The differences between the band gaps are very small. Probably the calculations were done properly. It can happen that the nature of the band gap depends on the potential.
________________________________ From: Wien <wien-boun...@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at> on behalf of Peeyush kumar kamlesh <peeyush.physik....@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 7:07 PM To: wien-requ...@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at; wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at Subject: Re: [Wien] Error in Bandstructure with hf Hi F. Tran sir, Band gap in scf2hf is 1.51eV while that is 1.47eV (Indirect) and 1.54eV (direct) from spaghetti. I did not get any error message. Still I am not satisfied with the calculations. Also I don't have any reference that changing potential functionals causes change in the nature of band gap. Regards Peeyush Kamlesh On Mon, 16 Dec 2019, 9:06 pm Peeyush kumar kamlesh, <peeyush.physik....@gmail.com<mailto:peeyush.physik....@gmail.com>> wrote: Dear Wien2k users, When I run Scf calculations by using pbe potential i got direct bandgap, while when i run the same using hybrid functional then I got indirect band gap. Also value of band gap in scf2hf file and bandgap obtained by bandstructure are not same. The command which i used are as follows: 1) create case.klist_band as usual 2) run_bandplothf_lapw -qtl -p 3) x spaghetti -hf -p Kindly help me to identify and resolve the error. Thank you! Peeyush Kamlesh
_______________________________________________ Wien mailing list Wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien SEARCH the MAILING-LIST at: http://www.mail-archive.com/wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/index.html
