Hello LAMMPS Users,
I am looking to run some metal oxidation studies and am interested in using the Streitz-Mintmire (CTIP) potential form to handle the variable charges. I can see in the LAMMPS documentation that the original Streitz-Mintmire formalism has been implemented with the coul/streitz pair style. However, I would like to know if the valence charge bound corrections proposed by Zhou et al (Phys. Rev. B 69, 035402 (2004) - Modified charge transfer--embedded atom method potential for metal/metal oxide systems) have also been implemented? I do not see this anywhere in the documentation, but have seen it used in several recent publications making use of LAMMPS (for example: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemmater.8b03969), and it is also referenced in the most recent LAMMPS publication (Redirecting). Any clarity on this issue would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Gabriel Plummer
I have sent an email to the developer of the coul/streitz pair style to provide his comments on that.
When I look at the potential files (AlO.streitz
and AlO.eam.alloy
) it seems they are consistent with what you are looking for. However, it also looks like the corrections proposed by Zhou only affect the EAM potential file not the pair style itself.
Thank you, Axel. My main concern from preliminary testing is that when I apply compressive isotropic strain to an Al2O3 cell, the charges on Al and O readily exceed +3 and -2 respectively (this occurs at only around 2% strain). Including the charge bound corrections of Zhou et al should not allow this to happen. Those corrections also require the definition of q(min) and q(max) for each atomic species and a coefficient, omega. For the coul/streitz pair style I do not see any place for the definition of these parameters, which made me think it had not been implemented.
That is definitely a question for the developer/contributor of the pair style. This sounds like it would be a feature that needs to be available in the charge-equilibration fix. Coincidentally, those fixes and the QEQ package were written by the same person. If you need his contact info please let me know.
Yes, that would be perfect if you would like to email me ([email protected]). Thanks!
Hello Gabriel and Alex,
Was there any movement regarding the implementation of Zhou et al. modified charge-transfer embedded atom method in LAMMPS? I ask this as the author of the paper you had referenced in your original question and since I am now working on making the LAMMPS extensions developed for that paper to work with newer versions of LAMMPS.
NOTE: To avoid confusion, I prefer to call Zhou’s modified charge-transfer EAM as CTIP and the implementation in LAMMPS as the Streitz-Mintmire (SM) potential. For single-metal oxides and under most equilibrium conditions, CTIP and SM should yield identical results. Zhou and Wadley’s CTIP has some other differences under-the-hood compared to the Strietz-Mintmire potential beyond the constraints for qmin and qmax. However, the parameter file only has two additional columns for the charge bounds.
As part of the work 6-7 years ago, we had implemented CTIP as an extension to LAMMPS. Unfortunately back then we had not distributed the CTIP code along with the paper and I had moved on to other priorities and jobs since.
It is now available at Lammps-Extensions / CTIP · GitLab. The only problem is that it was implemented for the 2015/2016 versions of LAMMPS. Due to some other requests I had to revisit this old piece of code and I am currently trying to make it work for the newer versions of LAMMPS.
Regards,
Kiran
Hi Kiran,
Yes, as linked by Stan, our implementation is now available on the LAMMPS develop branch. Please read the description there before using though, as it is not identical to the original Zhou et al CTIP. There should be an example script to use it there as well. We currently have a paper in review, which will provide more details and example use cases. In the meantime, please feel free to message me with any questions.
Best,
Gabriel
2 Likes
Thank you, Stan and Gabriel, especially to push this through and to have CTIP available as part of LAMMPS. I will test the code currently in the LAMMPS developer branch just to see how it compares against my old/naive implementation of the same, which likely does not have the efficiency improvements that you have incorporated. The reason I was digging through my old code was because I wanted to integrate CTIP with Echemdid (GitHub - nonofrio/LAMMPS-hacks-public: EChemDID and various USER packages for LAMMPS.) where the charge equilibration is dependent on an applied external potential. If my tests work out, then I think it would be beneficial to add that capability to your implementation in LAMMPS. I will keep you posted.
Regards,
Kiran
1 Like