How to consider a charge ordering?

Queries about input and output files, running specific calculations, etc.


Moderators: Global Moderator, Moderator

Locked
Message
Author
odkhuu

How to consider a charge ordering?

#1 Post by odkhuu » Sun Jul 17, 2011 6:19 am

Dear all,

I need to calculate a charge ordering for a insulating Fe3O4 using GGA+U method. Setting same U parameters on all Fe site (even though there are two different Fe sites, namely Fe+2 and Fe+3 in the unit cell, only one Fe type is considered in the calculations) does not give correct electronic structure, i.e., a band gap (The U is varied as well). In some literatures, two different U (J) parameters are used for two different Fe sites as mentioned before, resulting insulator. My question is how we devide Fe's sites into two charge ordered sites of +2 and +3 in input files?
Last edited by odkhuu on Sun Jul 17, 2011 6:19 am, edited 1 time in total.

jlbettis
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 1:13 am
Location: Raleigh, NC

How to consider a charge ordering?

#2 Post by jlbettis » Mon Jul 18, 2011 6:51 pm

Post your INCAR, you should be able to do this easily via your MAGMOM TAG. Give the appropriate number of unpaired electrons for each magnetic ion in an order corresponding to your POSCAR.
Last edited by jlbettis on Mon Jul 18, 2011 6:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
VASP 5.2.11
Cray XE6

odkhuu

How to consider a charge ordering?

#3 Post by odkhuu » Tue Jul 19, 2011 6:42 am

Thank you for your reply. My INCAR and POSCAR are as below,

SYSTEM = Fe3O4
NWRITE = 2
ISTART = 0
ICHARG = 2
INIWAV = 1
ISPIN = 2
MAGMOM = 2*-4.0 4*4.0 2*-4.0 4*4.0 2*-4.0 4*4.0 2*-4.0 4*4.0 32*0
LORBIT = 11
PREC = High
NELM = 100
EDIFF = 1E-05 NSW = 50
EDIFFG = 1E-03
IBRION = 2
POTIM = 0.5
ISIF = 2
ISYM = 2
ISMEAR = -5;SIGMA = 0.05
LDAU =.TRUE.
LDATYPE = 2
LDAUL = 2 -1
LDAUU = 6.8 0.0
LDAUJ = 0.9 0.0
LDAPRINT = 2
LMAXMIX = 4
ENCUT = 500.00 eV

POSCAR (only Fe):
0.0000000000000 0.0000000000000 0.0000000000000 T T T
0.5000000000000 0.5000000000000 0.0000000000000 T T T
0.6250000000000 0.1250000000000 0.1250000000000 T T T
0.8750000000000 0.3750000000000 0.1250000000000 T T T
0.1250000000000 0.6250000000000 0.1250000000000 T T T
0.3750000000000 0.8750000000000 0.1250000000000 T T T
0.2500000000000 0.2500000000000 0.2500000000000 T T T
0.7500000000000 0.7500000000000 0.2500000000000 T T T
0.8750000000000 0.1250000000000 0.3750000000000 T T T
0.6250000000000 0.3750000000000 0.3750000000000 T T T
0.3750000000000 0.6250000000000 0.3750000000000 T T T
0.1250000000000 0.8750000000000 0.3750000000000 T T T
0.5000000000000 0.0000000000000 0.5000000000000 T T T
0.0000000000000 0.5000000000000 0.5000000000000 T T T
0.1250000000000 0.1250000000000 0.6250000000000 T T T
0.3750000000000 0.3750000000000 0.6250000000000 T T T
0.6250000000000 0.6250000000000 0.6250000000000 T T T
0.8750000000000 0.8750000000000 0.6250000000000 T T T
0.7500000000000 0.2500000000000 0.7500000000000 T T T
0.2500000000000 0.7500000000000 0.7500000000000 T T T
0.3750000000000 0.1250000000000 0.8750000000000 T T T
0.1250000000000 0.3750000000000 0.8750000000000 T T T
0.8750000000000 0.6250000000000 0.8750000000000 T T T
0.6250000000000 0.8750000000000 0.8750000000000 T T T

First four Fe are Fe3+ (5 unpaired electrons), next two are Fe2+ (4 unpaired), and further keep a sequence.
Last edited by odkhuu on Tue Jul 19, 2011 6:42 am, edited 1 time in total.

tlchan

How to consider a charge ordering?

#4 Post by tlchan » Tue Jul 19, 2011 6:49 am

I need to calculate a charge ordering for a insulating Fe3O4 using GGA+U method. Setting same U parameters on all Fe site (even though there are two different Fe sites, namely Fe+2 and Fe+3 in the unit cell, only one Fe type is considered in the calculations) does not give correct electronic structure, i.e., a band gap (The U is varied as well). In some literatures, two different U (J) parameters are used for two different Fe sites as mentioned before, resulting insulator. My question is how we devide Fe's sites into two charge ordered sites of +2 and +3 in input files?
You can have 2 copies of the Fe pseudopotentials in POTCAR. This way, VASP will treat the 2 Fe pseudopotentials as 2 different species, and then you can specify the U parameters for them separately.
Last edited by tlchan on Tue Jul 19, 2011 6:49 am, edited 1 time in total.

odkhuu

How to consider a charge ordering?

#5 Post by odkhuu » Wed Jul 20, 2011 1:24 pm

Even though the calculations are not finilazed yet according to your suggestion, it would give a reasonable results in initial test. Thank you so much.
Last edited by odkhuu on Wed Jul 20, 2011 1:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

jlbettis
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 1:13 am
Location: Raleigh, NC

How to consider a charge ordering?

#6 Post by jlbettis » Fri Jul 22, 2011 8:50 pm

@tlchan - shouldn't he also edit his MAGMOM line to give a better initial guess closer to Fe3+ and Fe2+ , I would try to alter the MAGMOM line first:

MAGMOM = (#Fe3+)*5 (#Fe3+)*-5 (#Fe2+)*4 (#Fe2+)*-4

5 for unpaired electrons on Fe3+
4 for unpaired electrons on Fe2+
Last edited by jlbettis on Fri Jul 22, 2011 8:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
VASP 5.2.11
Cray XE6

jlbettis
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 1:13 am
Location: Raleigh, NC

How to consider a charge ordering?

#7 Post by jlbettis » Fri Jul 22, 2011 8:51 pm

And if that didn't work I would definitely add a new Fe to my POTCAR
Last edited by jlbettis on Fri Jul 22, 2011 8:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
VASP 5.2.11
Cray XE6

odkhuu

How to consider a charge ordering?

#8 Post by odkhuu » Tue Jul 26, 2011 10:04 am

Thanks to tlchan and jlbettis.

The idea from tlchan is a considerable. However just setting different initial moment for different Fe sites of Fe2+ and Fe3+ is enough to describe charge ordering through the test calculations. I obtained my desired results. Thanks again, jlbettis.
Last edited by odkhuu on Tue Jul 26, 2011 10:04 am, edited 1 time in total.

Locked