Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Figure out electrostatics in FDBM #277

Open
mondracek opened this issue May 14, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

Figure out electrostatics in FDBM #277

mondracek opened this issue May 14, 2024 · 0 comments
Assignees

Comments

@mondracek
Copy link
Collaborator

  • Nuclear charge needs to be added to the ab initio charge density of the tip (together with the charge of core electrons, unless an all-electron DFT code has been used).
  • Too wild spikes of charge density near the nucleus should better be avoided for the sake of numerical stability.

How to achieve this? Two solutions have been proposed and (to some extent at least) also implemented:

  1. Using the --Rcore option
  2. Using ddensity (delta-density, the self-consistent minus atomic non-self-consistent density) instead of the full self-consistent electron density for the tip

We should figure out which of these soulution works better (or perhaps propose yet another one?), both in terms of numerical stability and in terms of being substantiated by the physics of the problem.
Moreover, the solution may need to be different for VASP (pseudopotential code, the output density in CHGCAR exactly integrates to the total number of valence electrons) and for FHI-AIMS (all electron code, but the *_total_density.cube, as far as I know, does not have to integrate to the total number of electrons exactly, because of the finite grid that samples the density in the CUBE file).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants