[gmx-users] Heat capacity (C_{v}) for a solid
Alexander Alexander
alexanderwien2k at gmail.com
Fri Jan 29 19:00:33 CET 2016
Dear Gromacs user,
I am trying to calculate the heat capacity at constant volume (C_{v}) in
different temperature for a solid structure with "A_{3}B" chemical formula.
To do so, I made a big supercell containing totally "43904" atom by keeping
the rate (#A = 32928 and #B=10976), below is a part of my topology file.
topol.top:
-------------------------------------
[ moleculetype ]
; Name nrexcl
A 1
[ moleculetype ]
; Name nrexcl
B 1
[ molecules ]
;mol_name number
A 32928
B 10976
-------------------------------------
After convergence of the MD simulation I invoked the below command:
"gmx energy -f case.edr -nmol 43904 -fluct_props -o case.xvg"
My first question:
what exactly I should use as "-nmol" in this specific case as explained
above? If it is (#A) or (#B) or (#A+#B)?
Second question:
I was wondering if the Cv printed out in screen after choosing "Total
Energy" and "Temperature" in gmx energy is relabel? At least in this
level as I know the Quantum part has not been included yet. Or I have to
do the temperature numerical derivation of Total energy myself as
Cv=d(U)/d(T).
WARNING: Please verify that your simulations are converged and perform
a block-averaging error analysis (not implemented in g_energy yet)
Heat capacity at constant volume Cv = 200.779 J/mol K.
Third question:
If this is Molar heat capacity, am I right?
The last:
Below are the result of Cv in different temperature for this system:
(Cv J/mol K) ----- (Temperature K)
37037.700 10
200.779 50
40.497 75
124.360 100
321.416 150
620.247 298
I know these Cv do not include any corrections for quantum yet, but still I
am puzzled about the strange behavior of Cv versus temperature, I would be
so thankful if one could explain it for me.
(Version of Gromacs : is 5.1-rc1)
Sincerely,
Alex
More information about the gromacs.org_gmx-users
mailing list