-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 99
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
BUG: elastic stress tensor instability #987
Comments
Thank you very much for reporting the issue. We will try to track it down. @gpetretto any ideas? |
Or @esoteric-ephemera maybe? It could also be a stress problem again. |
Here for comparison I present for the same system VASP calculation of elastic stress using https://github.com/prnvrvs/elastic_vasp, PBE functional, pseudopotentials with "semicores" (INCAR and second order coefficients are as follow:
C11= 146.8699695272352
[[146.87 106.51 106.51 0. 0. 0. ]
�[1m�[1;32m structure is mechanically stable�[0m G_voigt= 28.74 GPa E_VRH= 77.42 GPa |
I have another question:
|
The default mace model, trained on MP, is very inaccurate, producing diagonal elements of the elastic tensor ~80GPa (old atomate2 version). There are no HEA alloys in MP or smth similar... |
Hey @chtchelkatchev: hard to say what the issue is when you're using a custom model. Is it possible that a concurrent update to For what it's worth, I get the same IEEE elastic tensor as your
|
After installing the latest version of atomate2, I noticed a big change in the results of elastic stress tensor calculations, compared to the results found in the previous version: diagonal elements of the elastic tensor increased by 15GPa in the latest automate2. MACE force field was used. 15GPa is a large mistake. Hopefully the issue has a solution. Files used for the calculation I attach. Of cause, I made other tests: the issue is stable.
results.tar.gz
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: