Re: [Wien] Mailing List

2020-07-24 Thread Gavin Abo
If your case.struct file has one Mn atom corresponding to one inequivalent atomic position that has multiple equivalent atomic positions where you want to split the equivalent atomic positions into inequivalent ones, then you need to use the "set at least for one atom-name a special label" at

Re: [Wien] Space group change during running x sgroup

2020-07-24 Thread Peeyush Kumar Kamlesh
Thank you so much Prof.Gavin. It is really very helpful. Thank you again! On Sat, Jul 25, 2020 at 6:25 AM Peeyush Kumar Kamlesh < peeyush.physik@gmail.com> wrote: > Sir, > One more question. How can I know the space group of the supercell? I > searched but was unable to find it. > Thank you!

Re: [Wien] Space group change during running x sgroup

2020-07-24 Thread Gavin Abo
View case.struct of the supercell in StructGen of w2web.  If the supercell has a space group, it will show what it is.  If it has no space group, it should instead have a general lattice highlighted such as "P". The WIEN2k 19.1 usersguide [1] states on page 110 under section "6.2 SGROUP":

Re: [Wien] Space group change during running x sgroup

2020-07-24 Thread Peeyush Kumar Kamlesh
Sir, One more question. How can I know the space group of the supercell? I searched but was unable to find it. Thank you! On Sat, Jul 25, 2020 at 6:20 AM Peeyush Kumar Kamlesh < peeyush.physik@gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you So much Prof. Blaha. It is working now. > > > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020

Re: [Wien] Space group change during running x sgroup

2020-07-24 Thread Peeyush Kumar Kamlesh
Thank you So much Prof. Blaha. It is working now. On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 3:39 PM Peeyush Kumar Kamlesh < peeyush.physik@gmail.com> wrote: > Sir, > Output of x nn is: > - > > specify nn-bondlength factor: (usually=2) [and optionally dlimit, dstmax >

Re: [Wien] Problems with FM+U+SOC with natorb=1 nlorb=2

2020-07-24 Thread Laurence Marks
Be aware that +U for 4f in my experience shoves them out of the way, whereas -eece does not so is considerably better. Depending on your ARPES energies this can be a significant issues. (The tabulated cross sections for 4f are really bad, but that is another problem.) N.B., also, be aware that

Re: [Wien] Problems with FM+U+SOC with natorb=1 nlorb=2

2020-07-24 Thread pluto
Dear Prof. Marks, Prof. Blaha, dear All, Thank you for the rapid answer! I appreciate! I think this resolves the issue. For practical reasons I will just use +U only for 4f levels. I agree with Prof. Marks who has reservations regarding the GGA+U for 4f. However, for practical reasons of

Re: [Wien] Problems with FM+U+SOC with natorb=1 nlorb=2

2020-07-24 Thread Peter Blaha
I do NOT officially support 2 l values / atom for GGA+U. It may/may not work in various programs. The reason is simply, that in WIEN2k the U is applied only inside the sphere and the V_orb potential is calculated from the occupations of an orbital, varying from 0 to 1. I.e. if n=1 (an orbital

Re: [Wien] Problems with FM+U+SOC with natorb=1 nlorb=2

2020-07-24 Thread Laurence Marks
I personally believe that it is critical to correct the 5d as well as 4f for the lanthanides, even though the 5d are essentially empty. However, not everyone agrees with this and at least some versions of lapwso do not support having +U on more than one state. In addition (even worse), there were

[Wien] Problems with FM+U+SOC with natorb=1 nlorb=2

2020-07-24 Thread pluto
Dear All, I am trying to calculate a simple 4f compound with GGA+U, ferromagnetic exchange (FM) and SOC. FM calculation without SOC using the literature U settings looks reasonable, I am getting a gapped band structure similar to anyone else. But running SCF with GGA+U and SOC removes the

[Wien] wien2k-3322

2020-07-24 Thread pblaha
Dear REKHA SOLANKI, (email: wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at ) Thank you very much for your WIEN2k registration. You (or the organisation specified in the payment-section of the online registration) will receive an invoice by not sent within the next days. After we received the payment, we will

Re: [Wien] Space group change during running x sgroup

2020-07-24 Thread Peter Blaha
When using w2web, your error is: When I ignore this warning and accept the changes produced by nn, then it pops up a new question (Use new struct-file?). on clicking on YES, it Displays a message: *Case-001.struct_nn copied to case-001.struct old struct-file saved as case-001.struct_init

Re: [Wien] Space group change during running x sgroup

2020-07-24 Thread Peeyush Kumar Kamlesh
Sir, Output of x nn is: - specify nn-bondlength factor: (usually=2) [and optionally dlimit, dstmax (about 1.d-5, 20)] DSTMAX: 30.297689760 iix,iiy,iiz 2 2 2 54.590432000 54.590432000

Re: [Wien] Space group change during running x sgroup

2020-07-24 Thread Peter Blaha
           _   _ __ | |__   ___  _ __   ___   _ __  _   _  | '_ \| '_ \ / _ \| '_ \ / _ \ | '_ \| | | |  | |_) | | | | (_) | | | | (_) || |_) | |_| |  | .__/|_| |_|\___/|_| |_|\___(_) .__/ \__, |  |_|                            |_|    |___/        

Re: [Wien] Space group change during running x sgroup

2020-07-24 Thread Peeyush Kumar Kamlesh
Dear Blaha Sir, 1. First I prepared a case.struct file with optimized lattice parameters, having F43m spacegroup (216). Which F lattice. it is as follows: -- F LATTICE,NONEQUIV.ATOMS: 3 216_F-43m MODE OF CALC=RELA unit=ang 13.647608