Dear Andriii,

As far as I know, the default settings limit DFT + U + V to 50 atoms. However, 
this should be readily adjusted by changing the natx parameter in the 
Modules/parameters.f90 (Modules/parameters.f90 · develop · QEF - Quantum 
Espresso Foundation / q-e · 
GitLab<https://gitlab.com/QEF/q-e/-/blob/develop/Modules/parameters.f90>) to 
your system size.

Also, having a look at your input file I do not think that you should 
Hubbard_U(3) = 1d-10  AND Hubbard_V(3,3,1), since Hubbard_V(3,3,1) already 
refers to the on-site Hubbard U for atom 3.  To sum up, if you are using DFT + 
U use Hubbard_U, if you are using DFT + U + V just use the Hubbard_V keyword.

The solutions to both of these problems are well described in the pw.x  input 
description (pw.x: input description 
(quantum-espresso.org)<https://www.quantum-espresso.org/Doc/INPUT_PW.html#idm471>,
 hence I thought you might find it helpful to give it a read. Also, I highly 
recommend working your way through the examples on the QE github page 
(q-e/LiCoO2.scf.in at master · QEF/q-e · 
GitHub<https://github.com/QEF/q-e/blob/master/HP/examples/example10/reference/LiCoO2.scf.in>).

HTH,

Johannes Meusburger
ISIS Neutron and Muon Source & Diamond Light Source & University of Exeter, UK
________________________________
From: users <[email protected]> on behalf of Andrii 
Shyichuk via users <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2021 8:52 PM
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: [QE-users] Hubbard U+V for a large system

Dear Users,

I'm trying to run a DFT+U+V Hubbard parameters calculation (hp.x) on a
system with 80 atoms.

SCF run is fine, file hp.x run gives:

Index of the second rotated atom=           0
      Error in routine symonpair (1):
      Out of bounds

How can the second rotated atom be zero?

My input is based on the YouTube "Tutorial on DFT+U+V using Quantum
ESPRESSO (v6.7)".
The +U+V settings are:
                    lda_plus_u = .true.
               lda_plus_u_kind = 2
                  Hubbard_U(3) = 1d-10
              Hubbard_V(1,1,1) = 1d-10
              Hubbard_V(2,2,1) = 1d-10
              Hubbard_V(3,3,1) = 1d-10
              Hubbard_V(4,4,1) = 1d-10
              ...
              Hubbard_V(80,80,1) = 1d-10

Is it a bug, or is it just the question of some parameter tweaking?
I've already increased natx to 150.

Thank you.
Andrii Shyichuk, University of Wrocław.
_______________________________________________
Quantum ESPRESSO is supported by MaX 
(www.max-centre.eu<http://www.max-centre.eu>)
users mailing list [email protected]
https://lists.quantum-espresso.org/mailman/listinfo/users

This email and any attachments are intended solely for the use of the named 
recipients. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, 
copy or distribute this email or any of its attachments and should notify the 
sender immediately and delete this email from your system. UK Research and 
Innovation (UKRI) has taken every reasonable precaution to minimise risk of 
this email or any attachments containing viruses or malware but the recipient 
should carry out its own virus and malware checks before opening the 
attachments. UKRI does not accept any liability for any losses or damages which 
the recipient may sustain due to presence of any viruses.

_______________________________________________
Quantum ESPRESSO is supported by MaX (www.max-centre.eu)
users mailing list [email protected]
https://lists.quantum-espresso.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Reply via email to