| Literature DB >> 26846401 |
Wei Geng1, Chuan-Jia Tong1, Jiang Liu2, Wenjun Zhu3, Woon-Ming Lau1,2, Li-Min Liu1.
Abstract
Methylammonium lead iodide perovskite, CH3NH3PbI3, has attracted particular attention due to its fast increase in efficiency in dye sensitization TiO2 solid-state solar cells. We performed first-principles calculations to investigate several different types of CH3NH3PbI3/TiO2 interfaces. The interfacial structures between the different terminated CH3NH3PbI3 and phase TiO2 are thoroughly explored, and the calculated results suggest that the interfacial Pb atoms play important roles in the structure stability and electronic properties. A charge transfer from Pb atoms to the O atoms of TiO2 lead to the band edge alignment of Pb-p above Ti-d about 0.4 eV, suggesting a better carries separation. On the other hand, for TiO2, rutile (001) is the better candidate due to the better lattice and atoms arrangement match with CH3NH3PbI3.Entities:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26846401 PMCID: PMC4742859 DOI: 10.1038/srep20131
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Optimized stable geometrical structures of (a) MAI/A, (b) PbI/A, (c) MAI/R and (d) PbI/R. (dark gray: lead; purple: iodine; brown: carbon; blue: nitrogen; pink: hydrogen; cyan: Ti; red: oxygen).
The proportion of bonded atoms of perovskite surface and bond length of the interface structures.
| Cation (MA+ or Pb2+) | Anion (I−) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bond number | Bond length(Å) | Bond number | Bond length(Å) | |
| MAI/A | 50% | 1.73 | 50% | 2.98 |
| PbI/A | 50% | 2.33 | 50% | 3.28 |
| MAI/R | 100% | 1.50 1.72 | 100% | 2.88, 2.89 |
| PbI/R | 200% | 2.41, 2.42, 2.38, 2.39 | 100% | 2.88, 2.91 |
The calculated Binding energy, lattice mismatch and Bader charge of the interface structures.
| Binding energy(eV) | Lattice mismatch | Bader charge | |
|---|---|---|---|
| MAI/A | −1.01 | 4.56% | −0.11 |
| PbI/A | −1.87 | 4.56% | −0.07 |
| MAI/R | −2.26 | −3.97% | −0.19 |
| PbI/R | −5.08 | −3.97% | −0.22 |
Figure 2ELF o (a) MAI/A, (b) PbI/A, (c) MAI/R and (d) PbI/R.
Figure 3Charge density difference (left panel) and plane-averaged electrostatic potential (right panel) for (a) MAI/A, (b) PbI/A, (c) MAI/R and (d) PbI/R.
Figure 4PDOS of (a) MAI/A, (b) PbI/A, (c) MAI/R and (d) PbI/R.