Cl2 binding energy
Moderators: Global Moderator, Moderator
Cl2 binding energy
I calculated the binding energy of Cl2 using PAW_GGA. The calculated binding energy is about 2.96 eV (3.50eV for Cl2 total energy and 0.29 eV for Cl total energy), while the experimental value is about 2.5 eV, the dofference is about 0.4 eV. Could this difference be that large in the vasp calculation? What could be the reason for this large difference?
SYSTEM = Cl2 molecule
ISMEAR = 0
SIGMA = 0.00001
IALGO = 48
LPLANE=.TRUE.
NPAR = 1
NSIM = 1
PREC = Accurate
NELMIN = 6
EDIFF = 1E-6
EDIFFG = -0.01
NSW = 500
IBRION = 2
and
SYSTEM = Cl atom
ISMEAR = 1
SIGMA = 0.00001
IALGO = 48
LPLANE=.TRUE.
#NPAR = 2
#NSIM = 2
NELMIN = 6
EDIFF = 1E-6
EDIFFG = -0.01
NSW = 500
IBRION = 2
ISPIN=2
SYSTEM = Cl2 molecule
ISMEAR = 0
SIGMA = 0.00001
IALGO = 48
LPLANE=.TRUE.
NPAR = 1
NSIM = 1
PREC = Accurate
NELMIN = 6
EDIFF = 1E-6
EDIFFG = -0.01
NSW = 500
IBRION = 2
and
SYSTEM = Cl atom
ISMEAR = 1
SIGMA = 0.00001
IALGO = 48
LPLANE=.TRUE.
#NPAR = 2
#NSIM = 2
NELMIN = 6
EDIFF = 1E-6
EDIFFG = -0.01
NSW = 500
IBRION = 2
ISPIN=2
Last edited by cichia on Mon Nov 26, 2007 8:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Newbie
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 3:17 pm
- Location: Singapore
- Contact:
Cl2 binding energy
This may be due to the discrepancy of the functional.
Last edited by wlyim on Tue Nov 27, 2007 12:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Newbie
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 1:05 pm
- License Nr.: Research Group E. Pehlke
Cl2 binding energy
Check convergence of your result with respect to:
- size of the cell
- value of ENCUT, ENAUG, PREC, EDIFFG (= -0.001 maybe?)
- try different PAW Potentials
I think ISMEAR = 0 and SIGMA = 0.01 or 0.001 could be safer.
The remaining error is most likely due to the functional.
PAW vs AE-Potential could also be responsible for some of the error.
- size of the cell
- value of ENCUT, ENAUG, PREC, EDIFFG (= -0.001 maybe?)
- try different PAW Potentials
I think ISMEAR = 0 and SIGMA = 0.01 or 0.001 could be safer.
The remaining error is most likely due to the functional.
PAW vs AE-Potential could also be responsible for some of the error.
Last edited by Franky on Tue Nov 27, 2007 1:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Administrator
- Posts: 2921
- Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 8:18 am
- License Nr.: 458
Cl2 binding energy
for small molecules, there may be significant discrepancy in the bonding energies of small molecules, depending on the chosen XC-functional (please also note that the DFT calculations correspond to T=0K). usually the PBE (3.04) or rPBE (2.7) potentials give better results. These values are taken from the PhD-Thesis of Robin Hirschl. (R. Hirschl, Thesis, University of Vienna, 2002)
Last edited by admin on Tue Nov 27, 2007 2:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Cl2 binding energy
I used the same INCAR the first Guy put here. Here is my result
PBE=2.84eV, GGA= 3.08eV, LDA=3.54eV. These valuse are far from expermental value=2.5eV. It is simple due to the system error of XC function or something else?
PBE=2.84eV, GGA= 3.08eV, LDA=3.54eV. These valuse are far from expermental value=2.5eV. It is simple due to the system error of XC function or something else?
Last edited by yzt102 on Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Cl2 binding energy
Best result can be obtained by using GGA+HSE06.
I calculated the binding energy of Cl2 as 2.59 eV.
I calculated the binding energy of Cl2 as 2.59 eV.
Last edited by rpf on Sun May 06, 2012 3:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.