Electric field gradient, eta parameter calculation: bug report
Posted: Tue Aug 04, 2020 9:23 pm
Hi,
I would like to bring up a potential bug while calculating EFG using LEFG tag.
While developing the electric field gradient database (https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.09255), we noticed that eta is non-zero and unreasonable even when Vzz is zero. For example AlN(F-43m): https://www.ctcms.nist.gov/~knc6/jsmol/JVASP-7844 . From the crystal symmetry, we can predict the Vii should be zero anyways, but it would still be be nice to have this fixed in the VASP routines.
Electric field gradients after diagonalization (V/A^2)
(convention: |V_zz| > |V_xx| > |V_yy|)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ion V_xx V_yy V_zz asymmetry (V_yy - V_xx)/ V_zz
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1 -0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.363
2 -0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.757
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Best Regards,
Kamal
I would like to bring up a potential bug while calculating EFG using LEFG tag.
While developing the electric field gradient database (https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.09255), we noticed that eta is non-zero and unreasonable even when Vzz is zero. For example AlN(F-43m): https://www.ctcms.nist.gov/~knc6/jsmol/JVASP-7844 . From the crystal symmetry, we can predict the Vii should be zero anyways, but it would still be be nice to have this fixed in the VASP routines.
Electric field gradients after diagonalization (V/A^2)
(convention: |V_zz| > |V_xx| > |V_yy|)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ion V_xx V_yy V_zz asymmetry (V_yy - V_xx)/ V_zz
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1 -0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.363
2 -0.000 -0.000 0.000 0.757
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Best Regards,
Kamal