GAPW and GTH
Harald Forbert
harald.... at theochem.ruhr-uni-bochum.de
Tue Jul 3 17:21:46 UTC 2007
Sorry, it took me a while to test things, but EPSFIT at 10^-2 seems to
work really well. Thanks a lot. :)
Though while testing I noticed something 'odd':
If I use H2O instead of HCl (and essentially the same input as above),
the results also look good, the grid effect is quite a bit smaller
than the
default EPS_FIT, MD seems stable, but if I just do a energy_force
calculation of the following configuration:
O 0.0 0.0 0.0
H 0.0 0.59124 -0.77291
H 0.0 0.59124 0.77291
I get a strange force on the oxygen in z direction:
ENERGY| Total FORCE_EVAL ( QS ) energy (a.u.):
-17.211597494294843
FORCES| (a.u.)
O 0.0000000127 -0.0024393452 0.0001621868
H -0.0000000043 0.0012914592 0.0010373482
H 0.0000000041 0.0011673908 -0.0011995375
Now, the force isn't that large, but if I simply switch axis (from z
to x) to:
O 0.0 0.0 0.0
H -0.77291 0.59124 0.0
H 0.77291 0.59124 0.0
I get basically the same energy, and the force on oxygen looks much
better as
one would expect from symmetry:
ENERGY| Total FORCE_EVAL ( QS ) energy (a.u.):
-17.211597494294828
FORCES| (a.u.)
O -0.0000000021 -0.0024393452 0.0000000127
H 0.0011184426 0.0012294258 -0.0000000043
H -0.0011184430 0.0012294243 0.0000000041
How come the different axis give such different results? Is it really
just the ordering
of the loops over axis in the code? I wouldn't have thought the impact
quite that
large from -2.1e9 to 1.6e-4....
Or is this an unlucky extreme example (due to symmetry)?
BTW the only force term that is really different in both calculations
is the vhxc_atom part and
for default EPS_FIT the difference is far less pronounced.
-H
More information about the CP2K-user
mailing list