geometric optimization of PtSSe bilayer giving unsatisfactory results

Queries about input and output files, running specific calculations, etc.


Moderators: Global Moderator, Moderator

Locked
Message
Author
fakir_chand1
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2023 7:42 am

geometric optimization of PtSSe bilayer giving unsatisfactory results

#1 Post by fakir_chand1 » Mon Jan 13, 2025 8:59 am

Dear experts,
I tried optimizing PtSSe Bilayer Structure but results do not match previously reported and other software's results.
lattice constant is supposed to be 3.69 A according to reported work and other software but our results always give smaller lattice constant
i have attached input and output files
please help us know what we can do to make it better
many thanks,
team kurukshtera :) :)

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

ahampel
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 36
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 11:41 am

Re: geometric optimization of PtSSe bilayer giving unsatisfactory results

#2 Post by ahampel » Mon Jan 13, 2025 11:37 am

Dear fakir_chand1,

thank you for asking your question on the official VASP forum.

I had a look at your input files and tried to reproduce your calculation. I am not an expert on this particular material so I cannot judge what is a "correct" lattice constant. However, I can reproduce your resulting CONTCAR with a smaller in plane lattice vector 4.32 (first component of CONTCAR). I found a problem in your calculation related to your POTCAR file. The POSCAR information does not match the POTCAR file. Please check if you also got this warning in your std output when running the calculation:

Code: Select all

WARNING: type information on POSCAR and POTCAR are incompatible
POTCAR overwrites the type information in POSCAR
typ   2 type information:  S  Pd

In your POTCAR file is also an POTCAR for Pd, which is probably a mistake? Please confirm. If I setup a POTCAR for Pt S Se and rerun the structural optimization I obtain an in-plane lattice constant of 3.67, which is closer to what you expect. I run the optimization first for your set EDIFF=1e-5 setting for 30 steps, then copied CONTCAR to POSCAR and run with EDIFF=1e-8 which converged after a few steps. This should be a first step towards the correct result I hope.

Let me know if this solves your problem.

Best regards,
Alex H.


fakir_chand1
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2023 7:42 am

Re: geometric optimization of PtSSe bilayer giving unsatisfactory results

#3 Post by fakir_chand1 » Tue Jan 14, 2025 5:04 am

thank you alex
yes i got that exact warning
now i am trying with new POTCAR file without Pd atom


ahampel
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 36
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 11:41 am

Re: geometric optimization of PtSSe bilayer giving unsatisfactory results

#4 Post by ahampel » Tue Jan 14, 2025 8:52 am

Hi fakir_chand1,

okay let me know if this problem is resolved. Then we can close the issue.

Best,
Alex


fakir_chand1
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2023 7:42 am

Re: geometric optimization of PtSSe bilayer giving unsatisfactory results

#5 Post by fakir_chand1 » Wed Jan 15, 2025 4:52 am

thank you so much dear alex :) :)
that worked so well, my lattice constant and bandgap both came out correct
folks in kurukshetra are very greatful to you.
very thankful,
team kurukshetra :) :)


Locked