material

SiO2
ID:

mp-559313
DOI:

10.17188/1270799

Tags: Silicon dioxide Zeolite

Material Details

Final Magnetic Moment
0.000 μB

Calculated total magnetic moment for the unit cell within the magnetic ordering provided (see below). Typically accurate to the second digit.
Magnetic Ordering
Non-magnetic
Formation Energy / Atom
-3.276 eV

Calculated formation energy from the elements normalized to per atom in the unit cell.

Energy Above Hull / Atom
0.009 eV

The energy of decomposition of this material into the set of most stable materials at this chemical composition, in eV/atom. Stability is tested against all potential chemical combinations that result in the material's composition. For example, a Co2O3 structure would be tested for decomposition against other Co2O3 structures, against Co and O2 mixtures, and against CoO and O2 mixtures.

Density
1.87 g/cm3

The calculated bulk crystalline density, typically underestimated due calculated cell volumes overestimated on average by 3% (+/- 6%)

Decomposes To
SiO2
Band Gap
5.366 eV

In general, band gaps computed with common exchange-correlation functionals such as the LDA and GGA are severely underestimated. Typically the disagreement is reported to be ~50% in the literature. Some internal testing by the Materials Project supports these statements; typically, we find that band gaps are underestimated by ~40%. We additionally find that several known insulators are predicted to be metallic.

Space Group

Hermann Mauguin
Cmce [64]
Hall
-C 2bc 2
Point Group
mmm
Crystal System
orthorhombic

Band Structure

Density of States
Warning! Semi-local DFT tends to severely underestimate bandgaps. Please see the wiki for more info.

sign indicates spin ↑ ↓

  • Cu
  • Ag
  • Mo
  • Fe

Calculated powder diffraction pattern; note that peak spacings may be affected due to inaccuracies in calculated cell volume, which is typically overestimated on average by 3% (+/- 6%)

X-Ray Absorption Spectra

FEFF XANES

Select an element to display a spectrum averaged over all sites of that element in the structure.

Apply Gaussian smoothing:

0 eV
3 eV
FWHM: 0 eV

Download spectra for every symmetrically equivalent absorption site in the structure.

Download FEFF Input parameters.

Warning: These results are intended to be semi-quantitative in that corrections, such as edge shifts and Debye-Waller damping, have not been included.

Substrates

Reference for minimal coincident interface area (MCIA) and elastic energy:
substrate orientation:
No elastic tensor calculated for this material, so elastic energies not avaialable. Sorting by MCIA instead.
substrate material substrate orientation film orientation MCIA† [Å2]
GaAs (mp-2534) <1 0 0> <0 1 0> 164.8
BaF2 (mp-1029) <1 1 1> <1 0 0> 281.4
SiO2 (mp-6930) <1 0 0> <1 0 0> 281.4
SiO2 (mp-6930) <1 0 1> <0 0 1> 282.0
KCl (mp-23193) <1 0 0> <0 1 0> 82.4
KCl (mp-23193) <1 1 1> <1 0 0> 281.4
AlN (mp-661) <1 1 1> <1 0 0> 281.4
BaF2 (mp-1029) <1 0 0> <0 1 0> 82.4
BaF2 (mp-1029) <1 1 0> <1 0 0> 281.4
Te2W (mp-22693) <0 0 1> <1 0 1> 132.8
TePb (mp-19717) <1 0 0> <0 1 0> 82.4
ZnSe (mp-1190) <1 0 0> <0 1 0> 164.8
KTaO3 (mp-3614) <1 0 0> <0 1 0> 82.4
LiF (mp-1138) <1 0 0> <0 1 0> 82.4
YVO4 (mp-19133) <1 1 0> <1 0 1> 132.8
LiNbO3 (mp-3731) <0 0 1> <1 0 0> 93.8
LiNbO3 (mp-3731) <1 1 0> <1 1 0> 124.9
Al (mp-134) <1 0 0> <0 1 0> 82.4
LiGaO2 (mp-5854) <0 0 1> <1 0 0> 281.4
LiGaO2 (mp-5854) <0 1 0> <1 0 1> 132.8
LiGaO2 (mp-5854) <1 1 1> <1 0 0> 281.4
TiO2 (mp-2657) <1 0 0> <0 1 0> 82.4
C (mp-66) <1 0 0> <0 1 0> 164.8
TeO2 (mp-2125) <0 1 0> <1 0 0> 281.4
Mg (mp-153) <1 0 0> <1 0 1> 132.8
LiTaO3 (mp-3666) <0 0 1> <1 0 0> 93.8
LiTaO3 (mp-3666) <1 0 0> <1 0 0> 281.4
LiTaO3 (mp-3666) <1 1 0> <1 1 0> 124.9
MgO (mp-1265) <1 0 0> <0 1 0> 164.8
PbSe (mp-2201) <1 1 0> <0 1 0> 164.8
Mg (mp-153) <1 1 0> <0 0 1> 282.0
SiC (mp-11714) <1 0 0> <1 0 0> 93.8
Ga2O3 (mp-886) <1 0 0> <0 1 0> 164.8
LaF3 (mp-905) <1 0 1> <1 0 0> 281.4
WSe2 (mp-1821) <1 0 0> <1 1 0> 249.7
PbSe (mp-2201) <1 1 1> <1 0 0> 281.4
ZrO2 (mp-2858) <1 0 -1> <1 0 0> 281.4
SiC (mp-11714) <0 0 1> <0 0 1> 282.0
SiC (mp-11714) <1 1 0> <1 0 0> 281.4
MoSe2 (mp-1634) <1 0 0> <1 1 0> 249.7
YAlO3 (mp-3792) <1 0 1> <0 1 0> 247.2
MgF2 (mp-1249) <1 1 0> <1 0 1> 265.6
NaCl (mp-22862) <1 0 0> <0 1 0> 164.8
ZrO2 (mp-2858) <0 1 0> <1 0 0> 281.4
ZrO2 (mp-2858) <1 0 0> <1 0 0> 281.4
ZrO2 (mp-2858) <1 1 0> <1 0 0> 281.4
YAlO3 (mp-3792) <0 0 1> <1 0 0> 281.4
YAlO3 (mp-3792) <0 1 1> <1 0 0> 93.8
YAlO3 (mp-3792) <1 1 1> <1 0 0> 187.6
Ge (mp-32) <1 0 0> <0 1 0> 164.8
Up to 50 entries displayed.
†minimal coincident interface area.

Elasticity

A full elastic tensor has not been calculated for this material. Registered users can view statistical-learning-based predictions of this material's bulk and shear moduli.

Once you have registered you can also "vote" for full calculation of this material's elastic properties.

Similar Structures

Explanation of dissimilarity measure: Documentation.
material dissimilarity Ehull # of elements
CsMgPO4 (mp-18329) 0.6684 0.000 4
CsLiSO4 (mp-6597) 0.6593 0.003 4
CsBePO4 (mp-15395) 0.4240 0.000 4
ReH4NO4 (mp-24128) 0.6706 0.000 4
CsAlSiO4 (mp-561457) 0.5762 0.000 4
CrN2 (mp-1014565) 0.1764 0.315 2
SiO2 (mp-7648) 0.2061 0.007 2
SiO2 (mp-555891) 0.1864 0.008 2
SiO2 (mp-554543) 0.1245 0.013 2
SiO2 (mp-8602) 0.1936 0.010 2
AlPO4 (mp-5724) 0.3988 0.003 3
AlPO4 (mp-37990) 0.3175 0.013 3
AlPO4 (mp-557842) 0.2279 0.011 3
AlPO4 (mp-675254) 0.2027 0.011 3
AlPO4 (mp-5859) 0.3285 0.011 3
Up to 5 similar elemental, binary, ternary, quaternary, etc. structures displayed (dissimilarity threshold 0.75). Ehull: energy above hull per atom [eV].

Calculation Summary

Structure Optimization

Run Type
GGA
Energy Cutoff
520 eV
# of K-points
12
U Values
--
Pseudopotentials
VASP PAW: Si O
Final Energy/Atom
-7.9062 eV
Corrected Energy
-200.9845 eV
-200.9845 eV = -189.7479 eV (uncorrected energy) - 11.2366 eV (MP Anion Correction)

Detailed input parameters and outputs for all calculations

Show JSON History Show BibTex Citation Download BibTex Citation
ICSD IDs
  • 170524
Submitted by

Displaying lattice parameters for primitive cell; note that calculated cell volumes are typically overestimated on average by 3% (+/- 6%). Note the primitive cell may appear less symmetric than the conventional cell representation (see "Structure Type" selector below the 3d structure)