[Pw_forum] Question on stress in a system with constraints
Stefano de Gironcoli
degironc at sissa.it
Thu Oct 13 09:53:31 CEST 2005
Dear Nicola and Kostya,
I did not think deeply about the question, so I may be wrong, but I agree
with Kostya.
Stress is a first order derivative and as such only GS properties should
be needed.
Without constraint it is related to homogeneous deformation, in presence
of constraints it is related to a locally inhomogeneous deformation but
Hellman-Feynman theorem should still apply.
I guess the result will be something like the unconstraint stress plus a
term
\sum_i,gamma F_i,gamma {\partial tau_i,gamma \over \partial
\epsilon_{alpha,beta} } / omega
where F_i,gamma is the (unconstrained) gamma component of the force on
atom i and {\partial tau_i,gamma \over \partial \epsilon_{alpha,beta} }
is the first order variation of the position of atom i with distortion
needed to fulfill the constraint.
In order to compute the stress induced by a displacement one indeed need a
linear response calculation and one could think that also a term involving
the internal strain parameter (Delta) is needed. something like
\sigma^constr_{alpha,beta} = \sigma^unconstr_{alpha,beta} +
\sum_i,gamma F_i,gamma *
{\partial tau_i,gamma \over \partial \epsilon_{alpha,beta} } +
\sum_i,gamma Delta_{alpha,beta;i,gamma} * delta tau_{i,gamma}
but stress is computed at zero deformation therefore delta tau_{i,gamma} is
actually zero
stefano
On Wed, 12 Oct 2005, Nicola Marzari wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi Kostya,
>
> I think that you do not need the response functions if you want to
> calculate the bare stress (i.e. derivative with respect to strain,
> in which fractional coordinates remain the same). If you want to have the
> bare stress plus constraints, you need to know at least the tensor that
> couples strain and forces.
>
> But keep in mind that the physical stress you want is dressed by the
> atominc internal relaxations; those would not be included in your
> bare CP stress, or in your bare CP stress plus contraints, and need in
> addition the inverse of the dynamical matrix.
>
> Any comments, anyone ?
>
> nicola
>
>
> Konstantin Kudin wrote:
>> Dear Nicola and Paolo,
>>
>> Thanks for the comments!
>>
>> However, I do not think that one needs the response functions from
>> DFPT to remove constraints from the stress.
>>
>> What happens is that for homogeneous strain it is probably assumed
>> that the fractional coordinates in the cell remain the same, however,
>> the lattice vectors change, and so all the atomic Cartesian coordinates
>> are updated. Is that how the stress actually defined?
>>
>> With constraints, the change in the lattice vectors should also update
>> the fractional coordinates of some atoms, leading to extra derivatives
>> which include the usual atomic forces of these atoms times the change
>> in the fractional coordinates.
>>
>> Kostya
>>
>>
>>
>> --- Nicola Marzari <marzari at MIT.EDU> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Hi Kostya,
>>>
>>>
>>> a quick comment - Don Hamann has written a fairly extensive PRB this
>>> year discussing many of these issues: Vol 72, 350105 (2005).
>>>
>>> CP stresses are (I hope) a derivative with respect to the strain
>>> tensor - ie.e they do not take into account that
>>> atoms can relax in response to the stress (the paradigmatic case is
>>> the
>>> response to a strain in the 111 direction in silicon - the internal
>>> strain parameter measures how the distance between the two atoms
>>> in the unit cell changes in response to the symmetry-breaking
>>> stress).
>>> So, you have the bare stress, calculated by CP and/or PWSCF, but you
>>> want the renormalized one "dressed" by the relaxations (mediated by
>>> the
>>> inverse of the dynamical matrix, and by the coupling between
>>> displacements and strains). The constraint will allow you to
>>> renormalize appropriately the bare stress, if you have all the
>>> response
>>> functions from DFPT (and their correct long-wavelength limit)
>>> but it might be easier to do it by finite differeces of the energy
>>> along the strain direction, while constraining the atoms.
>>>
>>> By the way - the dressing of a perturbation by the ionic relaxations
>>> is very relevant for piezoelectricity (e.g. Stefano de Gironcoli
>>> 1989 PRL) or for the interactions in substitutional alloy
>>> (PRL 72 4001 (1994) - some of the issues with the long wavelength
>>> limit are discussed there).
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> nicola
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Konstantin Kudin wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hi there,
>>>>
>>>> I have a basic question on the stress tensor.
>>>>
>>>> Presumably, the stress tensor computed in the CP implies
>>>
>>> continuous
>>>
>>>> stretching of the underlying system. Is this correct? Is the
>>>
>>> derivative
>>>
>>>> with respect to % of stretch, or is it to extra length in Bohrs,
>>>
>>> for
>>>
>>>> example?
>>>> What are the units of the stress in CP ?
>>>>
>>>> If one projected out certain forces (for constrained coordinates),
>>>> then the stress needs to be corrected for the fact that certain
>>>
>>> forces
>>>
>>>> are no longer there. Basically, the original stress was computed as
>>>
>>> if
>>>
>>>> all the forces were present, now, however, some of them are
>>>
>>> missing.
>>>
>>>> This means that if the system were to be stretched, the constrained
>>>> coordinates would still be constrained.
>>>>
>>>> My question is how I can correct the stress in a system with
>>>> constraints if this needs to be done.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>> Kostya
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo!
>>>> - Make it your home page! http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Pw_forum mailing list
>>>> Pw_forum at pwscf.org
>>>> http://www.democritos.it/mailman/listinfo/pw_forum
>>>
>>> --
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Prof Nicola Marzari Department of Materials Science and Engineering
>>> 13-5066 MIT 77 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge MA 02139-4307 USA
>>> tel 617.4522758 fax 617.2586534 marzari at mit.edu http://nnn.mit.edu
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Pw_forum mailing list
>>> Pw_forum at pwscf.org
>>> http://www.democritos.it/mailman/listinfo/pw_forum
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> __________________________________ Yahoo! Music Unlimited
>> Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.
>> http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited/
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pw_forum mailing list
>> Pw_forum at pwscf.org
>> http://www.democritos.it/mailman/listinfo/pw_forum
>
>
More information about the users
mailing list