Planewave cutoff energy convergence

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mayerz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Convergence Energy
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the convergence of planewave cutoff energy (PWcE) in computational simulations using DACAPO, particularly for a system with two atoms. Participants explore the implications of different pseudopotentials and the effects of varying PWcE on total energy calculations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant reports difficulties in achieving convergence for PWcE, suggesting that high values may be necessary and questioning whether pseudopotentials should be changed.
  • Another participant notes that hard pseudopotentials may require high cutoff values (around 700+ eV) for convergence, while ultrasoft pseudopotentials typically converge at lower values.
  • A participant clarifies that they are using ultrasoft pseudopotentials and observes that total energy converges at 400 eV, but higher PWcE values lead to lower total energy, raising questions about the reliability of this value.
  • One participant asserts that energy convergence tests do not require relaxation simulations and that single point calculations are sufficient.
  • Another participant asks for the total energy difference per atom between calculations at different PWcE values, noting specific energy differences observed in their calculations.
  • The original poster expresses confusion about the results and wonders if a lower PWcE could be acceptable, despite the observed behavior of energy differences.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of relaxation simulations for energy convergence tests and the implications of their findings regarding PWcE values. There is no consensus on the optimal PWcE value or the need for pseudopotential changes.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention specific energy differences observed in their calculations, indicating potential dependencies on the choice of PWcE and pseudopotentials. The discussion reflects uncertainty regarding the interpretation of energy convergence results.

mayerz
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hello everyone,

I have some problems with the convergence for the planewave cutoff energy, I tried to find the correct PWcE for a system with 2 atoms, I've determined the minimum k-point mesh with success, but when I compute the Total energy varying the PWcE, it seems that the convergence will be achieved till too high values of PWcE, should I change the pseudopotentials for the atoms?

I use DACAPO,

I'm Mexican by the way, so sorry if I made a mistake while I wrote this.

best,
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If the pseudopotential is hard then you may not achieve convergence until reaching to very high cutoff (~700+ eV). On the other extreme ultrasoft pseudopotentials tend to converge with much lower values. Another factor is the type of element you are studying.
Check the manual of your code and the recommended values of the pseudopotential.
 
Useful nucleus said:
If the pseudopotential is hard then you may not achieve convergence until reaching to very high cutoff (~700+ eV). On the other extreme ultrasoft pseudopotentials tend to converge with much lower values. Another factor is the type of element you are studying.
Check the manual of your code and the recommended values of the pseudopotential.

Thanks for your response, but in fact I'm using ultrasoft pseudopotentials (Vanderbilt), It seems that the Total energy converge at 400 eV but when I compute the total Energy with higher PWcE the tot E fall again to lower values. I didnt allow the atoms to relax, so the unique converge criteria is the total Energy, should I change to a relaxation calculation?

best
 
There is no need to conduct the energy convergence test in a relaxation simulation. A single point calculation is good enough to test energy convergence.

Can you tell us what the total energy difference per atom between the 400eV cutoff calculation and the more conservative one?
 
Useful nucleus said:
There is no need to conduct the energy convergence test in a relaxation simulation. A single point calculation is good enough to test energy convergence.

Can you tell us what the total energy difference per atom between the 400eV cutoff calculation and the more conservative one?
Of course! If I compute the total energy difference between the calculations done with a planewave cutoff energy of 320 and 400 eV , I get like 36 KJ/mol; something similar but in the interval of 400 - 480 eV (PWcE) I get about 4 KJ/mol; and the same with a PWcE range 480-700 eV, I get 17 KJ/mol (I've already done some calculations with higher pwce, up to 880 eV, and at this point (starting in 700) the plot seems to be almost asymptotic). But it seems to be a kind of weird to me, because I was hoping for a lower pwce value, it makes any sense?
could I take the 400 eV value as the planewave cutoff energy?

by the way I use a 6 atoms periodic model!
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
10K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K