Band structure of cobalt adsorbed graphene

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the band structure of cobalt adsorbed on graphene, specifically comparing a 3x3 supercell with one cobalt atom to a 4x4 supercell with the same atom density. The 3x3 configuration exhibits a band gap between the conduction and valence bands, while the 4x4 configuration shows no such gap. This discrepancy is attributed to finite size effects and the density of cobalt ad-atoms, which influences Co-Co interactions. The findings were derived using Density Functional Theory (DFT) implemented in Quantum ESPRESSO.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Density Functional Theory (DFT)
  • Familiarity with Quantum ESPRESSO software
  • Knowledge of band structure analysis
  • Concept of finite size scaling in computational physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the implementation of DFT in Quantum ESPRESSO for band structure calculations
  • Research finite size effects and their impact on electronic properties
  • Investigate the concept of finite size scaling in computational materials science
  • Learn about the influence of atomic positioning on electronic band structure
USEFUL FOR

Researchers in computational materials science, physicists studying electronic properties of materials, and anyone involved in the simulation of adsorbed systems using DFT.

saroj
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I have done the computations of band structure of cobalt adsorbed graphene. In 3x3 supercell of cobalt adsorbed (one cobalt atom) graphne, there is opening of band that is gap between conduction and valence band but there is no gap in 4x4 supercell of cobalt adsorbed graphene. I've done this in DFT implemented with quantum espresso. what is reason for the difference?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, I'm not sure how sensitive DFT is to these things or how the specific material is supposed to behave, but in other simulations one often needs to pay attention to boundary conditions (you can check if you have an even-odd effect when changing cell size) and to finite size effects. For the latter, the finite size of the system may open up a gap which disappears at some point when taking the thermodynamic limit. The only way around this is to measure the gap for a number of system sizes and see if there's a trend or not (you may want more than two data points though), a practice called finite size scaling. Could it be either of these things?
 
These are also different physical systems, due to the implied periodicity of these calculations. The first has a density of one Co atom per 3x3 cell of graphene, versus one Co atom per 4x4 cell of graphene - so the second implies a lower density of Co ad-atoms, and therefore a reduced Co-Co interaction. Thus the answer to "which is correct" depends on the physical system you are interested in, i.e. what physical Co density. Other minor things like how you position the Co over the C atoms of graphene can also make a difference ...
 

Similar threads

Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
8K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K