Control over the morphology of the active layer of bulk heterojunction (BHJ) organic solar cells is paramount to achieve high-efficiency devices. However, no method currently available can predict morphologies for a novel donor-acceptor blend. An approach which allows reaching relevant length scales, retaining chemical specificity, and mimicking experimental fabrication conditions, and which is suited for high-throughput schemes has been proven challenging to find. Here, we propose a method to generate atom-resolved morphologies of BHJs which conforms to these requirements. Coarse-grain (CG) molecular dynamics simulations are employed to simulate the large-scale morphological organization during solution-processing. The use of CG models which retain chemical specificity translates into a direct path to the rational design of donor and acceptor compounds which differ only slightly in chemical nature. Finally, the direct retrieval of fully atomistic detail is possible through backmapping, opening the way for improved quantum mechanical calculations addressing the charge separation mechanism. The method is illustrated for the poly(3-hexyl-thiophene) (P3HT)-phenyl-C61-butyric acid methyl ester (PCBM) mixture, and found to predict morphologies in agreement with experimental data. The effect of drying rate, P3HT molecular weight, and thermal annealing are investigated extensively, resulting in trends mimicking experimental findings. The proposed methodology can help reduce the parameter space which has to be explored before obtaining optimal morphologies not only for BHJ solar cells but also for any other solution-processed soft matter device.
Control over the morphology of the active layer of bulk heterojunction (BHJ) organic solar cells is paramount to achieve high-efficiency devices. However, no method currently available can predict morphologies for a novel donor-acceptor blend. An approach which allows reaching relevant length scales, retaining chemical specificity, and mimicking experimental fabrication conditions, and which is suited for high-throughput schemes has been proven challenging to find. Here, we propose a method to generate atom-resolved morphologies of BHJs which conforms to these requirements. Coarse-grain (CG) molecular dynamics simulations are employed to simulate the large-scale morphological organization during solution-processing. The use of CG models which retain chemical specificity translates into a direct path to the rational design of donor and acceptor compounds which differ only slightly in chemical nature. Finally, the direct retrieval of fully atomistic detail is possible through backmapping, opening the way for improved quantum mechanical calculations addressing the charge separation mechanism. The method is illustrated for the poly(3-hexyl-thiophene) (P3HT)-phenyl-C61-butyric acid methyl ester (PCBM) mixture, and found to predict morphologies in agreement with experimental data. The effect of drying rate, P3HT molecular weight, and thermal annealing are investigated extensively, resulting in trends mimicking experimental findings. The proposed methodology can help reduce the parameter space which has to be explored before obtaining optimal morphologies not only for BHJ solar cells but also for any other solution-processed soft matter device.
Organic solar cells
(OSCs)[1] are among
the new generation photovoltaic (PV) technologies which could be employed
to convert solar energy to electricity. Their main advantage over
more traditional PV cells is the solution processability of the layers
that compose the device. Moreover, the potential mechanical flexibility
and low weight of organic PV panels may enable the introduction of
innovative new products.[2,3] The most efficient OSCs
require a bulk heterojunction (BHJ),[4,5] an active layer
composed of intimately intermixed electron acceptors and electron
donors. Not only their electronic properties[6] but also the morphology of the active layer[7,8] will
determine the final device efficiency. These two different but entangled
aspects of a chosen donor–acceptor system along with the many
degrees of freedom offered by organic materials translate into a vast
multiparameter optimization space which, despite extensive research
efforts, has not yet led to efficiencies which can compete with inorganic
PV technologies. Design principles for bringing BHJ solar cells to
a substantially higher performance level are still sought after.[9]In OSCs the absorption of light leads to
the formation of excitons.
These have to dissociate at a donor–acceptor interface before
the resultant free carriers can be transported to the electrodes.
A large donor–acceptor interfacial area must therefore be present
for efficient exciton dissociation;[10] second,
both phases need to be continuous and well-connected to the respective
electrode for adequate charge collection. Furthermore, a high degree
of crystallinity is usually beneficial, as it increases charge mobility,
while the active layer needs to be at least ∼80–100
nm thick so as to absorb an adequate amount of light. From these conditions
stems the need for a bicontinuous interpenetrating network of donor
and acceptor phases. Such networks, usually achieved by spin coating
or doctor blading, are generally believed to be a kinetically trapped
state, as they are formed during the rapid solidification of a thin
layer of solution cast on a substrate.[11] Many processing conditions[11−15] have been found critical for the resulting morphology, but determining a priori those which will lead to an optimal morphology
when the two constituting materials are modified is still not possible.[7,9]A number of techniques have been employed to acquire structural
information on BHJs. Atomic force microscopy,[11,12,16] and transmission[17−19] and scanning[16] electron microscopy have been used to image
BHJs but provide only limited insights about the nature of the interpenetrating
network. Electron tomography has therefore been developed[19] to study the 3D morphology. However, the inherently
poor contrast due to the weak electron scattering of organic materials
leads to a limited and complex interpretation of the 3D-reconstructed
morphology. Techniques used to quantify the crystallinity of BHJs
are grazing-incidence X-ray diffraction (GIXD)[20] and grazing-incidence small-/wide-angle X-ray scattering
(GISAXS/GIWAXS).[21] The valuable information
provided by these techniques represents, however, averages over the
irradiated area of the sample, thus preventing real space localization
of nanocrystallites.Computational modeling provides atomistic
detail and thereby has
the potential to bridge the gap between experimental and molecular
length scales. In particular, coarse-grain (CG) molecular dynamics
(MD) simulations are often employed to model BHJs,[22−26] being able to capture the morphology at relevant
length scales while still retaining a molecular description (as opposed
to Monte Carlo simulated annealing[27−29] or mean field[30] approaches where that is lost). However, CG
models developed to date are not readily transferable.[22−25] This hinders their potential use within a high-throughput screening
scheme aimed at optimizing the morphology of a novel donor–acceptor
blend. Furthermore, CG models currently applied in this field often[22,23,26] simplify the description of donor
and acceptor molecules too severely: while this allows reaching length
scales which are comparable to real device thicknesses,[26] the loss of detail hampers the discrimination
of different donor (acceptor) structures and does not allow for direct retrieval of atom-resolved structural information.
Such structures are needed as input for higher level of theory, e.g.,
quantum mechanical (QM), calculations[31−33] that address the electronic
states involved in the charge separation. Finally, simulated annealing
is usually employed[24−26] to obtain CG morphologies. This does not reflect
the morphological evolution taking place during the solution processing
of BHJs, hence making the link between experimental fabrication conditions
and simulations more elusive. Importantly, Lee and Pao have recently
developed[34] a method to generate morphologies
which remedy this: during a standard MD simulation, the solvent is
slowly removed, thus simulating the experimental evaporation process.
The evolution of the BHJ morphology during solution processing can
therefore be studied, and a direct link to experimental conditions
can be made.In the present work, we employ CG models which
retain a sizable
degree of chemical specificity to simulate the large scale organization
of polymer–fullerene systems during solution processing, which
results in a predictive tool for BHJ morphologies. The method follows
the one developed by Lee and Pao,[34] but
differs from it in the nature of the CG models employed, namely finer
CG models based on the Martini CG force field.[35] The chemical specificity of this force field implies the
possibility to use it for rational design of donor (acceptor) compounds
which differ only slightly in chemical nature. Moreover, Martini gives
ready access to fully atomistic detail through backmapping,[36] opening the way for improved QM calculations.
As a first case study, we chose to simulate the poly(3-hexyl-thiophene)
(P3HT)–phenyl-C61-butyric acid methyl ester (PCBM)
mixture. The validity of the method is assessed by comparing the outcome
of simulations to a variety of experimental data available for this
well-studied system. Simulations predict morphologies in agreement
with published data in the literature. The effect of drying rate,
polymer molecular weight, and thermal annealing are investigated extensively,
resulting in trends in accordance with experimental observations.
Finally, the atomistic detail of the whole blend is directly retrieved
by means of backmapping. Together, the results presented in this contribution
show the potential of the proposed methodology to get insight into
larger scale morphological organization while, at the same time, obtaining
atom-resolved structural information on, for example, donor–acceptor
interfaces where such details are vital to solve the puzzle of the
charge separation mechanism.
Results and Discussion
Evolution of Bulk Heterojunction
Morphologies during Simulated
Solution Processing
Solvent evaporation CG MD simulations
were performed using newly developed Martini[37] CG models of P3HT, PCBM, and chlorobenzene (CB). The atomistic structures
along with schematic representations of the CG models are presented
in Figure . On average,
4 atoms are mapped to one CG particle, while bond, angle, and dihedral
potentials are used to have the CG models reproduce the structure
and flexibility of the corresponding atomistic models. Interactions
have been calibrated by using experimental free energy of transfer
data as reference. A detailed description of the CG models, atomistic
models which aided the parametrization and validation of the CG models,
as well as the parametrization and validation procedures themselves
are presented in the Methods section and in
the Supporting Information.
Figure 1
All-atom structures (left)
and corresponding coarse-grain models
(right) for P3HT (in red; a trimer is shown), PCBM (in blue), and
CB (in green). The connectivity between the coarse-grain interaction
sites is highlighted, while the actual size of the beads is shown
with semitransparent spheres.
All-atom structures (left)
and corresponding coarse-grain models
(right) for P3HT (in red; a trimer is shown), PCBM (in blue), and
CB (in green). The connectivity between the coarse-grain interaction
sites is highlighted, while the actual size of the beads is shown
with semitransparent spheres.In Figure , a prototypical
solvent evaporation simulation is illustrated (see also video in the Supporting Information), and the resulting BHJ
morphology compared to experimental data from ref (38). In particular, Figure b shows a comparison
between the morphology obtained via an evaporation simulation (where
the molecular weight (MW) of P3HT is 8 kDa) and an energy-filtered
scanning electron microscopy (EFSEM) image taken by Masters et al.[38] of an as-cast P3HT–PCBM blend (P3HT MW
of 54 kDa) spin-coated from CB. The P3HT–PCBM weight ratio
is 1:0.8 in both cases. The experimental EFSEM image contains gray
zones which Masters et al. ascribed to mixed polymer–fullerene
phases.[38] In these areas, fullerene and
P3HT are close to each other and give rise to an average signal, which
thus cannot be resolved. By contrast, simulations allow resolution
of structures up to the level of single CG particles (the CG particle-resolved
morphology is shown in Figure S1a). To
account for this discrepancy, and for the escape depth of secondary
electrons from P3HT (found to be between around 20–30 Å),[38] a ∼2.5 nm thick layer taken from the
CG morphology has been spatially discretized in polymer, fullerene,
and mixed phases, following the procedure outlined in the Methods section. A comparison of the resulting image
(left-hand side of Figure b) to the experimental one (right-hand side of Figure b) suggests that obtained donor
and acceptor domain sizes are in qualitative agreement with the experimental
ones. However, it is important to stress that the close agreement
between the experimentally and computationally obtained morphologies
is somewhat unexpected, given the difference in processing conditions.
A first difference is in the way the solvent evaporation takes place.
In spin coating, the solvent evaporates from the surface of the blend,
whereas in our simulations solvent is taken out of the system randomly.
The latter approach leads to a more uniform distribution of the molecular
components along the sample normal. A revised protocol in which surface
evaporation is taken into account is currently being developed to
quantify this effect in future studies. A more serious concern is
the considerable differences in time and length scales. Experimentally,
solvent evaporation takes place on the time scale of seconds, whereas
the simulations are necessary limited to the sub-millisecond range.
The length scale of the experimental samples is also larger, with
typical sample areas of ∼1 cm2, compared to 900
nm2 in the simulated samples. Note that the polymer chains
in the simulation are smaller than those used in experiment (8 kDa
vs 30–50 kDa), compensating, at least to some extent, for the
shorter time scale. Apparently, the primary driving forces governing
morphology formation in real blends act on time and length scales
accessible by our simulations. Further details about these driving
forces during the evaporation process are discussed below.
Figure 2
Simulation
of the evolution of a P3HT:PCBM bulk heterojunction
during solution-processing (a) and comparison to experimental data
(b). The evolution of P3HT-P3HT, P3HT-PCBM, and PCBM–PCBM contacts
and of the solvent amount during drying are plotted (a), and snapshots
at different times during the simulation are shown (P3HT chains are
rendered in red while PCBM molecules are in blue; solvent molecules
are not shown for clarity). The three stages of BHJ morphology evolution
(see text) are indicated with different shades of gray. (b) Visual
comparison between a spatially discretized morphology obtained via
the solvent evaporation protocol (left-hand side; the thin white square
shows the repeating unit cell) and a spin-coated blend imaged by EFSEM
(right-hand side; close up of Figure 7c of ref (38), reproduced under the
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License).
Simulation
of the evolution of a P3HT:PCBM bulk heterojunction
during solution-processing (a) and comparison to experimental data
(b). The evolution of P3HT-P3HT, P3HT-PCBM, and PCBM–PCBM contacts
and of the solvent amount during drying are plotted (a), and snapshots
at different times during the simulation are shown (P3HT chains are
rendered in red while PCBM molecules are in blue; solvent molecules
are not shown for clarity). The three stages of BHJ morphology evolution
(see text) are indicated with different shades of gray. (b) Visual
comparison between a spatially discretized morphology obtained via
the solvent evaporation protocol (left-hand side; the thin white square
shows the repeating unit cell) and a spin-coated blend imaged by EFSEM
(right-hand side; close up of Figure 7c of ref (38), reproduced under the
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License).The evolution of the morphology during the evaporation
can be followed
by computing the number of P3HT–P3HT, P3HT–PCBM, and
PCBM–PCBM contacts during the drying process. These have been
calculated as described in detail in the Methods section and are plotted in Figure a. Three evaporation stages can be distinguished. Within
the first microsecond, a first phase where molecules are still in
solution and thus relatively free to diffuse can be identified: during
this phase, a substantial increase in the number of P3HT-P3HT contacts
due to the aggregation of P3HT chains to form ordered nanostructures
(which will be discussed more extensively in the following sections)
is observed. Consequently, PCBM–P3HT contacts initially decrease
as PCBM molecules are deprived of P3HT neighboring molecules (as these
aggregate). Fullerene molecules are found to be considerably more
soluble in CB and do not show aggregation propensity. This is consistent
with the experimental solubility of P3HT in CB (∼16 mg/mL for
P3HT with MW of ∼65 kDa) being lower than the one of PCBM (∼60
mg/mL).[39] In the second stage, which starts
already after 1 μs when the amount of solvent is less than 60%
of the initial amount, the diffusion processes become much slower
(time scale of hundreds of nanoseconds to microseconds) due to the
increased size of P3HT nanostructures and the ever-decreasing quantity
of solvent, which starts to reduce dramatically the mobility of the
molecules. As a consequence, in this phase the number of contacts
between all compounds steadily increases. These aggregation processes
become gradually more stagnant and essentially stop when the solvent
weight content is about 1%. At this point, in the third and final
stage, the blend is in an almost frozen state where the free energy
barriers to even minimal rearrangement are very high. These observations
agree with the drying dynamics observed experimentally by GIXD and
GIWAXS/GISAXS during spin-coating[40] or
printing.[41,42] The studies follow the evolution of the
P3HT X-ray scattering peaks. Four drying stages are commonly individuated:
a first stage in which no scattering is detected and where thus the
molecules are considered being dispersed in solution; a second stage
in which the P3HT crystals start to nucleate and grow; a third stage,
also called the solvent swollen glassy state,[42] where the mobility of the molecules is already compromised by the
low amount of solvent and where, therefore, no new crystals can form
but the existing ones continue drying; a last stage where the film
is practically dry and close to the final structure. In the present
simulations, aggregation of P3HT is observed from the beginning, which
seems not to be consistent with experimental findings. However, the
aggregation of P3HT molecules may be happening earlier also in experiments,
but the P3HT crystals have to reach a certain size in order to be
detected by X-ray scattering techniques. Moreover, the initial P3HT
concentration in the simulations (∼39 mg mL–1) is higher than the one commonly used in experiments (∼15
mg mL–1), positioning P3HT already beyond the solubility
limit.In summary, the driving force for the (modest) phase
separation
observed during the solvent evaporation simulation is the self-organization
propensity of P3HT. This process can be hampered by a faster evaporation
and/or entanglement of polymer chains, as explored in the next sections.
It is crucial also to realize that, due to the relatively good affinity
of PCBM and P3HT, large-scale phase separation does not occur.
Effect
of Drying Rate and Polymer Molecular Weight
Slow drying,
also called solvent annealing[43] or solvent-assisted
annealing,[19] has
been shown to allow for structure reorganization, leading the P3HT:PCBM
blend to approach a degree of phase separation closer to thermodynamic
equilibrium. Lower MW (up to 10 kDa) P3HT has been found to have a
stronger tendency to phase separate during the solvent evaporation
process[44] than higher MW fractions, likely
due to an increased capability to crystallize. To investigate the
effect of drying rate and polymer length on the as-cast morphologies,
we performed two additional sets of simulations: one in which the
rate of solvent evaporation was varied, and another where this was
kept fixed while varying the polymer MW.To quantify the degree
of phase separation, the number of P3HT–PCBM contacts in the
dried morphologies has been computed. The number of polymer–fullerene
contacts correlates with the extent of donor–acceptor interface
present in the blend. The minimal amount of polymer–fullerene
contacts is obtained for a planar heterojunction morphology where
only one interface is present (see Figure S10); on the opposite end, the maximum amount of contacts is found in
a completely intermixed morphology. This has been built as a random
mixture, as explained in more detail in the Supporting Information. The numbers of contacts in the planar heterojunction
and intermixed extremes, respectively, have been used as references
to normalize the computed fraction of P3HT-PCBM contacts. Using this
scale, Figure a and 3b show how the number of polymer–fullerene
contacts varies with the drying rate and with the polymer molecular
weight, respectively. In the latter case, simulations with the same
number of P3HT monomers are compared.
Figure 3
Effect of the drying rate and polymer
molecular weight on the morphology.
Normalized number of P3HT–PCBM contacts expressed in percentage
(where 0 is taken as the number of contacts in a planar heterojunction
and 100 is the one computed for a finely intermixed morphology) are
shown as blue bars. Top views of representative morphologies are shown
for the various drying rates (increasing drying rate from bottom left
to top, clockwise) and for various polymer molecular weights (increasing
polymer weight from top to bottom right, clockwise).
Effect of the drying rate and polymer
molecular weight on the morphology.
Normalized number of P3HT–PCBM contacts expressed in percentage
(where 0 is taken as the number of contacts in a planar heterojunction
and 100 is the one computed for a finely intermixed morphology) are
shown as blue bars. Top views of representative morphologies are shown
for the various drying rates (increasing drying rate from bottom left
to top, clockwise) and for various polymer molecular weights (increasing
polymer weight from top to bottom right, clockwise).Faster drying leads to less phase separation. Faster
evaporation
does not allow for polymer crystals to grow, which therefore end up
having smaller dimensions (and, as a consequence, PCBM domains remain
smaller as well). This result is consistent with the hypothesis that
P3HT–PCBM blends are an example of blends which do not (liquid–liquid
or solid–liquid) phase separate considerably during spin coating.[30] Even though fast drying of a P3HT:PCBM mixture
leads to an intimately mixed blend, larger-scale phase separation
would occur on a longer time scale. Simulations also predict that
longer polymeric chains lead to less phase-separated morphologies
(Figure b). Slower
diffusion and more chain entanglement decelerate the aggregation of
longer polymer chains. However, the trend is not so pronounced, which
may be due to the limited range of MWs considered in the present contribution
(1 to 8 kDa). In fact, Liu et al.[44] reported
that blends with a P3HT MW up to 10 kDa practically behave indistinguishably
during spin coating.
Thermal Annealing and Crystallinity of the
Morphologies
P3HT–PCBM solar cells require an annealing
step in order to
reach their full potential.[45] The improved
power conversion efficiency is well documented and has been shown
to involve polymer crystallization—which increases optical
absorption and improves charge transport—and optimized phase
segregation, leading to more efficient charge separation. The width
of polymer and fullerene domains is known to increase upon annealing,
up to dimensions in the 10–20 nm range.[21,46,47] Various nanoscopic views on the thermal
annealing process have been proposed. The mobility of PCBM molecules
or small aggregates has been demonstrated by several studies.[48−50] It is often concluded to result from crystallization of P3HTdisordered
domains which expel fullerene loading.[44,48−50] In particular, diffusion of fullerenes appears to occur only through
the disordered regions of P3HT.[50] Conjectures
about polymer crystal growth during annealing inhibiting[18] or competing with[21] the formation of large fullerene domains are also found in the literature.
In order to investigate the effect of thermal annealing on the obtained
morphologies, a thermal annealing protocol has been applied by carrying
out MD simulations with an increased temperature, as described in
detail in the Methods section.Figure a shows three snapshots
taken at different times during an annealing simulation for a P3HT–PCBM
blend (MWP3HT = 4 kDa). Only P3HT backbones are shown to
highlight the increased ordering in the P3HT phase upon annealing.
The voids between P3HT sheets are, in general, occupied by P3HT side
chains, while the bigger white areas denote the presence of PCBM domains
(compare to Figure S2). Chain alignment
increases dramatically upon annealing. Domain segregation is also
observed, leading to sharper interfaces and larger domains. These
results are not surprising and are in line with experimental findings.
When P3HT is given more time for reorganization, crystallinity increases
and domain segregation is enhanced.[45] The
simulations further provide insight into the driving force for the
morphology evolution upon annealing. Following what is also observed
during the solvent evaporation simulations, P3HT drives the domain
segregation as P3HT crystals grow and therefore expel PCBM molecules.
No breaking of P3HT stacks is observed, corroborating the hypothesis
that diffusion of fullerene takes place through amorphous domains.[50]
Figure 4
Morphology evolution during thermal annealing and associated
computed
scattering curves. Snaphots at different times during the annealing
process (a) where only the P3HT backbones are shown. White areas denote
the location of P3HT side chains or PCBM domains (compare to Figure S2). A zoom in on the blend reveals a
stack of 3 P3HT chains (b) reporting the observed CG stacking distance
of 4.5 Å. (c) The corresponding computed scattering profiles
are shown; Gaussian fits to the (100) and (010) peaks are shown in
gray.
Morphology evolution during thermal annealing and associated
computed
scattering curves. Snaphots at different times during the annealing
process (a) where only the P3HT backbones are shown. White areas denote
the location of P3HT side chains or PCBM domains (compare to Figure S2). A zoom in on the blend reveals a
stack of 3 P3HT chains (b) reporting the observed CG stacking distance
of 4.5 Å. (c) The corresponding computed scattering profiles
are shown; Gaussian fits to the (100) and (010) peaks are shown in
gray.Scattering curves have been computed
as described in the Methods section and are
shown in Figure c.
Note that only thiophene
rings are considered in the simulated scattering curves. Upon annealing,
the intensities of the (100) (or lamellar) and (010) (or stacking)
peaks, which are fairly weak in the as-cast scattering curve, increase
considerably, in agreement with experimental observations.[51] This confirms the visual inspection of the morphologies
indicating increased P3HT crystallinity. The obtained peaks can be
fitted with a Gaussian function to obtain peak positions. The sharper
(100) and (010) peaks observed for the annealed blend, qualitatively
indicating a higher degree of crystallinity, are located at positions q ≈ 0.426 Å–1 and q ≈ 1.385 Å–1, respectively.
These values correspond to a lamellar distance of 14.7 Å and
a stacking distance of 4.5 Å (highlighted in Figure b). The discrepancy with the
experimental stacking distance value of 3.8 Å[52] is due to the too large radius of CG beads, which does
not allow for a ring thickness which matches the all-atom one; the
lamellar distance is instead underestimated (16.5 Å, experimentally[52]). Such discrepancies, inherent to the current
Martini CG force field (see also the Methods section), do not, however, impact the nanomorphology evolution.The effect of P3HT MW on the annealing process has also been investigated
by simulated annealing of blends containing P3HT with a MW ranging
from 2 to 8 kDa. Lower MW P3HT is found to both crystallize and promote
a phase-separated morphology more readily, as can be seen in Figure S3, where annealing results are shown
for blends with varying P3HT MW (2–8 kDa). In particular, P3HT
chains with MWs in the 2–4 kDa range respond similarly to annealing,
as quantified by the decrease in P3HT–PCBM contacts shown in Figure S3. When the MW is raised to 8 kDa, a
lower decrease of P3HT–PCBM contacts is observed (Figure S3): the blend responds less promptly
to thermal annealing due to a slowed down dynamics caused by the increased
molecular weight. Moreover, in this latter case amorphous regions
can still be observed (Figure S3c), while
in the former case the P3HT phase is almost completely crystalline.
We can therefore conclude that lower (up to 4 kDa) MW P3HT shows a
higher stacking efficiency. Low-MW P3HT films (<4 kDa) are known
to be more sensitive to processing conditions. Those protocols which
give more time for molecules to approach thermodynamic equilibrium
(e.g., slow growth, thermal annealing) lead to more crystalline phases,[53] as the molecules diffuse relatively fast due
to their small size. By contrast, polymer chain entanglement[54] and lower mobility slow the kinetics of ordering
and, consequently, the phase separation process in high (>30 kDa)
MW P3HT films.[53] The present data are also
in agreement with GIXD findings by Liu et al.[44] which show how low-MW (up to 5 kDa) P3HT, both in pure P3HT films
and when blended with PCBM, shows considerable reorientation freedom
upon annealing, while this effect is considerably reduced already
at MW of 10 kDa.The observed P3HT structures correspond to
the well-characterized
2D sheets in which the polymer is known to self-organize.[52,55] The strong tendency of P3HT to self-organize is well-known,[52,55] and it is evident from the outcome of the simulations that the model
also strongly favors aggregation. This self-organizing propensity
seems to be induced by the geometrical features of P3HT chains. It
should be stressed that no explicitly ad-hoc anisotropic
interaction has been introduced between thiophene rings, in contrast
to the strategy proposed by Carrillo et al.[26] in order to improve the “ultra” CG model of Lee et
al.[22] (also referred to as the LPC model[26]). In that model, representing thiophene units
with single beads sacrifices one of the characteristic features of
this polymer, namely the planar thiophene backbone. In the present
model, the employed finer mapping preserves the thiophene planarity,
and thus anisotropy, which evidently contains the driving force for
P3HT self-organization.
Backmapping CG Morphologies to Atomistic
Resolution
The CG morphologies obtained have finally been
backmapped to atomistic—also
termed all-atom (AA)—resolution by employing a published protocol[36] described in the Methods section. A snapshot of a CGdonor–acceptor interface for
an annealed blend along with its atom-resolved counterpart is shown
in Figure . In this
procedure, the fully relaxed atomistic configuration is obtained by
placing atoms in positions consistent with the CG beads that represent
them and then relaxing the structure to the local atomistic energy
minimum. Such a direct backmapping methodology differs
from the ones employed by, for example, Carrillo et al.,[26] where only a qualitative estimation of the donor–acceptor
interface configuration can be made from the large-scale CG simulations.
In that case, the obtained CG morphologies cannot be unambiguously
backmapped to AA resolution due to too severe loss of detail inherent
to the LPC model. The qualitative information can only be used to
“manually” assemble an atomistic interface. Such a procedure
is closer to strategies used to build idealized donor–acceptor
interfaces, such as the one of Liu et al., where an idealized donor–acceptor
interface is assembled by putting together P3HT and PCBM crystals.[56] While there are always multiple AA structures
corresponding to the same CG configuration, the present finer CG models
restrict their number and allow for the use of a semiautomatized procedure
for the direct retrieval of structural detail. This can pave the way
to QM calculations which can fully benefit from large-scale derived
structural information. In particular, the investigation of the local
dielectric response of organic photovoltaic blends upon changes in
the electronic density is of notable interest, as the dielectric screening
of charges is crucial for the exciton splitting and recombination
processes.[57] Promisingly, previous studies
on model systems have shown how the reorientation of dipole moments
can stabilize the charge separated state[33,58] relative to the lowest charge transfer state, thereby making the
exciton dissociation enthalpically favorable.
Figure 5
Close up of a donor–acceptor
interface at different resolutions.
The coarse-grain morphology (top) has been backmapped to atomistic
resolution (bottom). In both cases, only P3HT backbones (in red) are
shown to ease the view. PCBM molecules are depicted in blue.
Close up of a donor–acceptor
interface at different resolutions.
The coarse-grain morphology (top) has been backmapped to atomistic
resolution (bottom). In both cases, only P3HT backbones (in red) are
shown to ease the view. PCBM molecules are depicted in blue.
Conclusions
We
presented a CG MD based method which is able to capture the
kinetically trapped nature of spin-coated bulk heterojunction morphologies
with direct access to atom-resolved structural information. Simulations
predict morphologies in agreement with experimental findings. The
effects of slow-drying and annealing follow what is known for P3HT:PCBM
solar cells. The nanoscopic picture which emerges from the simulations
suggests that the (moderate) phase separation which is observed for
P3HT:PCBM blends is driven by the self-organization propensity of
P3HT. The good affinity between P3HT and PCBM does not allow for complete
phase separation on spin coating time scales.The resolution
mapping scheme of the Martini CG force field represents
a favorable compromise between the speedup of CG models and the preservation
of chemical detail; moreover, the existence of a robust backmapping
protocol ensures the retrieval of the atomistic structures underlying
the CG ones, opening the way for a molecular view on an in
silico solution-processed bulk heterojunction.As a
whole, this work proposes a predictive methodology for obtaining
morphologies of solution-processed soft matter systems with atomistic
resolution. The morphologies can subsequently serve as a starting
point for QM calculations on excitonic properties, or be used to compute
the mechanical response[59,60] of BHJ materials.
Methods
CG Models
CG MD
simulations have been run using models
which are based on the Martini CG force field.[37] Developed initially for biomolecules,[37,61−64] this CG force field has been later extended to nonbiological systems,
including various polymers[65−68] and carbon-based nanostructures.[69−72] As a general rule, four heavy
atoms are coarse-grained to one interaction site (bead). Finer mapping
is, however, allowed for ring systems, where an interaction site may
represent two or three atoms. The PCBM model makes use of the Martini
“F16” model,[69] a 16 beads representation of C60 fullerene, while the
oligothiophene amphiphile Martini model[73] has been used as starting point for the P3HTCG model. Experimental
transfer free energies were the main target of the Martini force field
parametrization.[37] This (top-down) approach
is used to obtain nonbonded interactions between CG particles. These
are determined by the type of beads which are used to describe the
molecules, the choice of which is made on the basis of experimental
free energy of transfer data. Bonded parameters between the beads
are instead obtained by matching bond and angle distributions of atomistic
simulations (bottom-up). The AA models used are based on the GROMOS
53A6 force field.[74] See the Supporting Information for detailed description
of the AA and CG models.Both CG and AA models have first been
validated by comparing computed free energies of transfer between
different solvents to experimental data for various molecular fragments.
The results, collected in Table S6, show
good agreement between experiments and simulations. Interactions between
the molecules studied here were further validated by comparing dimerization
potentials of mean force (PMFs) at the CG level with the corresponding
AA ones. PMFs were calculated for the dimerization of two 3HT molecules,
two PCBM molecules, and the 3HT-PCBM pair, all in CB solution. Figure S7 shows that CG PMFs are well in line
with atomistic ones. A thorough description of the free energy of
transfer and PMF calculations can be found in the Supporting Information.As already hinted previously,
the Martini CG force field parametrization,
based on a four heavy atoms to one CG site mapping scheme, brings
with it a bead size which is too large to accurately reproduce the
thickness of ring structures. This causes the discrepancy in the CG
stacking distance observed in the simulated morphologies (and also
seen in the potential of mean force of dimerization of two P3HT monomers
in the Supporting Information, Figure S7).
The bead radius is part of the Martini CG force field and cannot be
tweaked arbitrarily without disrupting the carefully parametrized
Martini partitioning equilibria. Work in our research group is being
carried out on improving properties of Martini CG ring models. Nevertheless,
the increased thickness of thiophene rings at the CG level does not
affect the nature of P3HT self-assembly, which is evident from the
simulations and which gives rise to structures in agreement with experiments.
Simulated Solvent Evaporation
The approach follows
the one recently developed by Lee and Pao.[34] Starting from a simulation box (30 × 30 × 88 nm3) containing a ternary mixture P3HT–PCBM–CB (∼39
mg mL–1 in P3HT and ∼31 mg mL–1 in PCBM for a 1:0.8 weight ratio), 1.25% of the solvent (i.e., CB)
is removed every time interval t until a dried blend
is obtained (30 × 30 × ∼5 nm3). The degrees
of polymerization N of (regioregular) P3HT employed
are 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48, approximately corresponding to molecular
weights of 1000, 2000, 4000, 6000, and 8000 Da. Various sizes for
the system have been tested, and the simulations have been found not
to suffer from finite size effects (see the Supporting Information). The largest size which could be exhaustively
simulated was chosen. 3D periodic boundary conditions are applied.
After every solvent removal, 4 ns of NPT equilibration are run followed
by a run 180, 120, 60, 30, 15, 7.5, or 3 ns long. This leads to total
drying times of 100, 70, 36, 19 11, 6.5, and 4 μs, respectively.
The equations of motion were integrated with a time step of 30 or
20 fs (the latter employed in the equilibration and often in the second
half of the evaporation to avoid numerical instabilities). The box
dimensions were fixed in the lateral directions by setting the compressibility
to 0 bar–1. The Verlet neighbor search algorithm
is employed to update the neighbor list.[75] Lennard-Jones potentials and forces are cut off at 1.1 nm; “potential
modifiers” are used to shift the potentials to zero at the
cut off.[76] The velocity-rescaling thermostat[77] and the Parrinello–Rahman barostat[78] are employed to maintain pressure and temperature,
respectively, with coupling parameters of 1.0 and 12.0 (or 15.0) ps–1. These parameters follow the standard “new” Martini set of run parameters.[76] All the evaporation simulations were run using the GROMACS
5.x package.[79] All the run parameter files,
as well as the solvent evaporation protocol, implemented as a bash
script (which assumes the use of GROMACS), are available for download
as part of the Supporting Information and
on the Martini portal http://cgmartini.nl. More details on the implementation can be found in the Supporting Information.
Simulated Annealing
Dried configurations have been
annealed by running MD simulations at higher temperature. The temperature
has been raised gradually, in the following way: 20 ns at 498 K, 180
ns at 598 K, and up to 1.8 μs at 698 K. This led to a total
simulation time of 2 μs for the full annealing cycle. The parameters
employed for the run are the same as the ones employed in the solvent
evaporation simulations (with the exception of the temperature). The
employed simulated annealing temperature is higher than the temperatures
commonly employed in experiments (∼420 K).[80] However, time scales are also different, as blends are
usually annealed for time scales currently not available for CG modeling
(5–10 min[80]). A direct comparison
between CG and experimental conditions is therefore not trivial.
Simulated Diffraction Pattern
The distances between
all the N thiophene centers of mass have been computed.
The N by N obtained distance matrix
is, evidently, symmetric and thus contains N(N – 1)/2 unique distances. These distances have been
binned in a histogram (occurrence vs distance; bin width = 1 nm).
Subsequently, the Fourier transform of this distribution has been
computed. This is done in the following way: the atoms are considered
as point scatterers located at points in the real space given by the
coordinates obtained by the MD simulations. If so, the scattering
intensity I(q) in the 3D reciprocal
space is given by[81]where q is the reciprocal space
vector, r is the position vector
of atom j, and Z is the atomic number of atom j. In this particular
case, we will make use of a one-dimensional version of eq . Moreover, as we consider identical
atoms (i.e., the thiophene centers of mass), the factor Z can be omitted. The procedure, which
makes use of the MDAnalysis package,[82,83] has been implemented
in a Jupyter/IPython notebook available for download as part of the Supporting Information.
Backmapping
The
procedure developed by Wassenaar et
al.[36] has been employed for the backmapping.
Briefly, mapping files, i.e., initial positioning of atoms expressed
on the CG particles space, have been defined for P3HT and PCBM. The
program backward.py places the atoms according to
the definitions contained in the mapping files. A series of energy
minimizations is then carried out (as implemented in the bash script initram.sh) until a relaxed atomistic morphology is obtained.
Further details are described in the Supporting
Information. The programs are available for download as part
of the Supporting Information and on the
Martini portal http://cgmartini.nl.
Calculation of Number of Contacts
The number of contacts
between molecules A and B in the simulations were calculated by counting
one contact for each CG bead belonging to a molecule B within a sphere
of radius 0.6 nm from each CG bead belonging to a molecule A. The
cutoff distance of 0.6 nm comprises the nearest neighbor CG sites
around a CG particle, with the radius of Martini S-particles being
0.24 nm ( where σ = 0.43 nm). When counting contacts, the
counting of intramolecular
contacts is avoided. More details on the computation of the number
of contacts and generation of the planar heterojunction and intermixed
morphology used to normalize the number of contacts can be found in
the Supporting Information.
Spatial Discretization
Scheme and Rendering
From each
obtained dried BHJ (of dimensions 30 × 30 × ∼5 nm3), two slabs (of dimensions 30 × 30 × ∼2.5
nm3) have been extracted. The thickness of these slabs
(2.5 nm), and consequently of the voxels into which the slabs are
divided, has been chosen based on the P3HT escape depth of secondary
electrons in the EFSEM measurements (found to be between around 20–30
Å[38]) to which the spatially discretized
morphologies are compared. The morphology slabs have been therefore
converted to a grid of polymer (red), fullerene (blue), and mixed
(gray) domains employing the following algorithm: the simulation box
is divided into voxels of dimensions 1 × 1 × 2.5 nm3; the number of P3HT (N) and PCBM (N) particles is then computed for each i,j voxel, and a color assigned to the
voxel based on the relative number of polymer and fullereneCG particles
contained in the voxel. In particular, the following ratio is evaluated:A x fraction
higher (lower) than 0.6 (−0.6)
has been assigned to the polymer (fullerene) phase, while fractions
between 0.6 and −0.6 (included) have been assigned to the mixed
phase. Simulations were visualized and rendered using VMD[84] and the Tachyon ray-tracer.[85]
Authors: Cesar A López; Andrzej J Rzepiela; Alex H de Vries; Lubbert Dijkhuizen; Philippe H Hünenberger; Siewert J Marrink Journal: J Chem Theory Comput Date: 2009-10-30 Impact factor: 6.006
Authors: Martin Kaltenbrunner; Matthew S White; Eric D Głowacki; Tsuyoshi Sekitani; Takao Someya; Niyazi Serdar Sariciftci; Siegfried Bauer Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2012-04-03 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Gang Wang; Steven M Swick; Micaela Matta; Subhrangsu Mukherjee; Joseph W Strzalka; Jenna Leigh Logsdon; Simone Fabiano; Wei Huang; Thomas J Aldrich; Tony Yang; Amod Timalsina; Natalia Powers-Riggs; Joaquin M Alzola; Ryan M Young; Dean M DeLongchamp; Michael R Wasielewski; Kevin L Kohlstedt; George C Schatz; Ferdinand S Melkonyan; Antonio Facchetti; Tobin J Marks Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2019-08-16 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Paulo C T Souza; Riccardo Alessandri; Jonathan Barnoud; Sebastian Thallmair; Ignacio Faustino; Fabian Grünewald; Ilias Patmanidis; Haleh Abdizadeh; Bart M H Bruininks; Tsjerk A Wassenaar; Peter C Kroon; Josef Melcr; Vincent Nieto; Valentina Corradi; Hanif M Khan; Jan Domański; Matti Javanainen; Hector Martinez-Seara; Nathalie Reuter; Robert B Best; Ilpo Vattulainen; Luca Monticelli; Xavier Periole; D Peter Tieleman; Alex H de Vries; Siewert J Marrink Journal: Nat Methods Date: 2021-03-29 Impact factor: 28.547
Authors: Ihor Sahalianov; Jonna Hynynen; Stephen Barlow; Seth R Marder; Christian Müller; Igor Zozoulenko Journal: J Phys Chem B Date: 2020-11-25 Impact factor: 2.991
Authors: Anna S Bondarenko; Ilias Patmanidis; Riccardo Alessandri; Paulo C T Souza; Thomas L C Jansen; Alex H de Vries; Siewert J Marrink; Jasper Knoester Journal: Chem Sci Date: 2020-10-01 Impact factor: 9.825
Authors: Riccardo Alessandri; Paulo C T Souza; Sebastian Thallmair; Manuel N Melo; Alex H de Vries; Siewert J Marrink Journal: J Chem Theory Comput Date: 2019-09-24 Impact factor: 6.006