[CP2K-user] [CP2K:11230] Cell optimization of layered material, convergence vs K_POINTS

hut... at chem.uzh.ch hut... at chem.uzh.ch
Wed Feb 13 13:29:14 UTC 2019


just a few suggestions that might help:

1) use EPS_DEFAULT 1.e-12 for additional numerical stability
2) use &REF_CELL with a cell of about the size of the largest cell expected
   this improves numerical stability by enforcing a constant number of grid points
   I think it is more stable

best regards

Juerg Hutter                         Phone : ++41 44 635 4491
Institut für Chemie C                FAX   : ++41 44 635 6838
Universität Zürich                   E-mail: hut... at chem.uzh.ch
Winterthurerstrasse 190
CH-8057 Zürich, Switzerland

-----cp... at googlegroups.com wrote: -----
To: "cp2k" <cp... at googlegroups.com>
From: "Daniele Ongari" 
Sent by: cp... at googlegroups.com
Date: 02/04/2019 12:00PM
Subject: [CP2K:11230] Cell optimization of layered material, convergence vs K_POINTS

Dear CP2K developers, 

while optimizing the cell of 2d layered covalent-organic frameworks (think: graphite with holes) we are encountering instabilities that can seemingly be quenched by increasing the number of layers used in the cell (increasing the K_POINTS works as well).
Since the materials tend to have a PBE gap above 2eV and should be van-der-Waals bonded only, we find that surprising.

In the following we report one of these problematic cases, COF-1, using PBE-D3(BJ) functional.
Figure 1 shows the starting unit cell, which contains 2 layers of the material (before and after the cell_opt with kpoints).

Figure 2 shows the convergence of the total energy, once using just the Gamma point and once using 1x1x2 k-points (2 k-points along the z direction). Note that for the second one we use DIAGONALIZATION and EXTRAPOLATION=USE_GUESS, as required for using kpoints, but the same CELL_OPT settings.

The cell find its optimal dimension by tilting in the xy plane and, in the case of Gamma calculation, the optimization oscillates without converging.

- ot-gamma inp: https://www.dropbox.com/s/g5usnojtblhomi3/ot_inp.txt?dl=0
- kpoints inp: https://www.dropbox.com/s/d69170jnqfuq4g6/kp_inp.txt?dl=0
- coord+inputs+outputs zipped: https://www.dropbox.com/s/k3kl6sw9u8ine2y/cof1_ot_vs_kpoints.zip?dl=1

We used K-POINTS because the perpendicular width in z direction is 6.920 Angs at the start and gets 6.766 Angsat the end, however we are confused on why the K-POINTS in z directions are so important for the stability of the calculation. Is there any other parameter that I can tune to stabilize the no-K-POINTS+OT calculation?

I tested already many options without kpoints, without success (always experiencing jumps in the energy during the CELL_OPT):

1) lower EPS_SCF
2) higher CUTOFF

and with (a partial) success:

5) Duplicating the cell in z direction gives almost exactly the same result as with K-POINTS (and is more efficients in terms of speed, albeit not an elegant solution)
6) CG or (much) lower TRUST_RADIUS=0.1, do not jump but they are *very* inefficient, and therefore not a solution.
7) Using the PW code Quantum Espresso (much slower than CP2K for this system) with Gamma approximation. In that case PBE-D3 does always lead to a smooth cell_opt convergence using bfgs. As expected, the z dimension of the cell is small, but "not so small" to cause problems.

Therefore, the most efficient solution for now it would be to duplicate my 2D materials in the z direction (mod #5) to have a robust convergence with the price of a ~2x slower calculation and having a bigger reference cell. This does not *always* solve the cell_opt convergence problems, but it works for most of the problematic cases. Consider that, as in my previous post on OT convergence problems (https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/cp2k/X8RhYjSVVWc/TXdeLTMUCQAJ) our aim is to use general setting for high-throughput calculation. 

Do you have any other suggestion to try solving my problem?
I expect that these 2D-layers have a corrugated potential surface: I'm not looking for the absolute minima, but at least a reasonable one without geometry convergence problem. I'm wondering if there are some threshold value that I can tune not to have interference with the CELL_OPT, without increasing much the computational cost (not more than ~2x).

Any suggestion is welcome, thanks!

Daniele Ongari

 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cp2k" group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cp2k+uns... at googlegroups.com.
 To post to this group, send email to cp... at googlegroups.com.
 Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/cp2k.
 For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

More information about the CP2K-user mailing list