forum@abinit.org
Subject: The ABINIT Users Mailing List ( CLOSED )
List archive
- From: PGanesh <pganesh@ciw.edu>
- To: forum@abinit.org
- Subject: Re: [abinit-forum] Different piezo. constants
- Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 15:42:30 -0400
Dear All,
There are two methods to compute the first-derivative wavefunctions (ddk), one using iscf = -3 and rfelfd = 2 and the other using berryopt = -2 in a non-scf calculation. The second method uses the finite-difference formula introduced by Marzari and Vanderbilt and susceptibility has been show to converge much faster with kpt. grid. So will I be correct in saying that second-order derivatives as well (like the piezo) will converge much better using this method as opposed to method one? Its probably a moot question, but still wanted to confirm. This would probably mean that in the tutorial for getting non-linear properties, using "tffield_2.in" would give better piezo. constants than "tnlo_2.in + tnlo_3.in".
Thanks a lot.
PGanesh
- Different piezo. constants, PGanesh, 01/23/2008
- Re: [abinit-forum] Different piezo. constants, PGanesh, 01/23/2008
- Re: [abinit-forum] Different piezo. constants, D. R. Hamann, 01/23/2008
- Re: [abinit-forum] Different piezo. constants, PGanesh, 01/23/2008
- Re: [abinit-forum] Different piezo. constants, D. R. Hamann, 01/23/2008
- Re: [abinit-forum] Different piezo. constants, PGanesh, 01/23/2008
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.