Formed in 2009, the Archive Team (not to be confused with the archive.org Archive-It Team) is a rogue archivist collective dedicated to saving copies of rapidly dying or deleted websites for the sake of history and digital heritage. The group is 100% composed of volunteers and interested parties, and has expanded into a large amount of related projects for saving online and digital history.
Which is my ecutwfc converged value in this calculation result.
How to choose ecutrho in quantum espresso calculation.
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
New contributor
Nithyadevi is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Add a comment
|
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
Convergence is always defined in term of tolerance what user choose and based on your data, I will take ecutwfc as 70 Ryd. You should also report run time along with these data.
For considering ecutrho I will suggest you to stick with default value, if you are dealing with metallic system.
Kinetic energy cutoff (Ry) for charge density and potential: For norm-conserving pseudopotential you should stick to the default value, you can reduce it by a little but it will introduce noise especially on forces and stress. If there are ultrasoft PP, a larger value than the default is often desirable (ecutrho = 8 to 12 times ecutwfc, typically). PAW datasets can often be used at 4*ecutwfc, but it depends on the shape of augmentation charge: testing is mandatory. The use of gradient-corrected functional, especially in cells with vacuum, or for pseudopotential without non-linear core correction, usually requires an higher values of ecutrho to be accurately converged.
References:
