Dear Gerhard;
I subtracted the value of the Fermi energy that is corresponding to this 
case(the value of the Fermi energy in the case.scf file) from each values in 
the column of the chemical potential, and then I got the zero at one of them. 
As I understand it should be done in that way, doesn't it?

But there is something that I don't understand, in the case.intrans file I 
assigned the value of efcut=0.15(the energy range of the chemical potential 
around efermi) even though in the case.trace file I see that the calculations 
have been run by using chemical potential over the range 0.1 lower than the 
Fermi energy till 0.2 higher than the Fermi energy(not 0.15 in both sides)

I expected that the seebeck is symmetric around zero chemical potential just 
because in almost all the articles that I have read about the boltztrap 
calculations, the seebeck coefficient is symmetric around zero chemical; they 
got the p-type at the negative values of the chemical potential and the n-type 
at the positive one. In my case, I got the n and p type at the positive values 
of the chemical potential.

Best regards

why do you expect that the Seebeck is symmetric arround zero chemical potential 
(whatever you assume to be the Zero)
is your density of states symmetric with respect to the middle of the band gap ?


DEEP THOUGHT in D. Adams; Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy:
"I think the problem, to be quite honest with you,
is that you have never actually known what the question is."

Dr. Gerhard H. Fecher
Institut of Inorganic and Analytical Chemistry
Johannes Gutenberg - University
55099 Mainz
Max Planck Institute for Chemical Physics of Solids
01187 Dresden
[] im Auftrag von 
Gesendet: Montag, 4. April 2016 06:34
An: A Mailing list for WIEN2k users
Betreff: [Wien] Seebeck coefficient_Boltztrap

Dear Wien2k users;
I'm using the boltztrap code to study the thermoelectric properties of some 
semiconducting materials.
I run the process and I got the results. But I have a problem; when I drew the 
figure that represents the Seebeck coefficient as a function of the chemical 
potential, I didn't get the curve symmetric around zero chemical potential. I 
got the curve at the right of the zero chemical potential.
Also I tried to reproduce the examples that are given in the package like 
Bi2te3, to know if it is happened only with these materials, and I had the same 
What could be the mistake that I did in the calculations?
Best regards

Wien mailing list
Wien mailing list

Wien mailing list

Reply via email to