[QE-users] users Digest, Vol 135, Issue 13
Punit Kumar
ip.punit.2016 at gmail.com
Sat Oct 13 12:55:07 CEST 2018
Hi Priyanka
Your input file is correct. It works fine when I opened it in xcrysden. Are
you able to open your input file in xcrysden? As you mentioned in your
previous email that you are not able to open your output file in xcrysden
so if you send your output file it will be easier to dig into the problem.
Punit
IIT Bombay
On Sat, 13 Oct 2018 at 15:31, <users-request at lists.quantum-espresso.org>
wrote:
> Send users mailing list submissions to
> users at lists.quantum-espresso.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.quantum-espresso.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> users-request at lists.quantum-espresso.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> users-owner at lists.quantum-espresso.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of users digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. vc-relax Convergence problem with 'TS' VdW correction
> (Hooman Yaghoobnejad Asl)
> 2. Electric Field (Ubaid Mohd)
> 3. Re: vc-relax Convergence problem with 'TS' VdW correction
> (Nicola Marzari)
> 4. Re2: Problem with ecutwfc, Error in routine ggen 1 (299008):
> too many g-vectors (Lucas Nicol?s Lodeiro Moraga)
> 5. PP of I from PSlib (Dr. K. C. Bhamu)
> 6. Re: unable to open the output file of vc relax inxcrysden
> while performing calculation for slab (Priyanka Makkar)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 09:36:20 -0500
> From: Hooman Yaghoobnejad Asl <hynr8 at mst.edu>
> To: users at lists.quantum-espresso.org
> Subject: [QE-users] vc-relax Convergence problem with 'TS' VdW
> correction
> Message-ID:
> <CAM_pzMuJMDJwQ6=UOZaJDxG-BS-gL5MranPKfZNn78D=
> ORhPOA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Dear all,
> I'm experiencing a problem with total force minimization when the vdw_corr
> = 'TS' is used. Without the vdw_corr option, force minimization completes
> smoothly, as shown below:
>
> Total force = 0.144455 Total SCF correction = 0.002938
> Total force = 0.096620 Total SCF correction = 0.004258
> Total force = 0.023833 Total SCF correction = 0.000694
> Total force = 0.013572 Total SCF correction = 0.000196
> Total force = 0.013176 Total SCF correction = 0.000775
> Total force = 0.013520 Total SCF correction = 0.001316
> Total force = 0.013322 Total SCF correction = 0.000670
> Total force = 0.013164 Total SCF correction = 0.000897
> Total force = 0.013634 Total SCF correction = 0.000800
> Total force = 0.016822 Total SCF correction = 0.000639
> Total force = 0.015558 Total SCF correction = 0.000354
> Total force = 0.012359 Total SCF correction = 0.000858
> Total force = 0.009014 Total SCF correction = 0.000322
> Total force = 0.007140 Total SCF correction = 0.000338
> Total force = 0.006073 Total SCF correction = 0.000556
> Total force = 0.005047 Total SCF correction = 0.000465
> Total force = 0.004639 Total SCF correction = 0.000050
> Total force = 0.003113 Total SCF correction = 0.000382
> Total force = 0.002225 Total SCF correction = 0.000268
> Total force = 0.001698 Total SCF correction = 0.000156
> Total force = 0.001505 Total SCF correction = 0.000372
> Total force = 0.001422 Total SCF correction = 0.000244
> Total force = 0.001442 Total SCF correction = 0.000420
> However, after implementing the VdW correction, it seems that the forces
> cannot be minimized further even after 200 ionic steps:
>
> Total force = 0.146620 Total SCF correction = 0.003488
> Total force = 0.108842 Total SCF correction = 0.004843
> Total force = 0.069519 Total SCF correction = 0.000923
> Total force = 0.016339 Total SCF correction = 0.002655
> Total force = 0.015353 Total SCF correction = 0.001041
> Total force = 0.016188 Total SCF correction = 0.000361
> Total force = 0.016350 Total SCF correction = 0.000832
> Total force = 0.015878 Total SCF correction = 0.001654
> Total force = 0.016273 Total SCF correction = 0.000560
> Total force = 0.016349 Total SCF correction = 0.000406
> Total force = 0.015879 Total SCF correction = 0.001403
> .
> .
> .
> .
> Total force = 0.015866 Total SCF correction = 0.001214
> Total force = 0.016279 Total SCF correction = 0.000263
> Total force = 0.016351 Total SCF correction = 0.000394
> Total force = 0.015879 Total SCF correction = 0.000394
> Total force = 0.016277 Total SCF correction = 0.001323
> Total force = 0.016347 Total SCF correction = 0.000194
> Total force = 0.015878 Total SCF correction = 0.000606
> I was wondering if anyone can make a comment on this? I'm using QE 6.2 on a
> cluster. Input copied below:
> &CONTROL
> title = 'Li0.5NiO2 NCPP FM VdW ' ,
> calculation = 'vc-relax' ,
> max_seconds = 86300 ,
> ! wf_collect = .true. ,
> outdir = '/' ,
> wfcdir = '/' ,
> pseudo_dir = '/scratch/05246/pseudo/' ,
> ! restart_mode = 'restart' ,
> prefix = 'LNO' ,
> disk_io = 'low' ,
> verbosity = 'high' ,
> nstep = 200 ,
> /
> &SYSTEM
> ibrav = 0,
> celldm(1) = 1.889726,
> nat = 21,
> ntyp = 3,
> ecutwfc = 80 ,
> ecutrho = 320 ,
> occupations = 'smearing' ,
> degauss = 0.001 ,
> smearing = 'gaussian' ,
> nspin = 2 ,
> starting_magnetization(1) = 0.25,
> vdw_corr = 'TS' ,
> /
> &ELECTRONS
> electron_maxstep = 500,
> conv_thr = 1.0d-6 ,
> /
> &IONS
> /
> &CELL
> /
> CELL_PARAMETERS {alat}
> 5.790000 0.000000 0.000000
> -1.447500 2.507144 0.000000
> 0.000000 0.000000 14.221000
> ATOMIC_SPECIES
> Ni 58.69000 Ni_ONCV_PBE-1.0.upf
> O 15.99000 O_ONCV_PBE-1.0.upf
> Li 6.94000 Li_ONCV_PBE-1.0.upf
> ATOMIC_POSITIONS crystal
> O 0.000000 0.000000 0.232000
> O 0.000000 0.000000 0.768000
> O 0.333333 0.333333 0.565333
> O 0.333333 0.333333 0.101333
> O 0.166667 0.666667 0.898667
> O 0.166667 0.666667 0.434667
> Ni 0.000000 0.000000 0.500000
> Ni 0.333333 0.333333 0.833333
> Ni 0.166667 0.666667 0.166667
> Li 0.166667 0.666667 0.666667
> O 0.500000 0.000000 0.232000
> O 0.500000 0.000000 0.768000
> O 0.833333 0.333333 0.565333
> O 0.833333 0.333333 0.101333
> O 0.666667 0.666667 0.898667
> O 0.666667 0.666667 0.434667
> Ni 0.500000 0.000000 0.500000
> Ni 0.833333 0.333333 0.833333
> Ni 0.666667 0.666667 0.166667
> Li 0.500000 0.000000 0.000000
> Li 0.833333 0.333333 0.333333
> K_POINTS automatic
> 4 8 2 0 0 0
>
> Thank you
> P.S. I benchmarked the wf cut-off energy vs binary oxides for each metal
> and 80 Ry gave values comparable to 320 Ry.
>
> --
>
> *Hooman Yaghoobnejad*
>
> *PhD, Department of Chemistry*
>
> *Missouri University of Science and Technology*
>
> *Rolla, MO 65409*
> *USA*
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.quantum-espresso.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20181012/be326e5a/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 20:20:07 +0530
> From: Ubaid Mohd <onlymubaid at gmail.com>
> To: users at lists.quantum-espresso.org
> Subject: [QE-users] Electric Field
> Message-ID:
> <
> CACgVGwi7BqN0Z6ji4oH2ZjFr-gXChKLfkzqdxgPCPTWpY7CWiQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Dear experts,
> I am doing electronic structure calculations of van der
> Waal heterostructure devices. I have done all vc-relaxation and electronic
> structure calculations. Now I want to introduce an external electric field
> perpendicular to the 2D system. I have been work on the tutorial examples
> related to the electric field given in the espresso.
> How should I start the electric field calculations? Can I start scf
> calculations with the relaxed parameters for electric field or I have to
> relax the system for each value of the electric field?
>
> I would appreciate any help on the subject.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.quantum-espresso.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20181012/2a21c700/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 21:31:47 +0200
> From: Nicola Marzari <nicola.marzari at epfl.ch>
> To: Quantum Espresso users Forum <users at lists.quantum-espresso.org>,
> Hooman Yaghoobnejad Asl <hynr8 at mst.edu>
> Subject: Re: [QE-users] vc-relax Convergence problem with 'TS' VdW
> correction
> Message-ID: <91059cd6-8e0c-09b9-9cc6-79f897465b5b at epfl.ch>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
>
> First I would try to have a much, much tighter convergence threshold
> than conv_thr = 1.0d-6; I think we use as a standard 0.2d-9 times
> the number of atoms - so in your case 4.0d-9, rather than
> 1.0d-6. If your selfconsistency is poor, your forces are noisy, and the
> relaxation slow.
>
> I also note that there is a variable called
> ts_vdw_econv_thr ; not sure what it does, but seems relevant.
>
> nicola
>
>
>
>
> On 12/10/2018 16:36, Hooman Yaghoobnejad Asl wrote:
> > Dear all,
> > I'm experiencing a problem with total force minimization when
> > the?vdw_corr = 'TS' is used. Without the vdw_corr option, force
> > minimization completes smoothly, as shown below:
> >
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.144455? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.002938
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.096620? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.004258
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.023833? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000694
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.013572? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000196
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.013176? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000775
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.013520? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.001316
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.013322? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000670
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.013164? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000897
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.013634? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000800
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.016822? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000639
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.015558? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000354
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.012359? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000858
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.009014? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000322
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.007140? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000338
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.006073? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000556
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.005047? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000465
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.004639? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000050
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.003113? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000382
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.002225? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000268
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.001698? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000156
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.001505? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000372
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.001422? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000244
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.001442? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000420
> > However, after implementing the VdW correction, it seems that the forces
> > cannot be minimized further even after 200 ionic steps:
> >
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.146620? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.003488
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.108842? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.004843
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.069519? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000923
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.016339? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.002655
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.015353? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.001041
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.016188? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000361
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.016350? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000832
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.015878? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.001654
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.016273? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000560
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.016349? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000406
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.015879? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.001403
> > ? ? ?.
> > ? ? ?.
> > ? ? ?.
> > ? ? ?.
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.015866? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.001214
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.016279? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000263
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.016351? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000394
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.015879? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000394
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.016277? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.001323
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.016347? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000194
> > ? ? ?Total force =? ? ?0.015878? ? ?Total SCF correction =? ? ?0.000606
> > I was wondering if anyone can make a comment on this? I'm using QE 6.2
> > on a cluster. Input copied below:
> > ?&CONTROL
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?title = 'Li0.5NiO2 NCPP FM VdW ' ,
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?calculation = 'vc-relax' ,
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?max_seconds = 86300 ,
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? !? ? wf_collect = .true. ,
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? outdir = '/' ,
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? wfcdir = '/' ,
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? pseudo_dir = '/scratch/05246/pseudo/' ,
> > !restart_mode = 'restart' ,
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? prefix = 'LNO' ,
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?disk_io = 'low' ,
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?verbosity = 'high' ,
> > nstep = 200 ,
> > ?/
> > ?&SYSTEM
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?ibrav = 0,
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?celldm(1) = 1.889726,
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?nat = 21,
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ntyp = 3,
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?ecutwfc = 80 ,
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?ecutrho = 320 ,
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? occupations = 'smearing' ,
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?degauss = 0.001 ,
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? smearing = 'gaussian' ,
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?nspin = 2 ,
> > ? ?starting_magnetization(1) = 0.25,
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ?vdw_corr = 'TS' ,
> > ?/
> > ?&ELECTRONS
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? electron_maxstep = 500,
> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? conv_thr = 1.0d-6 ,
> > /
> > ?&IONS
> > /
> > ?&CELL
> > /
> > CELL_PARAMETERS {alat}
> > ? 5.790000? ?0.000000? ?0.000000
> > ?-1.447500? ?2.507144? ?0.000000
> > ? 0.000000? ?0.000000? 14.221000
> > ATOMIC_SPECIES
> > ? ?Ni? ?58.69000? ?Ni_ONCV_PBE-1.0.upf
> > ? ? O? ? 15.99000? O_ONCV_PBE-1.0.upf
> > ? ?Li? ? 6.94000? ?Li_ONCV_PBE-1.0.upf
> > ATOMIC_POSITIONS crystal
> > O? ? ? ?0.000000? ?0.000000? ?0.232000
> > O? ? ? ?0.000000? ?0.000000? ?0.768000
> > O? ? ? ?0.333333? ?0.333333? ?0.565333
> > O? ? ? ?0.333333? ?0.333333? ?0.101333
> > O? ? ? ?0.166667? ?0.666667? ?0.898667
> > O? ? ? ?0.166667? ?0.666667? ?0.434667
> > Ni? ? ?0.000000? ?0.000000? ?0.500000
> > Ni? ? ?0.333333? ?0.333333? ?0.833333
> > Ni? ? ?0.166667? ?0.666667? ?0.166667
> > Li? ? ? 0.166667? ?0.666667? ?0.666667
> > O? ? ? ?0.500000? ?0.000000? ?0.232000
> > O? ? ? ?0.500000? ?0.000000? ?0.768000
> > O? ? ? ?0.833333? ?0.333333? ?0.565333
> > O? ? ? ?0.833333? ?0.333333? ?0.101333
> > O? ? ? ?0.666667? ?0.666667? ?0.898667
> > O? ? ? ?0.666667? ?0.666667? ?0.434667
> > Ni? ? ?0.500000? ?0.000000? ?0.500000
> > Ni? ? ?0.833333? ?0.333333? ?0.833333
> > Ni? ? ?0.666667? ?0.666667? ?0.166667
> > Li? ? ? 0.500000? ?0.000000? ?0.000000
> > Li? ? ? 0.833333? ?0.333333? ?0.333333
> > K_POINTS automatic
> > 4 8 2? ?0 0 0
> >
> > Thank you
> > P.S. I benchmarked the wf cut-off energy vs binary oxides for each metal
> > and 80 Ry gave values comparable to 320 Ry.
> >
> > --
> > *Hooman Yaghoobnejad
> > *
> > *PhD, Department of Chemistry
> > *
> > *Missouri University of Science and Technology
> > *
> > *Rolla, MO 65409
> > *
> > *USA*
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > users mailing list
> > users at lists.quantum-espresso.org
> > https://lists.quantum-espresso.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> >
>
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Prof Nicola Marzari, Chair of Theory and Simulation of Materials, EPFL
> Director, National Centre for Competence in Research NCCR MARVEL, EPFL
> http://theossrv1.epfl.ch/Main/Contact http://nccr-marvel.ch/en/project
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 18:17:50 -0300
> From: Lucas Nicol?s Lodeiro Moraga <lucas.lodeiro at ug.uchile.cl>
> To: users at lists.quantum-espresso.org
> Subject: [QE-users] Re2: Problem with ecutwfc, Error in routine ggen
> 1 (299008): too many g-vectors
> Message-ID:
> <CAJHgcJ9sRSfo=
> FaBLBrJtP+tsJsMKac_JUB62S0kP3tSZWiySQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Sorry I forgot to put the link where I have the files.
>
> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/cudj1bc7cqef4dk/AAB0CNoU7BiVX3mU_eTvUvPwa?dl=0
>
> I run the input in 6.1 and 5.3 versions, and in a variety of number of
> cores.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.quantum-espresso.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20181012/bb39efbd/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2018 03:11:22 +0530
> From: "Dr. K. C. Bhamu" <kcbhamu85 at gmail.com>
> To: Quantum Espresso users Forum <users at lists.quantum-espresso.org>
> Subject: [QE-users] PP of I from PSlib
> Message-ID:
> <
> CAJYci+TEbzS7Hzqn2TbWhQOHJG-B-uCxoFb0V4bMtyOKaBHihw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hii List,
>
> I tried to get PP of "I" from PSlibrary and I could not get UPF format
> instead I am getting "I.pbe-n-rrkjus_psl.1.0.0.UPF.xml".
> Could someone please suggest me how may I have PP of "I" from 1.0.0 version
> in UPF format ?
> Also, SSSP library do not have uspp for "I".
>
> regards
> Bhamu
>
>
> K. C. Bhamu
> CSIR-NCL, Pune
> India
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.quantum-espresso.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20181013/8c73613c/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2018 14:38:15 +0530
> From: Priyanka Makkar <p20170414 at goa.bits-pilani.ac.in>
> To: Quantum Espresso users Forum <users at lists.quantum-espresso.org>,
> hpaudya1 at binghamton.edu
> Subject: Re: [QE-users] unable to open the output file of vc relax
> inxcrysden while performing calculation for slab
> Message-ID:
> <CAPTOZ+Xus1Dfq+6VYtsCnBw0xNDfVB6vOPHGg-5NJdQk=
> zcHnw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi Hari,
> Thanks for the reply. As suggested by you, I have checked the lattice
> parameters and atomic positions in output of vc-relax and both are present.
> I am sending you the input file. kindly help me out in resolving the issue.
>
>
>
>
> &CONTROL
> title = 'MnF-slab' ,
> calculation = 'vc-relax' ,
> restart_mode = 'from_scratch' ,
> outdir = '/home/p20170414/MnF-slab/' ,
> wfcdir = '/home/p20170414/MnF-slab/' ,
> pseudo_dir =
>
> '/opt/apps/quantum_espresso/qe-6.1/pseudo/pslibrary.1.0.0/pbe/PSEUDOPOTENTIALS/'
> ,
> prefix = 'pwscf' ,
> verbosity = 'high' ,
> /
> &SYSTEM
> ibrav = 0,
> celldm(1) = 11.3557527319d0,
> nat = 28,
> ntyp = 3,
> ecutwfc = 40 ,
> ecutrho = 480 ,
> input_dft = 'pbe' ,
> occupations = 'smearing' ,
> degauss = 0.005d0 ,
> smearing = 'methfessel-paxton' ,
> nspin = 2 ,
> starting_magnetization(1) = 0.5,
> lda_plus_u = .true. ,
> lda_plus_u_kind = 0 ,
> Hubbard_U(1) = 1.769,
> Hubbard_U(2) = 6.531,
> vdw_corr = 'grimme-d2' ,
> /
> &ELECTRONS
> scf_must_converge = .false. ,
> conv_thr = 1d-06 ,
> mixing_mode = 'local-TF' ,
> mixing_beta = 0.7d0 ,
> /
> &IONS
> ion_dynamics = 'bfgs' ,
> /
> &CELL
> cell_dynamics = 'bfgs' ,
> /
> CELL_PARAMETERS alat
> 1.000000000 0.000000000 0.000000000
> -0.500000000 0.866025404 0.000000000
> 0.000000000 0.000000000 3.297106646
> ATOMIC_SPECIES
> Fe 55.84500 Fe.pbe-n-rrkjus_psl.1.0.0.UPF
> Mn 54.93800 Mn.pbe-spn-rrkjus_psl.1.0.0.UPF
> O 15.99940 O.pbe-n-rrkjus_psl.1.0.0.UPF
> ATOMIC_POSITIONS crystal
> Fe 0.000000000 0.000000000 0.030955041
> O 0.363288149 0.181644075 0.064691840
> O 0.818355924 0.181644075 0.064691840
> O 0.818355924 0.636711850 0.064691840
> O 0.333333334 0.666666667 0.070255356
> Mn 0.500000000 0.000000000 0.123820165
> Mn 0.000000000 0.500000000 0.123820165
> Mn 0.500000000 0.500000000 0.123820165
> O 0.666666666 0.333333333 0.177384975
> O 0.181644076 0.363288150 0.182948491
> O 0.181644076 0.818355925 0.182948491
> O 0.636711851 0.818355925 0.182948491
> Fe 0.000000000 0.000000000 0.216685290
> Mn 0.333333333 0.666666667 0.247640331
> Fe 0.666666667 0.333333333 0.278595372
> O 0.029954816 0.514977408 0.312332171
> O 0.485022591 0.514977408 0.312332171
> O 0.485022591 0.970045183 0.312332171
> O 0.000000001 0.000000000 0.317895687
> Mn 0.166666667 0.333333333 0.371460496
> Mn 0.166666667 0.833333333 0.371460496
> Mn 0.666666667 0.833333333 0.371460496
> O 0.333333333 0.666666666 0.425025306
> O 0.303378517 0.151689259 0.430588821
> O 0.848310742 0.151689259 0.430588821
> O 0.848310742 0.696621484 0.430588821
> Fe 0.666666667 0.333333333 0.464325620
> Mn 0.000000000 0.000000000 0.495280662
> K_POINTS automatic
> 4 4 1 0 0 0
>
>
>
>
> *Priyanka Makkar*
> *Research Scholar*
> *BITS Pilani K K Birla Goa Campus*
> *India*
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 7:54 PM Hari Paudyal <hpaudya1 at binghamton.edu>
> wrote:
>
> > [image: Boxbe] <https://www.boxbe.com/overview> This message is eligible
> > for Automatic Cleanup! (hpaudya1 at binghamton.edu) Add cleanup rule
> > <
> https://www.boxbe.com/popup?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.boxbe.com%2Fcleanup%3Fkey%3Dfn2blv1T0REAdPG6pgkRgEArev5hWuI%252BoUe0qrzb6ZQ%253D%26token%3D0iSTP0cRHbWOy5To4tx%252F%252BOvCHnBODab7LNW%252B48IiHj39F1y3V0m%252BEIZ4VoKj8sAWNMUTRxGMapSKH2rZP7EGZ7TN3%252BaHOnduQzO2GEGTJDkRXI7%252BxuWZG0rDV%252FqocQqBLdM7RAP6X9ULPib2Gb4FcA%253D%253D&tc_serial=43527014435&tc_rand=1523273503&utm_source=stf&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ANNO_CLEANUP_ADD&utm_content=001
> >
> > | More info
> > <
> http://blog.boxbe.com/general/boxbe-automatic-cleanup?tc_serial=43527014435&tc_rand=1523273503&utm_source=stf&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ANNO_CLEANUP_ADD&utm_content=001
> >
> > Hi Priyanka,
> >
> > If you provide your input/output file then it would be easy to figure out
> > the problem exactly. This time I can only guess based on my experience
> > using xcrysden. In each bfgs step you get lattice parameters and atomic
> > position written in the output of vc-relax, I think you are missing those
> > information. You can check your output if the system is relaxed correctly
> > writing the output. Let us know, if any.
> >
> > Best,
> > Hari Paudyal
> > SUNY Binghamton, NY
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 4:41 AM Priyanka Makkar <
> > p20170414 at goa.bits-pilani.ac.in> wrote:
> >
> >> Hello all,
> >> I am doing the calculation for making a slab of MnFe2O4 but the output
> >> file is not opening in xcrysden after vc relax. It is giving the
> following
> >> error as shown below. kindly help in getting the solution.
> >>
> >> Your reply will be grateful.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Operating system : Linux
> >> [p20170414 at kosambi ~]$ Package ImageMagick's convert: /usr/bin/convert
> >> Package ImageMagick's import: /usr/bin/import
> >> Package Xwd: /usr/bin/xwd
> >> Executing: /opt/apps/xcrysden/bin/ftnunit
> >> PWSCF version of the output: 6.1
> >> TEXT-WIDGET: .a1.f1.t
> >> PWSCF version of the output: 6.1
> >> TEXT-WIDGET: .a2.f1.t
> >> Executing: /usr/bin/gawk -f /opt/apps/xcrysden/Awk/pwo_coortype.awk
> >> /home/p20170414/MnF-Slab/MnF-vc-relax.pw.out
> >> ctypes = 0
> >> pwOutputPresetWhat: /opt/apps/xcrysden/scripts/pwo2xsf.sh --latestcoor
> >> /home/p20170414/MnF-Slab/MnF-vc-relax.pw.out
> >> Executing: sh /opt/apps/xcrysden/scripts/pwo2xsf.sh --latestcoor
> >> /home/p20170414/MnF-Slab/MnF-vc-relax.pw.out > pwo2xsf.xsf
> >> Executing: sh /opt/apps/xcrysden/scripts/dummy.sh
> >> /home/p20170414/MnF-Slab/MnF-vc-relax.pw.out
> >> Number of Atoms: 0
> >> Number of Frames: 0
> >> Estimated number of bonds = 0
> >> sInfo(dim) = 0; periodic(dim) = 0
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> users mailing list
> >> users at lists.quantum-espresso.org
> >> https://lists.quantum-espresso.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > users mailing list
> > users at lists.quantum-espresso.org
> > https://lists.quantum-espresso.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> >
>
>
> --
> *Priyanka Makkar*
> *Research Scholar*
> *BITS Pilani K K Birla Goa Campus*
> *India*
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.quantum-espresso.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20181013/11e8ba11/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> users at lists.quantum-espresso.org
> https://lists.quantum-espresso.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of users Digest, Vol 135, Issue 13
> **************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.quantum-espresso.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20181013/304629b9/attachment.html>
More information about the users
mailing list