Dear Prof.Blaha,
Thanks for your reply. It really helps me a lot.

Actually,i did the initialization with -nodstart before, and there was an error 
in the lapw2 calculation later.Now I know the reason.

After plot the DOS and bandstructure of KFe2As2 slabs, i tried to use 
wien2wannier for it.

I followed the guide step by step and when i do 

x wannier90 -up
 
An error came out. After check the file generated by "x w2w -up", i found that 
all of the data in "*.mmnup" and the data at the bottom of "*.amnup" are "NaN".

The possible reason for this is in the "*.outputwfup", the LO COEFFICIENT of Fe 
and As is NaN and "***********"

ATPAR

          ATOMIC PARAMETERS FOR Fe1       

           ENERGY PARAMETERS ARE   0.02   0.02   0.05   0.02   0.02   0.02

           L     U(R)          U'(R)         DU/DE        DU'/DE      NORM-U'
           0 -0.551142E+00  0.124267E+00  0.109667E+00  0.340139E+00
           1  0.640043E+00  0.161089E+00 -0.789075E-01 -0.334058E+00
           2  0.186063E+00 -0.174896E+00 -0.572407E+00 -0.542898E+00
           3  0.825200E+00  0.874714E+00 -0.593096E-01 -0.306556E+00
           4  0.950759E+00  0.151315E+01 -0.398060E-01 -0.274852E+00
           5  0.105105E+01  0.218939E+01 -0.301429E-01 -0.254103E+00
LO COEFFICIENT: l,A,B,C   0          0.86181     4.33109     0.00000     0.00000
LO COEFFICIENT: l,A,B,C   0          0.06758     0.00000     0.99586     0.00000
LO COEFFICIENT: l,A,B,C   1          0.74147     6.01428     0.00000     0.00000
LO COEFFICIENT: l,A,B,C   1          0.10317     0.00000     0.98454     0.00000
LO COEFFICIENT: l,A,B,C   2          0.97213     0.31600     0.00000     0.00000
LO COEFFICIENT: l,A,B,C   2     ************     0.00000************     0.00000
number of rad. functions per L:  3  3  3  2  2  2

ATPAR

          ATOMIC PARAMETERS FOR As2       

           ENERGY PARAMETERS ARE   0.42   0.02   0.02   0.02   0.02   0.02

           L     U(R)          U'(R)         DU/DE        DU'/DE      NORM-U'
           0 -0.229133E+00  0.708995E+00  0.212786E+00  0.312661E+00
           1  0.523646E+00 -0.223201E+00 -0.137651E+00 -0.366257E+00
           2 -0.722238E+00 -0.403473E+00  0.544474E-01  0.338522E+00
           3  0.867710E+00  0.895087E+00 -0.617087E-01 -0.320081E+00
           4  0.101233E+01  0.163812E+01 -0.401997E-01 -0.284836E+00
           5  0.112453E+01  0.241620E+01 -0.300851E-01 -0.262492E+00
LO COEFFICIENT: l,A,B,C   0          0.97291     1.04766     0.00000     0.00000
LO COEFFICIENT: l,A,B,C   0          1.87772     0.00000    -0.92893     0.00000
LO COEFFICIENT: l,A,B,C   1          0.88419     3.36358     0.00000     0.00000
LO COEFFICIENT: l,A,B,C   1              NaN     0.00000         NaN     0.00000
LO COEFFICIENT: l,A,B,C   2          0.44520     5.90551     0.00000     0.00000
LO COEFFICIENT: l,A,B,C   2          0.09624     0.00000     0.97840     0.00000
number of rad. functions per L:  3  3  3  2  2  2

What cause it? And What should i do next?

Looking forward to your reply.

With redards.

Yuyang Xia
----- 原始邮件 -----
发件人: "Peter Blaha" <[email protected]>
收件人: "wien" <[email protected]>
发送时间: 星期三, 2024年 4 月 10日 下午 1:26:52
主题: Re: [Wien] Question of bad E(TOP) with no error

Hi, 

The "crazy" E-top is NOT a problem. 


While for very low lying semicore states we expect to find E-top AND E-bottom 
(STOP in the corresponding line of case.in1), this is not necessary for higher 
states. (CONT in in1). We simply do not search for E-top much above EF, since 
this could lead to an E-parameter (expansion energy of the radial wavefunction) 
which is higher than EF and thus in the unoccupied region. Obviously, during 
scf we are interested on an accurate description of the OCCUPIED states below 
EF. 


Just one further remark (provided you did not have RMTs above 2.3 in the 
original setup with -prec 1): 
init_lapw -perc 1 -ecut -7.0 -sp 
runsp_lapw -i 1000 -fc 3 -p
save_lapw unrelaxed
runsp_lapw -i 1000 -min -fc 1 -p
save_lapw relaxed
init_lapw -prec 2 -ecut -7.0 -sp    -nodstart    <----- this would save a lot 
of cpu time
runsp_lapw -i 1000 -cc 0.0001 -p 






-nodstart will not produce a new density, but you would continue with the 
already converged one (from the previous runsp_lapw). Only if you had large 
spheres (above 2.3), prec 2 will reduce these spheres automatically and you 
must start over with dstart since the radial mesh has been changed. 



I am doing a project about KFe2As2 surface. 


After relaxing the surface slab in prec 1, i did a prec 2 calculation with cc 
0.0001.
There is no error in the process, but when i check the scf1up and scf1dn, i 
found that E(TOP) is not good.

ATOMIC SPHERE DEPENDENT PARAMETERS FOR ATOM  As1       
:e__0004: OVERALL ENERGY PARAMETER IS    0.0158
          OVERALL BASIS SET ON ATOM IS LAPW
:E2_0004: E( 2)=    0.0158
             APW+lo
:E2_0004: E( 2)=   -2.3962   E(BOTTOM)=   -2.455   E(TOP)=   -2.337  0  1   120
             LOCAL ORBITAL
:E0_0004: E( 0)=    0.4158
             APW+lo
:E0_0004: E( 0)=   -0.8200   E(BOTTOM)=   -1.495   E(TOP)= -520.000  3 -1   175
             LOCAL ORBITAL
:E1_0004: E( 1)=    0.0158
             APW+lo
:E1_0004: E( 1)=    0.0158
             LOCAL ORBITAL(SECDER)

          ATOMIC SPHERE DEPENDENT PARAMETERS FOR ATOM  As2       
:e__0005: OVERALL ENERGY PARAMETER IS    0.0158
          OVERALL BASIS SET ON ATOM IS LAPW
:E2_0005: E( 2)=    0.0158
             APW+lo
:E2_0005: E( 2)=   -2.4026   E(BOTTOM)=   -2.462   E(TOP)=   -2.344  0  1   124
             LOCAL ORBITAL
:E0_0005: E( 0)=    0.4158
             APW+lo
:E0_0005: E( 0)=   -0.8200   E(BOTTOM)=   -1.506   E(TOP)= -520.000  3 -1   175
             LOCAL ORBITAL
:E1_0005: E( 1)=    0.0158
             APW+lo
:E1_0005: E( 1)=    0.0158
             LOCAL ORBITAL(SECDER)

Is there any influence to the results? if is,what should i do?
The structure is 1X1X1 supercell with 25 vacuum in z(for less time),rmt reduced 
3%.

init_lapw -perc 1 -ecut -7.0 -sp 
runsp_lapw -i 1000 -fc 3 -p
save_lapw unrelaxed
runsp_lapw -i 1000 -min -fc 1 -p
save_lapw relaxed
init_lapw -prec 2 -ecut -7.0 -sp 
runsp_lapw -i 1000 -cc 0.0001 -p

in outputst,the As is

                    As                                  RHFS

 FOR SPIN  1   R-MT=   2.12000   R*V=  -3.20524  V=  -1.51191
 FOR SPIN  2   R-MT=   2.12000   R*V=  -2.68025  V=  -1.26427

 TOTAL CHARGE FOR SPIN            1 :                  18.000000000108162     
 TOTAL CHARGE FOR SPIN            1  INSIDE SPHERE:    15.842689296044156     
 TOTAL CHARGE FOR SPIN            2 :                  15.000000000108740     
 TOTAL CHARGE FOR SPIN            2  INSIDE SPHERE:    14.639384914097263     
 TOTAL CHARGE in sigma FOR SPIN            1 :                 
0.0000000000000000     
 TOTAL CHARGE in sigma FOR SPIN            1 INSIDE SPHERE:    
0.0000000000000000     
 TOTAL CHARGE in sigma FOR SPIN            2 :                 
0.0000000000000000     
 TOTAL CHARGE in sigma FOR SPIN            2 INSIDE SPHERE:    
0.0000000000000000     

          E-up(Ry)      E-dn(Ry)   Occupancy   q/sphere  core-state
  1S    -861.070611   -861.062271  1.00  1.00    1.0000  T
  2S    -109.198830   -109.195361  1.00  1.00    1.0000  T
  2P*    -97.557529    -97.550205  1.00  1.00    1.0000  T
  2P     -94.870103    -94.863015  2.00  2.00    1.0000  T
  3S     -13.958022    -13.947526  1.00  1.00    1.0000  T
  3P*    -10.047612    -10.035593  1.00  1.00    0.9999  T
  3P      -9.678540     -9.666373  2.00  2.00    0.9999  T
  3D*     -2.998617     -2.979436  2.00  2.00    0.9965  F
  3D      -2.945248     -2.925727  3.00  3.00    0.9963  F
  4S      -1.117588     -0.948715  1.00  1.00    0.6527  F
  4P*     -0.448722     -0.278655  1.00  0.00    0.4165  F
  4P      -0.428475     -0.258969  2.00  0.00    0.3984  F

 TOTAL CORE-CHARGE:                   18.000000
 TOTAL CORE-CHARGE INSIDE SPHERE:     17.999236
 TOTAL CORE-CHARGE OUTSIDE SPHERE:     0.000764

 TOTAL ENERGY (RYD):            -4521.980893
     SUM OF EI:-2.6347206E+03     NUC:-1.0916132E+04     COUL:-7.0407530E+03
     V-XC SPIN 1:-1.1047898E+02     E-XC SPIN 1:-8.4909182E+01
     V-XC SPIN 2:-1.0750097E+02     E-XC SPIN 2:-8.2641601E+01

In addition, in the bulk calulation, the As still has a bad E(TOP).

Looking forward to your reply.

With regards!

Yuyang Xia
_______________________________________________
Wien mailing list [ mailto:[email protected] | 
[email protected] ] [ 
http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien | 
http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien ] SEARCH the 
MAILING-LIST at: [ 
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/index.html | 
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/index.html ] 
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Blaha,  Inst. f. Materials Chemistry, TU Vienna, A-1060 Vienna
Phone: +43-158801165300
Email: [ mailto:[email protected] | [email protected] ] WWW: [ 
http://www.imc.tuwien.ac.at/ | http://www.imc.tuwien.ac.at ] WIEN2k: [ 
http://www.wien2k.at/ | http://www.wien2k.at ] 
------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

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

Reply via email to