Abstract

Free energies of bulk materials are nowadays routinely computed by density functional theory. In particular for metals, electronic excitations can significantly contribute to the free energy. For an ideal static lattice, this contribution can be obtained at low computational cost, e.g., from the electronic density of states derived at T=0 K or by utilizing the Sommerfeld approximation. The error introduced by these approximations at elevated temperatures is rarely known. The error arising from the ideal lattice approximation is likewise unexplored but computationally much more challenging to overcome. In order to shed light on these issues we have computed the electronic free energies for all 3d,4d, and 5d transition elements on the ideal lattices of the bcc, fcc, and hcp structures using finite-temperature density-functional theory. For a subset of elements we have explored the impact of explicit thermal vibrations on the electronic free energies by using ab initio molecular dynamics simulations. We provide an analysis of the observed chemical trends in terms of the electronic density of states and the canonical d band model and quantify the errors in the approximate methods. The electronic contribution to the heat capacities and the corresponding errors due to the different approximations are studied as well.

Highlights

  • Free energies determine thermodynamic phase stabilities and phase diagrams and are, a key ingredient to materials design

  • For an ideal static lattice, this contribution can be obtained at low computational cost, e.g., from the electronic density of states derived at T = 0 K or by utilizing the Sommerfeld approximation

  • For a subset of elements we have explored the impact of explicit thermal vibrations on the electronic free energies by using ab initio molecular dynamics simulations

Read more

Summary

INTRODUCTION

Free energies determine thermodynamic phase stabilities and phase diagrams and are, a key ingredient to materials design. Available approaches are (a) a self-consistent field (SCF) finite temperature DFT calculation, (b) the fixed density of states (DOS) approximation that neglects the implicit temperature dependence of the electronic DOS of the self-consistent formalism, or (c) a further approximation that considers only the effective, temperature independent DOS at the Fermi level [Sommerfeld approximation (SOM)] [10]. This is understandable because the latter requires multiple self-consistent cycles to derive the full temperature dependence of the electronic free energy, even if the atoms are restricted to their ideal lattice sites.

SCF finite temperature DFT approach
Method
Fixed density-of-states approximation
Sommerfeld approximation
Electronic free energies including lattice vibrations
METHODOLOGICAL DETAILS
Temperature dependence
Volume dependence
Impact of explicit lattice vibrations
Electronic contribution to the heat capacity
CONCLUSIONS
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call