For the moment, I suspect that your calculations are not very well
converged. Did you run the calculations with good energy and charge
convergence criteria? If not, run the two calculations with
-ec 0.0001 -cc 0.0001
which is fairly good criteria. Then, maybe the two calculations
give same results.


On Mon, 14 Dec 2015, shima pourrad wrote:


Hi

Thanks for your prompt answer.

Yes, for the first calculation with “ EX_GRR VX_GRR” I have :

Case.in0 :

TOT  XC_MBJ     (XC_LDA,XC_PBESOL,XC_WC,XC_MBJ,XC_REVTPSS)                     

R2V      IFFT      (R2V)

 120 120 120    1.00  1    min IFFT-parameters, enhancement factor, iprint

 

And case.in0_grr :

TOT  EX_GRR VX_GRR     (XC_LDA,XC_PBESOL,XC_WC,XC_MBJ,XC_REVTPSS)               
      

R2V      IFFT      (R2V)

 120 120 120    1.00  1    min IFFT-parameters, enhancement factor, iprint

 

 This calculation give me these results by Analysis :

--- ENE -----------

in  1 files:

case.scf::ENE  : *WARNING** TOTAL ENERGY IN Ry =       -79386.93188247

--- FER -----------

in  1 files:

case.scf::FER  : F E R M I - ENERGY(TETRAH.M.)=   0.4117108915

--- GAP -----------

in  1 files:

case.scf::GAP  :    0.0564 Ry =     0.767 eV   (provided you have a proper 
k-mesh)

 

For the second calculation with “ EX_GRR EC_NONE VX_GRR VC_NONE” I have:

Case.in0 :

TOT   XC_MBJ (  (XC_LDA,XC_PBESOL,XC_WC,XC_MBJ,XC_REVTPSS)                     

R2V      IFFT      (R2V)

 120 120 120    1.00  1    min IFFT-parameters, enhancement factor, iprint

 

And case.in0_grr :

TOT   EX_GRR EC_NONE VX_GRR VC_NONE (  
(XC_LDA,XC_PBESOL,XC_WC,XC_MBJ,XC_REVTPSS)                     

R2V      IFFT      (R2V)

 120 120 120    1.00  1    min IFFT-parameters, enhancement factor, iprint

 

 

And its results :

--- ENE -----------

in  1 files:

case.scf::ENE  : *WARNING** TOTAL ENERGY IN Ry =       -79386.93585459

--- FER -----------

in  1 files:

case.scf::FER  : F E R M I - ENERGY(TETRAH.M.)=   0.4269866858

--- GAP -----------

in  1 files:

case.scf::GAP  :    0.0423 Ry =     0.575 eV   (provided you have a proper 
k-mesh)

 

what is your opinion?

Sincerely

Shima M.Pourrad


On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 6:11 PM, <t...@theochem.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
      Hi,

      "XC_MBJ" in the 1st line of case.in0 indicates that the mBJ method
      will be used. For mBJ, it is necessary to have also the file case.in0_grr
      such that the average of grad(rho)/rho in the unit cell
      [used for Eq. (3) in PRL 102, 226401 (2009)] is calculated.

      According to a test that I've just made it does not matter which one
      of these two is specified in case.in0_grr:
      "EX_GRR EC_NONE VX_GRR VC_NONE"
      "EX_GRR VX_GRR"

      So, I don't understand why you got two different results.
      Can you show us the input files case.in0 and case.in0_grr
      that you used for the two calculations?

      F. Tran

      On Mon, 14 Dec 2015, shima pourrad wrote:


            Dear P.Blaha and F.Tran and Wien2k Users

            I am running wien version14.2 .The purpose of my calculations is to 
get accurate gap and band structure. Hence I am performing MBJ calculations 
with the parameters special to semiconductors.

            I would like to ask how we should edit case.in0_grr for a mbj 
calculation in wien2k14.2 ?

            I read the user guide and checked the mailing list before, I didn’t 
find any obvious instruction.

            In user guide, it was written that: when you perform init_mbj_lapw 
for the second time, some steps must do automatically:

             *
                edit case.in0 and change the functional to option XC_MBJ. (ok 
this step is done).

             *
                 cp case.in0 case.in0_grr and choose EX_GRR VX_GRR in 
case.in0_grr.

            But this step, when I open the case.in0_grr to check that, at first 
line, it was written that: EX_GRR EC_NONE VX_GRR VC_NONE. Is it a correct 
edition? Should I remove “EC_NONE VC_NONE” from the first line?

            I think “EX_GRR EC_NONE VX_GRR VC_NONE” means that correlation 
energy and potential are ignored! But “EX_GRR VX_GRR” alone, means there is a 
kind of correlation energy and potential as a default for usual mbj 
calculation. Did I realize
            correctly??

            You answered the question about the use of the PBE instead of LDA 
for the energy before: 
http://www.mail-archive.com/wien%40zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/msg13395.html

            And it is stated that how we must change case.in0 .

            But there is no instruction for case.in0_grr. What should be done 
for this issue?

            (What kind of edition is correct for case.in0_grr? “EX_GRR VX_GRR”? 
Or “ EX_GRR EC_NONE VX_GRR VC_NONE”?? I performed both of them for one 
structure, and got very different result: different Gaps, different total 
energies and different
            Fermi-energies!!! )

            Please help me.

            Sincerely

            Shima M.Pourrad

            PhD student of physics in condensed matter

            Science and Research Branch
            Islamic Azad University


      _______________________________________________
      Wien mailing list
      Wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
      http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien
      SEARCH the MAILING-LIST at:  
http://www.mail-archive.com/wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/index.html



_______________________________________________
Wien mailing list
Wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien
SEARCH the MAILING-LIST at:  
http://www.mail-archive.com/wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/index.html

Reply via email to