<p dir="ltr">You should take band unfolding into consideration. For example, for a unit cell if we have<br>
Kpoints<br>
x y z n<br>
...</p>
<p dir="ltr">for a 2×2 super cell we should write<br>
Kpoints<br>
2x 2y 2z n</p>
<p dir="ltr">2×2 Super cell ----> bz is multiplied by 1/2 ----> kpoints must be multiplied by 2 to neutralize such a change.</p>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On May 18, 2017 1:45 AM, "Pietro Bonfa'" <<a href="mailto:pietro.bonfa@fis.unipr.it">pietro.bonfa@fis.unipr.it</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Dear Mohammadreza Hosseini,<br>
<br>
are you talking about band folding? I wrote a small utility to unfold<br>
the band structure of supercells long time ago. It's in a git repository<br>
hosted on <a href="http://qe-forge.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">qe-forge.org</a> (project name is unfold).<br>
<br>
Kind regards,<br>
Pietro Bonfa'<br>
<br>
On 05/15/2017 11:16 AM, Mohammadreza Hosseini wrote:<br>
><br>
><br>
> ______________________________<wbr>__________<br>
> From: Mohammadreza Hosseini<br>
> Sent: Sunday, May 14, 2017 1:43 AM<br>
> To: <a href="mailto:pw_forum@pwscf.org">pw_forum@pwscf.org</a><br>
> Subject: Re: Pw_forum Digest, Vol 118, Issue 12<br>
><br>
> Dear All<br>
><br>
> I am calculating the band structure of phagraphyne. First we computed for primitive unit cell and then for the 2X2 supercell. Although the bulk structure is same the band structure is different. What is the problem ? Should parameters be optimized again for supercell?<br>
><br>
> Mohammadreza Hosseini<br>
> Tarbiat modares uiversity<br>
> ______________________________<wbr>__________<br>
> From: <a href="mailto:pw_forum-bounces@pwscf.org">pw_forum-bounces@pwscf.org</a> <<a href="mailto:pw_forum-bounces@pwscf.org">pw_forum-bounces@pwscf.org</a>> on behalf of <a href="mailto:pw_forum-request@pwscf.org">pw_forum-request@pwscf.org</a> <<a href="mailto:pw_forum-request@pwscf.org">pw_forum-request@pwscf.org</a>><br>
> Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2017 10:00 PM<br>
> To: <a href="mailto:pw_forum@pwscf.org">pw_forum@pwscf.org</a><br>
> Subject: Pw_forum Digest, Vol 118, Issue 12<br>
><br>
> Send Pw_forum mailing list submissions to<br>
> <a href="mailto:pw_forum@pwscf.org">pw_forum@pwscf.org</a><br>
><br>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>
> <a href="http://pwscf.org/mailman/listinfo/pw_forum" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://pwscf.org/mailman/<wbr>listinfo/pw_forum</a><br>
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>
> <a href="mailto:pw_forum-request@pwscf.org">pw_forum-request@pwscf.org</a><br>
><br>
> You can reach the person managing the list at<br>
> <a href="mailto:pw_forum-owner@pwscf.org">pw_forum-owner@pwscf.org</a><br>
><br>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>
> than "Re: Contents of Pw_forum digest..."<br>
><br>
><br>
> Today's Topics:<br>
><br>
> 1. Re: how to determine the symmetry of a given phonon mode in<br>
> quantum espresso (Lorenzo Paulatto)<br>
> 2. Re: Gipaw - Magnetic susceptibility (Davide Ceresoli)<br>
><br>
><br>
> ------------------------------<wbr>------------------------------<wbr>----------<br>
><br>
> Message: 1<br>
> Date: Sat, 13 May 2017 15:08:04 +0200<br>
> From: Lorenzo Paulatto <<a href="mailto:lorenzo.paulatto@impmc.upmc.fr">lorenzo.paulatto@impmc.upmc.<wbr>fr</a>><br>
> Subject: Re: [Pw_forum] how to determine the symmetry of a given<br>
> phonon mode in quantum espresso<br>
> To: PWSCF Forum <<a href="mailto:pw_forum@pwscf.org">pw_forum@pwscf.org</a>><br>
> Message-ID: <1728518.gkaUiGcZ5e@paulaxps><br>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"<br>
><br>
> On Friday, 12 May 2017 23:44:33 CEST Mihiri Hewa bosthanthirige wrote:<br>
>> Hi,<br>
>> I am graduate student at Clemson university, currently working with Quantum<br>
>> Espresso. I would like to know how to determine the symmetry of a given<br>
>> phonon mode in quantum espresso.<br>
><br>
> Hello,<br>
> it is printed in the output of phonon at the end of the calculation, i.e.:<br>
> ...<br>
> End of self-consistent calculation<br>
><br>
><br>
> --<br>
> Dr. Lorenzo Paulatto<br>
> IdR @ IMPMC -- CNRS & Universit? Paris 6<br>
> +33 (0)1 44 275 084 / skype: paulatz<br>
> <a href="http://www.impmc.upmc.fr/~paulatto/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.impmc.upmc.fr/~<wbr>paulatto/</a><br>
> 23-24/4?16 Bo?te courrier 115,<br>
> 4 place Jussieu 75252 Paris C?dex 05<br>
> -------------- next part --------------<br>
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
> URL: <a href="http://pwscf.org/pipermail/pw_forum/attachments/20170513/0ddc04ba/attachment-0001.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://pwscf.org/pipermail/pw_<wbr>forum/attachments/20170513/<wbr>0ddc04ba/attachment-0001.html</a><br>
><br>
> ------------------------------<br>
><br>
> Message: 2<br>
> Date: Sat, 13 May 2017 16:09:02 +0200<br>
> From: Davide Ceresoli <<a href="mailto:davide.ceresoli@cnr.it">davide.ceresoli@cnr.it</a>><br>
> Subject: Re: [Pw_forum] Gipaw - Magnetic susceptibility<br>
> To: PWSCF Forum <<a href="mailto:pw_forum@pwscf.org">pw_forum@pwscf.org</a>><br>
> Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:6933968b-d5f1-fb6b-c518-e47ca4ce6da8@cnr.it">6933968b-d5f1-fb6b-c518-<wbr>e47ca4ce6da8@cnr.it</a>><br>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed<br>
><br>
> Dear Alan,<br>
> I think that there is no problem in doing a G=0 response<br>
> with a shifted mesh. The response is at G=0, hence it couples<br>
> wfcs at the same k. The susceptibility depends a lot on k-points<br>
> sampling and if your system has a vanishing band gap, convergence<br>
> can be a nightmare.<br>
> By default the macroscopic shape is diagonal:<br>
> nmr_macroscopic_shape(:,:) = 0.d0<br>
> nmr_macroscopic_shape(1,1) = 2.d0 / 3.d0<br>
> nmr_macroscopic_shape(2,2) = 2.d0 / 3.d0<br>
> nmr_macroscopic_shape(3,3) = 2.d0 / 3.d0<br>
> You can change the component (demagnetizing field) in the input file.<br>
><br>
> Good luck for your calculations!<br>
><br>
> Best,<br>
> Davide<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> On 05/12/2017 07:47 PM, Ambrozio wrote:<br>
>> Dear QE users and Developers,<br>
>><br>
>> I'm working with NMR calculations in Gipaw. Recently I did some shielding<br>
>> calculations and I have some questions regarding the magnetic susceptibility.<br>
>> The article from developers Mauri et al (*PRL 77, 26, 1996*) explain that the<br>
>> shielding of a bulk of a periodic system is also periodic (i.e. has the same<br>
>> periodicity of *G*, the reciprocal lattice vectors), and it is proportional to<br>
>> the magnetic susceptibility matrix. In the paper Mauri did a short discussion<br>
>> about the macroscopic susceptibility, which is calculated at *G=0*. Follow my<br>
>> questions:<br>
>><br>
>> i) Assuming that the macroscopic susceptibility is calculating at gamma point<br>
>> (*G=0*) and depends of the sample's shape, Does make sense to do a NMR<br>
>> calculation with automatic kpoints (monkhorst pack grid) that does not include<br>
>> the gamma point? It is mandatory to including the gamma point when the shape<br>
>> correction is .true.?<br>
>><br>
>> ii) Does the susceptibility depends of the supercell size? I found very<br>
>> different susceptibilities for the same material (AB graphite) changing the<br>
>> supercell size.<br>
>><br>
>> iii) Why the susceptibility matrix is not diagonal when the shape correction is<br>
>> .true.? Assuming the Mauri paper I think it doens't make sense. Help me to<br>
>> understand...<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> I appreciate any help,<br>
>><br>
>> Thanks in advance,<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Alan.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> --<br>
>><br>
>> Alan J. Romanel Ambrozio<br>
>> Bacharel em F?sica<br>
>> Mestre em Eng. de Materiais<br>
>> Doutorando em F?sica - PPGFis<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
><br>
> --<br>
> +-----------------------------<wbr>------------------------------<wbr>---+<br>
> Davide Ceresoli<br>
> CNR Institute of Molecular Science and Technology (CNR-ISTM)<br>
> c/o University of Milan, via Golgi 19, 20133 Milan, Italy<br>
> Email: <a href="mailto:davide.ceresoli@cnr.it">davide.ceresoli@cnr.it</a><br>
> Phone: +39-02-50314276, +39-347-1001570 (mobile)<br>
> Skype: dceresoli<br>
> Website: <a href="http://sites.google.com/site/dceresoli/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://sites.google.com/site/<wbr>dceresoli/</a><br>
> +-----------------------------<wbr>------------------------------<wbr>---+<br>
><br>
><br>
> ------------------------------<br>
><br>
> ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
> Pw_forum mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Pw_forum@pwscf.org">Pw_forum@pwscf.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://pwscf.org/mailman/listinfo/pw_forum" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://pwscf.org/mailman/<wbr>listinfo/pw_forum</a><br>
><br>
> End of Pw_forum Digest, Vol 118, Issue 12<br>
> ******************************<wbr>***********<br>
><br>
> ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
> Pw_forum mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Pw_forum@pwscf.org">Pw_forum@pwscf.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://pwscf.org/mailman/listinfo/pw_forum" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://pwscf.org/mailman/<wbr>listinfo/pw_forum</a><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
Pietro Bonfa'<br>
Dipartimento di Fisica e Scienze della Terra "Macedonio Melloni"<br>
Viale delle Scienze 7A<br>
43124 Parma - Italy<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Pw_forum mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Pw_forum@pwscf.org">Pw_forum@pwscf.org</a><br>
<a href="http://pwscf.org/mailman/listinfo/pw_forum" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://pwscf.org/mailman/<wbr>listinfo/pw_forum</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div>