[Wien] Reg:LDA+U

2013-03-11 Thread Peter Blaha
If you want a non-magnetic solution with LDA+U you still need a spin-polarized 
setup,
but then can use   runsp_c_lapw -orb to constrain the spin to zero.

Am 10.03.2013 06:29, schrieb Swetarekha Ram:
 Dear Users,

   I am doing LDA+U calculation.
 I have done the spin-polarization calculation, by using the command 
 runsp_lapw.

 After that I have edited the file case.indm and case.inorb for the LDA+U 
 calculation.
 And by using the runsp_lapw -orb,
 I got the result fine.
 But I have a doubt that, is it necessary that each time we have to do the 
 spin-polarization calculation before LDA+U ?

 OR

 Can we do the LDA+U calculation, after the run_lapw ?

 --
 Swetarekha Ram,
 Research Scholar,



 ___
 Wien mailing list
 Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
 http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien


-- 
-
Peter Blaha
Inst. Materials Chemistry, TU Vienna
Getreidemarkt 9, A-1060 Vienna, Austria
Tel: +43-1-5880115671
Fax: +43-1-5880115698
email: pblaha at theochem.tuwien.ac.at
-


[Wien] Questions about -orbc calculations

2013-03-11 Thread Peter Blaha
Assumed magnetic order  means  ferromagnetic, or a certain type of 
anti-feromagnetic order (there are many possibilities !)

And with SO you could put the magnetization (case.inso) in various 
different crystallographic directions 

On 03/08/2013 04:40 PM, Hongbin Zhang wrote:

 Dear Prof. Blaha,

 Thank you for your reply!

 I suppose by assumed magnetic order and also on the direction of the
 magnetization you mean equivalent magnetic ordering/magnetization
 directions for a given structure. But I do not see the reason why this
 is relevant. For instance, the system I am considering now is Sr2IrO4,
 where the magnetic structure has determined experimentally and fixed
 due to the rotation of IrO6 octahedra. Yes there are many different
 ways to chose the unit cell, and I think once the structure is chosen,
 the magnetization configuration is chosen too. Maybe I should try to
 force the magnetization direction to be aligned along different
 directions to see whether it will converge (to a correct solution).

 Yes, with large U I could get convergence, but the physics is different
 from expected.

 Regards,

 Hongbin
 On Fri, 8 Mar 2013, Peter Blaha wrote:

 I have done once some test calculations on some iridates.

 As far as I remember, everything depends on the assumed magnetic order
 and also on the direction of the magnetization (with SO). Some
 magnetic structures are easy to converge, others will not (or very
 hard) converge.

 With LDA+U and -orbc you can often enforce a particular
 magnetic/orbital state, but of course not always. If the system feels
 it is even with an external constrained potential not favorable, it
 won't go into this state, (unless you specify a really large U value ?)

 And remember, LDA+U was made for real insulators, for correlated
 metals only DMFT may help (wien2wannier + DMFT, see eg. unsupported
 software).



 On 03/06/2013 02:55 PM, Hongbin Zhang wrote:

 Dear Prof. Blaha and wien users,

 Recently I am trying to do calculations on J=1/2 insulation iridates
 using
 LDA+U+SOC as implemented in WIEN2k. However, I found that it is very
 hard
 to converge to the desired insulating states with U smaller than 3 eV
 (J=0). Moreover, the ratio of spin and orbital moments is one if a large
 U, for instance, U=4 eV is used. This deviates also from what is
 expected
 that the ratio between spin and orbital moments should be 1/2.

 So my first questionsis , does any of you have ever done such
 calculations
 on J=1/2 iridates? I could not find any calculations done by wien2k
 in the
 literature. Is there any pitfalls that it is not doable?

 Since I could not converge it within normal self-consistent routines, I
 tried to make some density matrices up with desired spin/orbital moments
 and also occupation numbers. Then I do x orb -up/dn and afterwards self-
 consistent calculations with -orbc -so. After it converges, the orbital
 and spin moments are totally different from what is expected/designed.
 And also the density matrices in the case.scfdmup are quite different
 from
 my inputs.

 Here is my second question that how can one enforce the code to
 converge to a desired density matrix? Or one can only generate a rigid
 orbital potential and hope that the system will converge to the desired
 one?

 Any suggestion is welcome and appreciated!

 Regards,

 Hongbin


 ___
 Wien mailing list
 Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
 http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien

 --

  P.Blaha
 --

 Peter BLAHA, Inst.f. Materials Chemistry, TU Vienna, A-1060 Vienna
 Phone: +43-1-58801-165300 FAX: +43-1-58801-165982
 Email: blaha at theochem.tuwien.ac.atWWW:
 http://info.tuwien.ac.at/theochem/
 --

 ___
 Wien mailing list
 Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
 http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien

 ___
 Wien mailing list
 Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
 http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien

-- 

   P.Blaha
--
Peter BLAHA, Inst.f. Materials Chemistry, TU Vienna, A-1060 Vienna
Phone: +43-1-58801-165300 FAX: +43-1-58801-165982
Email: blaha at theochem.tuwien.ac.atWWW: 
http://info.tuwien.ac.at/theochem/
--


[Wien] Small question about XSPEC

2013-03-11 Thread Peter Blaha
You will see, that it does not matter. In this approximation you can 
remove the electron either from 1/2 or 3/2 state.

On 03/08/2013 03:18 PM, prasenjit roy wrote:
 Dear Prof Blaha and WIEN2k users,

 I have a small question regarding XAS using XSPEC. Using
 standard inputs I have been able to obtain ground state K-edge and
 L-edge XAS. At the next step I wanted to incorporate core-holes in my
 calculation. So for that I created supercell (2x2x1). The first atom
 (Fe) in my structure has core electrons as specified in case.inc:
 -
   5 0.00  1  NUMBER OF ORBITALS (EXCLUDING SPIN), SHIFT, IPRINT
 1,-1,2   ( N,KAPPA,OCCUP)
 2,-1,2   ( N,KAPPA,OCCUP)
 2, 1,2   ( N,KAPPA,OCCUP)
 2,-2,4   ( N,KAPPA,OCCUP)
 3,-1,2   ( N,KAPPA,OCCUP)
 -

 If I want to obtain K-edge of 1st atom, I just need to remove 1 electron
 from 1s level of the 1st atom. But my question is how can I modify
 case.inc for obtaining L23 edge of the 1st atom? I mean, from which line
 should I remove the electron (the 4th or the 5th line of case.inc) from
 2p1/2 or 2p3/2?

 Thank you very much in advance for your kind help.

 With regards,
 Prasenjit Roy
 Electronic Structures of Materials
 Radboud University
 Nijmegen
 +31 (0) 24 36 52805


 ___
 Wien mailing list
 Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
 http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien


-- 

   P.Blaha
--
Peter BLAHA, Inst.f. Materials Chemistry, TU Vienna, A-1060 Vienna
Phone: +43-1-58801-165300 FAX: +43-1-58801-165982
Email: blaha at theochem.tuwien.ac.atWWW: 
http://info.tuwien.ac.at/theochem/
--


[Wien] cat: .ieds: No such file or directory during initso_lapw

2013-03-11 Thread Gavin Abo
Line 154 creates the atom-number, E-param for RLO lines in case.inso 
when a or c is entered, so this line should not be removed. My 
understanding is that there should be none of these lines when N is 
entered. So you could ignore the error or exclude it by changing line 
154 to:

if( $localp != 'n' ) cat .ieds  $file.inso

On 2/21/2013 1:12 PM, Gavin Abo wrote:
 This concerns the make_inso_lapw script in Wien2k 12.1.  The same 
 script file is different in 11.1.

 On 2/21/2013 12:40 PM, Zhu, Jianxin wrote:
 Dear Peter and Wien2k users,

 During the running of initso_lapw, I notice the following if I hit 
 N (or choose no for all types after hitting c) in response to

 Add RLO for NONE, ALL, CHOOSE elements? (N/a/c) : N
 cat: .ieds: No such file or directory

 Dr. Gavin Abo pointed out ---
 This comes from line 154 in the script make_inso_lapw in the 
 $WIENROOT directory.
 There is code to create the file on line 143 with an echo command.  
 However, the goto statement on line 71 always jumps over the code 
 that seems to create it.

 My question is:  When NO_RLO is in effect, do we still need the file 
 .ieds?
 Can I simply comment out the line 154 --

 cat .ieds  $file.inso

 ?


 Thanks,

 Jianxin


-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/pipermail/wien/attachments/20130311/2c3b19e6/attachment.htm


[Wien] cat: .ieds: No such file or directory during initso_lapw

2013-03-11 Thread Zhu, Jianxin
Hi Gavin,

Thanks for taking a look into this.
I will try that.

Regards,

Jianxin

From: Gavin Abo gsabo at crimson.ua.edumailto:gs...@crimson.ua.edu
Reply-To: A Mailing list for WIEN2k users wien at 
zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.atmailto:wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
List-Post: wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 07:48:29 -0600
To: A Mailing list for WIEN2k users wien at 
zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.atmailto:wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
Subject: Re: [Wien] cat: .ieds: No such file or directory during initso_lapw

Line 154 creates the atom-number, E-param for RLO lines in case.inso when a 
or c is entered, so this line should not be removed. My understanding is that 
there should be none of these lines when N is entered. So you could ignore 
the error or exclude it by changing line 154 to:

if( $localp != 'n' ) cat .ieds  $file.inso

On 2/21/2013 1:12 PM, Gavin Abo wrote:
This concerns the make_inso_lapw script in Wien2k 12.1.  The same script file 
is different in 11.1.

On 2/21/2013 12:40 PM, Zhu, Jianxin wrote:
Dear Peter and Wien2k users,

During the running of initso_lapw, I notice the following if I hit N (or 
choose no for all types after hitting c) in response to

Add RLO for NONE, ALL, CHOOSE elements? (N/a/c) : N
cat: .ieds: No such file or directory

Dr. Gavin Abo pointed out ---
This comes from line 154 in the script make_inso_lapw in the $WIENROOT 
directory.
There is code to create the file on line 143 with an echo command.  However, 
the goto statement on line 71 always jumps over the code that seems to create 
it.

My question is:  When NO_RLO is in effect, do we still need the file .ieds?
Can I simply comment out the line 154 --

cat .ieds  $file.inso

?


Thanks,

Jianxin


___ Wien mailing list Wien at 
zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.atmailto:Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at 
http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/pipermail/wien/attachments/20130311/bb0770b2/attachment.htm


[Wien] Small question about XSPEC

2013-03-11 Thread Choudhary,Kamal
Hi

I don't have a background knowledge in XAS and how to interpret its data from 
WIEN2k. Could anyone please suggest me a book/paper in this context?

Best Regards
Kamal Choudhary

From: wien-bounces at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at [wien-bounces at 
zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at] on behalf of prasenjit roy [prasenjit1...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2013 9:18 AM
To: wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
Subject: [Wien] Small question about XSPEC

Dear Prof Blaha and WIEN2k users,

   I have a small question regarding XAS using XSPEC. Using 
standard inputs I have been able to obtain ground state K-edge and L-edge XAS. 
At the next step I wanted to incorporate core-holes in my calculation. So for 
that I created supercell (2x2x1). The first atom (Fe) in my structure has core 
electrons as specified in case.inc:
-
 5 0.00  1  NUMBER OF ORBITALS (EXCLUDING SPIN), SHIFT, IPRINT
1,-1,2   ( N,KAPPA,OCCUP)
2,-1,2   ( N,KAPPA,OCCUP)
2, 1,2   ( N,KAPPA,OCCUP)
2,-2,4   ( N,KAPPA,OCCUP)
3,-1,2   ( N,KAPPA,OCCUP)
-

If I want to obtain K-edge of 1st atom, I just need to remove 1 electron from 
1s level of the 1st atom. But my question is how can I modify case.inc for 
obtaining L23 edge of the 1st atom? I mean, from which line should I remove the 
electron (the 4th or the 5th line of case.inc) from 2p1/2 or 2p3/2?

Thank you very much in advance for your kind help.

With regards,
Prasenjit Roy
Electronic Structures of Materials
Radboud University
Nijmegen
+31 (0) 24 36 52805
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/pipermail/wien/attachments/20130311/f1fff957/attachment.htm


[Wien] Nonlinear optics using WIEN2k

2013-03-11 Thread Choudhary,Kamal
Hi

Is there any tool available to calculate nonlinear optical properties using 
WIEN2k?

Best Regards
Kamal Choudhary
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/pipermail/wien/attachments/20130311/9c533aad/attachment.htm


[Wien] discussion about YBCO and Bi-2212 by MBJ+U

2013-03-11 Thread ali ghafari


Dear Peter Blaha and users

I have calculated the electronic structure of undoped YBCO and Bi-2212 by MBJ+U 
where both compound have two CuO2 planes. For YBCO the calculation leads to AFM 
ground state with a gap of 1.5eV by U=8eV. While the calculations of Bi-2212 
reveal metallic properties instead of AFM. I have tried to repeat calculations 
by U=12 but unfortunately it also leads to metallic properties. By considering 
U for other atoms such as Bi,? Sr, and Ca the calculations again leads to 
metallic properties. However all calculations have been performed by AFM (i.e. 
considering two opposite spins for Cu).
What's your advise?
Best Regards
Ali
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/pipermail/wien/attachments/20130311/4026d860/attachment.htm


[Wien] discussion about YBCO and Bi-2212 by MBJ+U

2013-03-11 Thread Rocquefelte
Did you try to do only LDA+U for these two systems, instead of MBJ+U?
Indeed, by simply adding an Hubbard term you will open the band gap of 
these Cu2+ (d9) systems.
Regards

Xavier


Le 3/11/2013 9:20 PM, ali ghafari a ?crit :

 Dear Peter Blaha and users

 I have calculated the electronic structure of undoped YBCO and Bi-2212 
 by MBJ+U where both compound have two CuO2 planes. For YBCO the 
 calculation leads to AFM ground state with a gap of 1.5eV by U=8eV. 
 While the calculations of Bi-2212 reveal metallic properties instead 
 of AFM. I have tried to repeat calculations by U=12 but unfortunately 
 it also leads to metallic properties. By considering U for other atoms 
 such as Bi,  Sr, and Ca the calculations again leads to metallic 
 properties. However all calculations have been performed by AFM (i.e. 
 considering two opposite spins for Cu).
 What's your advise?
 Best Regards
 Ali




 ___
 Wien mailing list
 Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
 http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien

-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/pipermail/wien/attachments/20130311/48e8d6c8/attachment.htm


[Wien] discussion about YBCO and Bi-2212 by MBJ+U

2013-03-11 Thread ali ghafari
Dear Xavier
thank you very much for your replay.
yes, I also repeated for LDA+U, for Bi-2212 it was same as MBJ+U. you are right 
it just opens the gap of d orbitals.

RegardsAli



 From: Rocquefelte xavier.rocquefelte at cnrs-imn.fr
To: A Mailing list for WIEN2k users wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at 
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 9:39 PM
Subject: Re: [Wien] discussion about YBCO and Bi-2212 by MBJ+U
 

Did you try to do only LDA+U for these two systems, instead of MBJ+U?
Indeed, by simply adding an Hubbard term you will open the band
  gap of these Cu2+ (d9) systems. 
Regards

Xavier


Le 3/11/2013 9:20 PM, ali ghafari a ?crit?:



Dear Peter Blaha and users


I have calculated the electronic structure of undoped YBCO and Bi-2212 by 
MBJ+U where both compound have two CuO2 planes. For YBCO the calculation leads 
to AFM ground state with a gap of 1.5eV by U=8eV. While the calculations of 
Bi-2212 reveal metallic properties instead of AFM. I have tried to repeat 
calculations by U=12 but unfortunately it also leads to metallic properties. 
By considering U for other atoms such as Bi,? Sr, and Ca the calculations 
again leads to metallic properties. However all calculations have been 
performed by AFM (i.e. considering two opposite spins for Cu).
What's your advise?
Best Regards
Ali







___
Wien mailing list Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at 
http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien 

___
Wien mailing list
Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/pipermail/wien/attachments/20130311/ca1e7b6c/attachment.htm


[Wien] Virtual Crystal Approximation (VCA): not neighboring atoms in periodic table

2013-03-11 Thread Qingyun Mao
Dear Xavier,

Thank you for your reply!

Regards,
Qingyun

Sent from my iPad

On Mar 9, 2013, at 1:14 AM, Rocquefelte xavier.rocquefelte at cnrs-imn.fr 
wrote:

 Many other posts have been sent more recently. Search the word virtual and 
 not VCA. 
 
 The idea is that you replace an atom defined by a nucleus +Z surrounded by Z 
 electrons, by an effective atom defined by a nucleus Zeff = Z+x  surrounded 
 by Z+x electrons. Such an effective   treatment can only be done for 
 neigboring atoms, which have the same number of core electrons for instance 
 and similar radii...
 Indeed, remember the Slater approach (effective nucleus). The screening is 
 defined by the inner electrons Zeff = Z - Sigma, and the way the nucleus is 
 screened defines all the properties of the   atom. In your case the 
 valence electrons of La and Nb feel a completely different effective nucleus 
 (the screening is too much different) and a mixing of these two atoms cannot 
 be simply   treated by an effective nucleus. In a way VCA is a 
 perturbative approach and could give results only if the atoms are not too 
 far in the periodic table. 
 
 In addition, as already explained by Peter in previous posts it should be 
 used only for non-active electrons in the valence band (like Sr2+/La3+), 
 but not for active ones (like O/F) ...
 
 In your case, I will use a supercell approach and to insure that you didn't 
 create an artificial order you must try different models and compare them in 
 terms of total energy, DOS, properties... 
 
 Best Regards
 
 Xavier
 
 
 
 
 
  valence electrons/core charge
 
 
 Le 3/9/2013 1:11 AM, Qingyun Mao a ?crit :
 Dear Prof. Blaha and wien users,
 
 Recently I am trying to do calculations on systems like La(x)Nb(1-x)O(y). I 
 searched in the mailing list and the earliest comments showed up was posted 
 around 2004. I saw comments like: VCA in WINE2k is only possible between 
 neighboring elements, like Na-Mg or Ba-La. But I have not seen any 
 explanation for that yet.
 
 May I ask the reason why we cannot use VCA for atoms which are not neighbors 
 (like La and Nb) in periodic table? Thanks a lot!
 
 Regards,
 Qingyun Mao
 
 School of Applied and Engineering Physics
 Cornell University
 
 
 
 
 ___
 Wien mailing list
 Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
 http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien
 
 ___
 Wien mailing list
 Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
 http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/pipermail/wien/attachments/20130311/6e21e3d4/attachment.htm


[Wien] In put for Double perovskite

2013-03-11 Thread tripurari sinha
Dear all,
I am calculating the ground state property of double perovskite oxide Ba2FeMoO6 
where Fe has valency 2+ and Mo has 6+ (a standard one). But if I want to do the 
calculation for the same system having valency of Fe as 3+ and Mo as 5+, what 
change I will ?have to make in the input data or elsewhere to run the code in 
this fashion, please suggest
Thanks and Regards,T.P.Sinha?

From: Professor T. P. Sinha

Department of Physics

Bose Institute

93/1, Acharya Prafulla Chandra Road

Kolkata - 79, India

Cell No. +91 9830159422
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/pipermail/wien/attachments/20130311/6532bb11/attachment.htm