| Literature DB >> 28317929 |
In Hwan Jung1, Cheon Taek Hong1, Un-Hak Lee1, Young Hun Kang1, Kwang-Suk Jang2, Song Yun Cho1.
Abstract
We studied the thermoelectriEntities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28317929 PMCID: PMC5357796 DOI: 10.1038/srep44704
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Stille polymerization for PDPP3T.
Figure 2Optical absorption spectra of (a) P3HT and (b) PDPP3T films undoped and doped by spin-coating using FeCl3/nitromethane solutions with concentration in the range of 1–10 mM. The ratio between oxidized and neutral form of (c) P3HT and (d) PDPP3T film upon the dopant concentration.
Figure 3Schematic diagram of the doping by spin-coating, and photographic images of P3HT and PDPP3T films doping level controlled by varying the concentration of dopant solutions.
Figure 4Thermoelectric properties of (a) P3HT and (b) PDPP3T doped with FeCl3/nitromethane solutions by spin-coating.
Thermoelectric properties of P3HT and PDPP3T doped by spin-coating.
| Polymer/concentration of doping solution | Seebeck coefficient [μV K−1] | Electrical conductivity [S cm−1] | Power factor [μW m−1K−2] | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Average | Maximum | Average | Maximum | Average | Maximum | |
| P3HT/9 mM | 105 ± 12 | 122 | 42 ± 3 | 45 | 46 ± 7 | 56 |
| PDPP3T/6 mM | 217 ± 8 | 226 | 52 ± 3 | 55 | 247 ± 21 | 276 |
Figure 5(a) Seebeck coefficients of the doped P3HT and PDPP3T films as a function of electrical conductivity (the dashed lines were inserted to stand out the difference of Seebeck coefficients more clearly), and (b) the scheme of the doped P3HT and PDPP3T with optimal thermoelectric performances.