
> > O 15.999 O.pbe-n-kjpaw_psl.1.0.0.UPF
> > H 1.008 H.pbe-n-kjpaw_psl.1.0.0.UPF
> >
> > K_POINTS automatic
> > 6 6 1  0 0 0
> >
> > CELL_PARAMETERS angstrom
> > 7.42718991274627 0.00000000000000 0.00000000000000
> > 3.71359495637314 6.43213514316980 0.00000000000000
> > 0.00000000000000 0.00000000000000 29.000000000003126
> >
> > ATOMIC_POSITIONS angstrom
> > Pt 2.5641489000 0.4594382200 8.0000000000  0 0 0
> > Pt 5.2167167200 1.3783146700 8.0000000000  0 0 0
> > ...
> > Pt 4.1556895900 0.1531460700 17.1683222700
> > Pt 6.8082574200 1.0720225200 17.1683222700
> > Pt 2.0336353300 1.9908989700 17.1683222700
> > ...
> > H 0.3060672802 1.6388023741 19.1376040000
> > H 2.7167357186 1.0284278006 19.1376040000
> > H 4.4562891110 2.8078620154 19.1376040000
> >
> > ___________________________________
> >
> > Thank you in advance for your assistance.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> > Gabriel Bramley
> > PhD. Candidate
> > University of Southampton
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Quantum ESPRESSO is supported by MaX 
> > (https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.max-centre.eu%2F&amp;data=01%7C01%7CG.A.Bramley%40soton.ac.uk%7Cff146e0c9f8442a6502408d86aaf85d0%7C4a5378f929f44d3ebe89669d03ada9d8%7C0&amp;sdata=1iFjhj4tqm%2FF7Zmv5ob6KOGFn328kB6fdI5BpmoeUSY%3D&amp;reserved=0)
> > users mailing list [email protected]
> > https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.quantum-espresso.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fusers&amp;data=01%7C01%7CG.A.Bramley%40soton.ac.uk%7Cff146e0c9f8442a6502408d86aaf85d0%7C4a5378f929f44d3ebe89669d03ada9d8%7C0&amp;sdata=Lv7plWOT%2B3hGuARAi%2BVgBKu51t94mxKdcmCP5J%2BIZug%3D&amp;reserved=0
> _______________________________________________
> Quantum ESPRESSO is supported by MaX 
> (https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.max-centre.eu%2F&amp;data=01%7C01%7CG.A.Bramley%40soton.ac.uk%7Cff146e0c9f8442a6502408d86aaf85d0%7C4a5378f929f44d3ebe89669d03ada9d8%7C0&amp;sdata=1iFjhj4tqm%2FF7Zmv5ob6KOGFn328kB6fdI5BpmoeUSY%3D&amp;reserved=0)
> users mailing list [email protected]
> https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.quantum-espresso.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fusers&amp;data=01%7C01%7CG.A.Bramley%40soton.ac.uk%7Cff146e0c9f8442a6502408d86aaf85d0%7C4a5378f929f44d3ebe89669d03ada9d8%7C0&amp;sdata=Lv7plWOT%2B3hGuARAi%2BVgBKu51t94mxKdcmCP5J%2BIZug%3D&amp;reserved=0
> _______________________________________________
> Quantum ESPRESSO is supported by MaX (www.max-centre.eu)
> users mailing list [email protected]
> https://lists.quantum-espresso.org/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
Quantum ESPRESSO is supported by MaX (www.max-centre.eu)
users mailing list [email protected]
https://lists.quantum-espresso.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Reply via email to