Energy difference between CP2K and VASP energy calculation results of fcc Si

1,031 views
Skip to first unread message

brhr

unread,
Feb 21, 2018, 6:16:34 AM2/21/18
to cp...@googlegroups.com
Dear CP2K experts,

I have a very rudimental (probably stupid) question.....

Energy of face centered cubic Si which calculated by VASP
found at VASPwiki example page (https://cms.mpi.univie.ac.at/wiki/index.php/Fcc_Si)
is -4.8758538 eV when the lattice parameter is 3.9 angstrom.

I also found fcc Si calculations at the CP2K tutorial pages.
 ( "Simple Static Energy and Force Calculation Using QUICKSTEP"(http://www.cp2k.org/howto:static_calculation)
and "How To Converge The Multi-Grid Used in QUICKSTEP"(http://www.cp2k.org/howto:converging_grid) )

Energy cutoff values, lattice parameters and XC functional are different between these VASP and CP2K cases,
and SCF_MAX is set to 1 in the case of CP2K.
So I calculated fcc Si energy with CP2K 5.1 setting the energy cutoff 240 eV ~ 8.820 a.u., the lattice parameter 3.9 angstrom,
 XC functional PBE and SCF_MAX defaut value.

The input file is the following:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
@SET twice_lp 7.80

&GLOBAL
  PROJECT Si_bulk8
  RUN_TYPE ENERGY
  PRINT_LEVEL MEDIUM
&END GLOBAL
&FORCE_EVAL
  METHOD Quickstep
  &DFT
    BASIS_SET_FILE_NAME  BASIS_SET
    POTENTIAL_FILE_NAME  GTH_POTENTIALS
    &MGRID
      CUTOFF 8.820
    &END MGRID
    &QS
      EPS_DEFAULT 1.0E-10
    &END QS
    &SCF
      SCF_GUESS ATOMIC
      EPS_SCF 1.0E-6
      ADDED_MOS 10
      CHOLESKY INVERSE
      &SMEAR ON
        METHOD FERMI_DIRAC
        ELECTRONIC_TEMPERATURE [K] 300
      &END SMEAR
      &DIAGONALIZATION
        ALGORITHM STANDARD
      &END DIAGONALIZATION
      &MIXING
        METHOD BROYDEN_MIXING
        ALPHA 0.4
        BETA 0.5
        NBROYDEN 8
      &END MIXING
    &END SCF
    &XC
      &XC_FUNCTIONAL PBE
      &END XC_FUNCTIONAL
    &END XC
  &END DFT
  &SUBSYS
    &KIND Si
      ELEMENT   Si
      BASIS_SET DZVP-GTH-PBE
      POTENTIAL GTH-PBE-q4
    &END KIND
    &CELL
      SYMMETRY CUBIC
      A     ${twice_lp}    0.00    0.00
      B     0.00    ${twice_lp}    0.00
      C     0.00    0.00    ${twice_lp}
    &END CELL
    &COORD
      SCALED
      Si    0.00    0.00    0.00
      Si    0.00    0.50    0.50
      Si    0.50    0.50    0.00
      Si    0.50    0.00    0.50
      Si    0.75    0.25    0.75
      Si    0.25    0.25    0.25
      Si    0.25    0.75    0.75
      Si    0.75    0.75    0.25
    &END COORD
  &END SUBSYS
  &PRINT
    &TOTAL_NUMBERS  ON
    &END TOTAL_NUMBERS
  &END PRINT
&END FORCE_EVAL

-----------------------------------------------------------------

A part of the result by CP2K 5.1 is
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SCF WAVEFUNCTION OPTIMIZATION

  Step     Update method      Time    Convergence         Total energy    Change
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     1 NoMix/Diag. 0.40E+00    0.2     3.06132393       -28.5675142867 -2.86E+01
     2 Broy./Diag. 0.40E+00    0.3     2.32214549       -28.7998050659 -2.32E-01
     3 Broy./Diag. 0.40E+00    0.3     0.58522732       -29.4698863750 -6.70E-01
     4 Broy./Diag. 0.40E+00    0.3     0.20998859       -29.2828168394  1.87E-01
     5 Broy./Diag. 0.40E+00    0.3     0.12057075       -29.1932153866  8.96E-02
     6 Broy./Diag. 0.40E+00    0.3     0.05618396       -29.1361561613  5.71E-02
     7 Broy./Diag. 0.40E+00    0.3     0.01016729       -29.1363881842 -2.32E-04
     8 Broy./Diag. 0.40E+00    0.3     0.00251115       -29.1338276656  2.56E-03
     9 Broy./Diag. 0.40E+00    0.3     0.00053053       -29.1364584302 -2.63E-03
    10 Broy./Diag. 0.40E+00    0.3     0.00012439       -29.1370164369 -5.58E-04
    11 Broy./Diag. 0.40E+00    0.3     0.00008751       -29.1372252303 -2.09E-04
    12 Broy./Diag. 0.40E+00    0.3     0.00001301       -29.1371970535  2.82E-05
    13 Broy./Diag. 0.40E+00    0.3     0.00001000       -29.1371543754  4.27E-05
    14 Broy./Diag. 0.40E+00    0.3     0.00000033       -29.1371468686  7.51E-06

  *** SCF run converged in    14 steps ***

  Electronic density on regular grids:        -32.0116716966       -0.0116716966
  Core density on regular grids:               32.0008931651        0.0008931651
  Total charge density on r-space grids:       -0.0107785315
  Total charge density g-space grids:          -0.0107785315

  Overlap energy of the core charge distribution:               0.00000000000000
  Self energy of the core charge distribution:                -82.06393942512820
  Core Hamiltonian energy:                                     15.15717724613789
  Hartree energy:                                              46.02547467061829
  Exchange-correlation energy:                                 -8.25223104355429
  Electronic entropic energy:                                  -0.00362831666283
  Fermi energy:                                                -0.03620657710631

  Total energy:                                               -29.13714686858875

-----------------------------------------------------------------

The obtained energy per atom is -29.13714686858875 / 8 = -3.64214335857359375 a.u. ~ -99.10776 eV
This is very different from -4.8758538 eV.

Could anyone interpret the difference between these results?
Thank you in advance.

brhr

hut...@chem.uzh.ch

unread,
Feb 21, 2018, 6:30:57 AM2/21/18
to cp...@googlegroups.com
Hi

in descending order:

- pseudopotentials
- k-points
- basis sets

only if you would have all of this equal, you could have the same results.

For comparing total energies with VASP you need to converge a VASP PAW
result wrt cutoff and k-points and then do a CP2K GAPW all-electron
calculation with the same k-point grid and with a converged basis set.
With these settings total energies could be rather close.

regards

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

-----cp...@googlegroups.com wrote: -----To: cp2k <cp...@googlegroups.com>
From: brhr
Sent by: cp...@googlegroups.com
Date: 02/21/2018 12:16PM
Subject: [CP2K:10014] Energy difference between CP2K and VASP energy calculation results of fcc Si

Dear CP2K experts,
I have a very rudimental (probably stupid) question.....
Energy of face centered cubic Si which calculated by VASP
found at VASPwiki example page (https://cms.mpi.univie.ac.at/wiki/index.php/Fcc_Si)
is -4.8758538 eV when the lattice parameter is 3.9 angstrom.
I also found fcc Si calculations at the CP2K tutorial pages.
( "Simple Static Energy and Force Calculation Using QUICKSTEP"(http://www.cp2k.org/tutorials:static_calculation)
and "How To Converge The Multi-Grid Used in QUICKSTEP"(http://www.cp2k.org/tutorials:converging_grid) )
--

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...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to cp...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/cp2k.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Ari Paavo Seitsonen

unread,
Feb 21, 2018, 3:13:17 PM2/21/18
to cp...@googlegroups.com
Dear brhr,

  Adding to Jürg's answer, if I remember correctly in VASP the total energy of the pseudo atoms (stored in the POTCAR files) is subtracted from the total energy. So even if you could (you most likely cannot, the kind of pseudo potentials is limited in both codes) calculate the total energy with a consistent set of the other parametres, you should consider also the energy of the isolated (spherical) atoms.

    Greetings from Paris,

       apsi

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cp2k+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.


To post to this group, send email to cp...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/cp2k.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


--
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+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to cp...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/cp2k.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



--
-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-
  Ari Paavo Seitsonen / Ari.P.S...@iki.fi / http://www.iki.fi/~apsi/
    Ecole Normale Supérieure (ENS), Département de Chimie, Paris
    Mobile (F) : +33 789 37 24 25    (CH) : +41 79 71 90 935

brhr

unread,
Feb 23, 2018, 6:08:11 AM2/23/18
to cp2k

Dear Professor Hutter and Dr. Seitsonen
 
Thank you for very instructive replies.  
In fccSi file (This file is generated from http://www.vasp.at/vasp-workshop/examples/fccSi.tgz, which is linked by
the above mentioned VASPwiki page),
   EATOM  =   103.0669 eV,    7.5752 Ry
The total energy considering the psudo-atom energy may be 103.0669 - 4.8758 ~ +98.1910 eV
This value is pretty close to the CP2K results except for its sign...
Anyway I should reexamine the CP2K input.
    brhr 
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages