[CP2K:3168] Re: error in bond dissociation energy of gas phase molecule
teodor... at gmail.com
Wed Apr 6 13:02:12 CEST 2011
that's correct -
Try nonetheless whatever decoupling you like (WAVELET or MT) - I'm quite skeptical on the ANALYTIC one though (so I would never suggest you this one specifically).
H2O2 and H2O have strong dipoles and these may still bias the energetics in full periodic boundary conditions (keep in mind that in a full slab of dipoles the electrostatic interactions falls like 1/r, although for two isolated dipoles the interactions goes like 1/r^3).
Remember to include also:
for your large basis set you may still have some contributions from the NL of the core hamiltonian matrix.
On Apr 6, 2011, at 12:55 PM, Jun wrote:
> Thanks for the prompt reply.
> We are calculating OH radical, rather OH anion. So, all the species
> are neutral.
> On Apr 6, 11:53 am, hut... at pci.uzh.ch wrote:
>> as you are generating charged species you should use a non-periodic
>> Try PERIODIC NONE in the &CELL section together with
>> PERIODIC NONE
>> PSOLVER WAVELET <- MT and ANALYTIC could also work but this is best
>> in the DFT section.
>> Juerg Hutter Phone : ++41 44 635 4491
>> Physical Chemistry Institute FAX : ++41 44 635 6838
>> University of Zurich E-mail: hut... at pci.uzh.ch
>> Winterthurerstrasse 190
>> CH-8057 Zurich, Switzerland
>> -----cp... at googlegroups.com wrote: -----
>> To: cp2k <cp... at googlegroups.com>
>> From: Jun
>> Sent by: cp... at googlegroups.com
>> Date: 04/06/2011 12:43PM
>> Subject: [CP2K:3165] error in bond dissociation energy of gas phase molecule
>> Hello everyone,
>> We did some testing calculations on bond dissociation energies of HO-
>> OH in vacuum using BLYP and B3LYP. We found a large difference from
>> reported results using the same functionals in literature; our numbers
>> are about 0.5 eV too small for both functionals. We also cross-checked
>> the numbers using gaussian program, indeed cp2k gives smaller bond
>> dissociation energy. It is not likely to be BSSE, as we use quite
>> large basis set TZV2P and also checked QZV2P. It is obvious that we
>> got either the total energy of H2O2 too high or the OH energy too low.
>> We checked the energy of H2O --> OH + H, which is very close to what
>> we found in literature. So, the problem appears to be the too high
>> energy of H2O2.
>> Also, we checked CH3-CH3, and found the same: CH3-CH3 bond
>> dissociation energy is 0.3 eV too small for both functionals compared
>> to literature numbers, while the energy of CH4-->CH3+H agrees well.
>> The bond dissociation energies (total energies without ZPE) are
>> summarised below, and inputs for H2O2-->2OH (H2O2.inp and OH.inp) are
>> BLYP B3LYP
>> H2O2-->2OH 2.04 eV (2.67) 1.80 eV (2.27)
>> H2O-->OH+H 5.10 eV 5.16 eV (5.2)
>> C2H6-->2CH3 3.64 eV (3.92) 3.69 eV (3.97)
>> CH4-->CH3+H 4.69 eV (4.77) 4.75 eV (4.67)
>> Numbers in parentheses are from literature. The geometry is optimised
>> one taken from literature, which is almost the same as optimised by
>> Can anyone comment on this? Many thanks in advance.
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cp2k" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to cp... at googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to cp2k+uns... at googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/cp2k?hl=en.
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cp2k" group.
> To post to this group, send email to cp... at googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to cp2k+uns... at googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cp2k?hl=en.
More information about the CP2K-user