[Pw_forum] change of crystal symmetry during vc-relax calculations with pressure

[mohnish pandey]

Dear Saqib,

The number of symmetry operations may be the same but the 'kind' of
symmetry may be different.

The way to study the pressure induced phase transition is to plot the
enthalpy as a function of pressure both the systems and look for the
crossover. Geometry optimization doesn't convert the one type of crystal to
the other. So you have to do the calculations for both of your system.

At the transition pressure the enthalpy of the dominant phase will be
lower. I hope it helps.


On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 3:09 PM, saqib javed <sqbjd at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Paolo,
>
> Actually lattice parameters obtained for high pressures ( 25, 30, 35 GPa)
> are the same if initial structure is either tetragonal or orthorhombic.
> Furthermore the initial symmetry for both cases as written at start of
> output reads the same
>
> *2 Sym. Op. (with inversion)*
>
> Thus perhaps change from tetragonal to orthorhombic structures at high
> pressure may not represent symmetry breaking ?? And results obtained are
> physicall meaningful i.e., tetragonal phase is unstable at high pressures
> in favor of orthorhombic phase. Plz correct me if you see anything wrong in
> my reasoning.
>
> cheers
> Saqib
> NCP, Pakistan
>
>
> > From: paolo.giannozzi at uniud.it
> > To: pw_forum at pwscf.org
> > Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 12:34:57 +0200
>
> > Subject: Re: [Pw_forum] change of crystal symmetry during vc-relax
> calculations with pressure
> >
> > On Fri, 2013-06-14 at 09:13 +0000, saqib javed wrote:
> >
> > > i started with tetragonal structure (ibrav=6) so i would have imagined
> > > that a=b would have been enforced by the code in case symmetry is
> > > conserved during optimization ...
> >
> > symmetry IS conserved during optimization, apart from unfortunate cases,
> > but only the symmetry of the starting configuration, as found by the
> > code. Look at which symmetries are found by the code in the starting
> > configuration.
> >
> > > you are saying that these results don't represent physical
> > > pressure-induced tetragonal to orthorhombic transition but just a
> > > numerical artificat ?
> >
> > I don't know. Likely: it is a 0.3% difference. Do you trust it?
> > I wouldn't. At least, not without some additional evidence.
> >
> > P.
> > --
> > Paolo Giannozzi, Dept. Chemistry&Physics&Environment,
> > Univ. Udine, via delle Scienze 208, 33100 Udine, Italy
> > Phone +39-0432-558216, fax +39-0432-558222
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Pw_forum mailing list
> > Pw_forum at pwscf.org
> > http://pwscf.org/mailman/listinfo/pw_forum
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pw_forum mailing list
> Pw_forum at pwscf.org
> http://pwscf.org/mailman/listinfo/pw_forum
>



-- 
Regards,
MOHNISH,
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Mohnish Pandey,
PhD Student,
Center for Atomic-scale Materials Design,
Department of Physics,
Technical University of Denmark
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.quantum-espresso.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20130614/def7da1f/attachment.html>