| Literature DB >> 29051855 |
Yu Xiong1,2, Bo Wu1, Xiaoyan Zheng3, Zheng Zhao2,3, Ping Deng1, Ming Lin4, Benzhong Tang2,3, Beng S Ong1.
Abstract
A novel, star-shaped electron acceptor, DMTPA-PDI3, derived from a planar dimethylmethylene-bridged triphenylamine core with three acetylene-linked perylene diimide (PDI) units is developed as a nonfullerene acceptor for organic solar cells (OSCs). DMTPA-PDI3 manifests significantly reduced intramolecular twisting, enabling sufficient system-wide π-electron delocalization leading to broadened spectral absorption and raised lowest unoccupied molecular orbital level. As a result, higher and more balanced hole and electron transport properties are observed. Active layers for OSCs comprising DMTPA-PDI3 acceptor and PBT7-Th donor exhibit suppressed intermolecular aggregation, giving rise to uniform nanophase network formation. These OSC devices have afforded respectably high power-conversion efficiency of about 5%.Entities:
Keywords: nonfullerene acceptors; organic solar cells; perylene diimide; triphenylamine
Year: 2017 PMID: 29051855 PMCID: PMC5644237 DOI: 10.1002/advs.201700110
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Adv Sci (Weinh) ISSN: 2198-3844 Impact factor: 16.806
Scheme 1Synthetic route for DMTPA‐PDI3.
Figure 1a) Normalized solution (dichloromethane) and thin‐film UV–vis absorption spectra of DMTPA‐PDI3. b) Cyclic voltammogram of DMTPA‐PDI3 thin film in CH3CN/0.1 m Bu4NPF6 at a scan rate of 100 mV s−1.
Figure 2a) HOMO and LUMO electron density contours of optimized DMTPA‐PDI3 at B3LYP/6‐31G* level by DFT (top view). b) Top view and side view of optimized DMTPA‐PDI3 geometry.
Figure 3a) J–V characteristics; b) EQE spectrum for inverted OSC structure of ITO/ZnO/Al/PTB7‐Th:DMTPA‐PDI3/MoO3/Ag.
Photovoltaic performances of OSCs based on PTB7‐Th:DMTPA‐PDI3 under the illumination of AM 1.5G, 100 mW cm−2
| PTB7‐Th:DMTPA‐PDI3 [w/w] |
|
| FF [%] | PCE | PCEmax [%] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1:1 | 0.848 ± 0.003 | 9.21 ± 0.10 | 54.94 ± 1.38 | 4.32 ± 0.07 | 4.39 |
| 1:1.5 | 0.846 ± 0.002 | 9.80 ± 0.11 | 47.81 ± 0.93 | 3.95 ± 0.08 | 4.03 |
| 1.5:1 | 0.826 ± 0.003 | 11.95 ± 0.10 | 47.82 ± 1.69 | 4.79 ± 0.09 | 4.88 |
| 2:1 | 0.855 ± 0.001 | 7.26 ± 0.18 | 48.73 ± 0.56 | 3.04 ± 0.06 | 3.10 |
| 1.5:1 (3% DIO) | 0.832 ± 0.005 | 6.48 ± 0.19 | 44.01 ± 0.87 | 2.37 ± 0.06 | 2.43 |
| 1.5:1 (3% CN) | 0.829 ± 0.003 | 11.27 ± 0.27 | 51.46 ± 0.78 | 4.81 ± 0.1 | 4.91 |
The average PCE value was calculated from twelve devices for each condition.
Figure 5a) Normalized thin‐film UV–vis absorption spectra of DMTPA‐PDI3, PTB7‐Th, and PTB7‐Th:DMTPA‐PDI3 (1.5:1.0, w/w); b) thin‐film photoluminescence spectra of DMTPA‐PDI3 (excited at 500 nm), PTB7‐Th (excited at 698 nm), and PTB7‐Th:DMTPA‐PDI3 (1.5:1.0, w/w) (excited at 500 and 698 nm).
Figure 4a) AFM images (1 µm × 1 µm) of PTB7‐Th:DMTPA‐PDI3 (1.5:1, w/w) thin films (left: phase image; right: height image); b) XRD patterns of DMTPA‐PDI3, PTB7‐Th, and PTB7‐Th:DMTPA‐PDI3 (1.5:1, w/w) thin films.