[lammps-users] LJ units: pe/ke normalized to energy per atom?

Hello,

When using a potential with LJ units, it appears that the potential energy and kinetic energies found via a compute (i.e. compute 1 all pe) are not extensive and instead are normalized by the total number of atoms in the system. For example, if I compare two fcc systems, with the same 1.0 density, but different numbers of atoms, I find (both input scripts attached):
500 atoms, rho = 1.0, fcc, LJ/cut
pe ke vol Press
-7.761588e+00 1.497000e+00 5.000000e+02 -2.395575e+00

4000 atoms, rho = 1.0, fcc, LJ/cut
pe ke vol Press
-7.761588e+00 1.499625e+00 4.000000e+03 -2.393825e+00

I am confused because I can do the same procedure with an EAM potential and the compute is extensive. I assume that I have just missed something or made a silly mistake. Can someone show me where I am going wrong?

Thanks,
Richard


Richard E. Baumer
PhD Candidate
MIT Department of Materials Science and Engineering
2010 LLNL CCMS Summer Institute Participant

in.lj_energy_test2 (409 Bytes)

in.lj_energy_test1 (406 Bytes)

Hi Rich,

In the manual compute page says “Thermodynamic output will normalize extensive values by the number of atoms in the system, depending on the “thermo_modify norm” setting. It will not normalize intensive values.”

When you go to thermo_modify page, it says
“The option defaults are lost = error, norm = yes for unit style of lj, norm = no for unit style of real and metal, flush = no, temp/press = compute IDs defined by thermo_style.”

I hope this helps.

Vikas Varshney wrote:

Hi Rich,
In the manual compute page says "Thermodynamic output <http://*lammps.sandia.gov/doc/thermo_style.html> will normalize extensive values by the number of atoms in the system, depending on the "thermo_modify norm" setting. It will not normalize intensive values."
When you go to thermo_modify page, it says
"The option defaults are lost = error, norm = yes for unit style of /lj/, norm = no for unit style of /real/ and /metal/, flush = no, temp/press = compute IDs defined by thermo_style."
I hope this helps.

    Hello,

    When using a potential with LJ units, it appears that the
    potential energy and kinetic energies found via a compute (i.e.
    compute 1 all pe) are not extensive and instead are normalized by
    the total number of atoms in the system. For example, if I compare
    two fcc systems, with the same 1.0 density, but different numbers
    of atoms, I find (both input scripts attached):
    _*500 atoms, rho = 1.0, fcc, LJ/cut*_
    pe ke vol Press
    -7.761588e+00 1.497000e+00 5.000000e+02 -2.395575e+00

    _*4000 atoms*__*, rho = 1.0, fcc, LJ/cut*_
    pe ke vol Press
    -7.761588e+00 1.499625e+00 4.000000e+03 -2.393825e+00

    I am confused because I can do the same procedure with an EAM
    potential and the compute is extensive. I assume that I have just
    missed something or made a silly mistake. Can someone show me
    where I am going wrong?

    Thanks,
    Richard

    --
    /Richard E. Baumer
    PhD Candidate
    MIT Department of Materials Science and Engineering
    2010 //LLNL //CCMS Summer Institute Participant/

    # 3d Lennard-Jones melt

    units lj
    atom_style atomic

    lattice fcc 1.0
    region box block 0.0 10.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 10.0
    create_box 1 box
    create_atoms 1 box
    mass 1 1.0

    velocity all create 1.0 87287

    pair_style lj/cut 2.5
    pair_coeff 1 1 1.0 1.0 2.5

    neighbor 0.3 bin
    neigh_modify every 1 delay 0 check no

    thermo_style custom step etotal pe ke temp vol press
    thermo_modify format float %15.6e
    thermo 1

    run 1

    # 3d Lennard-Jones melt

    units lj
    atom_style atomic

    lattice fcc 1.0
    region box block 0.0 5.0 0.0 5.0 0.0 5.0
    create_box 1 box
    create_atoms 1 box
    mass 1 1.0

    velocity all create 1.0 87287

    pair_style lj/cut 2.5
    pair_coeff 1 1 1.0 1.0 2.5

    neighbor 0.3 bin
    neigh_modify every 1 delay 0 check no

    thermo_style custom step etotal pe ke temp vol press
    thermo_modify format float %15.6e
    thermo 1

    run 1

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate
    GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the
    lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win:
    http://*p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo
    _______________________________________________
    lammps-users mailing list
    [email protected]
    <mailto:[email protected]>
    https://*lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lammps-users

That did the trick - thanks so much for pointing that out!