| Literature DB >> 30996945 |
Guang-Zhao Lu1, Ning Su1, Hui-Qing Yang1, Qi Zhu2, Wen-Wei Zhang1, You-Xuan Zheng1, Liang Zhou2, Jing-Lin Zuo1, Zhao-Xu Chen1, Hong-Jie Zhang2.
Abstract
Three red cyclometalatedEntities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30996945 PMCID: PMC6432389 DOI: 10.1039/c8sc05605f
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Chem Sci ISSN: 2041-6520 Impact factor: 9.825
Scheme 1The synthetic routes to the ligands and complexes.
Photophysical data of (4tfmpq)2Ir(dipdtc), (4tfmpq)2Ir(dpdtc) and (4tfmpq)2Ir(Czdtc) in CH2Cl2 solution
| Complex |
| Absorption | Emission |
|
|
| HOMO/LUMO |
| (4tfmpq)2Ir(dipdtc) | 384 | 263/285/453/592 | 641 | 1.41 | 58.3 | 2.04 | –5.44/–3.19 |
| (4tfmpq)2Ir(dpdtc) | 376 | 261/324/443/543 | 628 | 1.55 | 84.3 | 2.07 | –5.50/–3.20 |
| (4tfmpq)2Ir(Czdtc) | 371 | 282/357/532/570 | 611 | 1.50 | 93.0 | 2.18 | –5.61/–3.22 |
Decomposition temperature.
Measured in degassed CH2Cl2.
Φ: emission quantum yields were calculated with the fac-Ir(ppy)3 standard in degassed CH2Cl2 solution (ΦP = 0.4).
E T (triplet energy): estimated from the highest-energy peaks of the 77 K phosphorescence spectra in CH2Cl2 (10–5 M).
HOMO (eV) = –(Eox – E1/2,Fc) – 4.8, LUMO (eV) = HOMO + Ebandgap.
Fig. 1The calculated Gibbs free energy change ΔG of the three reactions of (4tfmpq)2Ir(dipdtc), (4tfmpq)2Ir(dpdtc) and (4tfmpq)2Ir(Czdtc) complexes.
Fig. 2ORTEP diagram of (4tfmpq)2Ir(dipdtc) (CCDC no. ; 1832357) and (4tfmpq)2Ir(Czdtc) (CCDC no. ; 1832334) with the atom-numbering schemes. Hydrogen atoms are omitted for clarity. Ellipsoids are drawn at the 50% probability level.
Fig. 3The UV-vis absorption (a) and emission (b) spectra of the three complexes (4tfmpq)2Ir(dipdtc), (4tfmpq)2Ir(dpdtc) and (4tfmpq)2Ir(Czdtc) in degassed dichloromethane (5 × 10–5 M) at room temperature.
Scheme 2Energy level diagram of the HOMO and LUMO levels of materials investigated and their chemical molecular structures.
Fig. 4Characteristics of single-emitting-layer devices: (a) EL spectra, (b) J–V–L curves, (c) ηc–L–ηp curves and (d) EQE–L curves.
The key EL data of devices S1–S3 and D1–D3
| Device |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| CIE |
| S1 | 3.4 | 26 490 | 9.51 | 15.30 | 7.86 | 7.38 | 11.69 | (0.68, 0.31) |
| S2 | 3.2 | 39 870 | 18.56 | 20.91 | 16.00 | 13.27 | 14.36 | (0.66, 0.33) |
| S3 | 3.4 | 56 880 | 32.92 | 24.18 | 28.94 | 28.14 | 20.33 | (0.63, 0.36) |
| D1 | 3.6 | 33 540 | 11.89 | 19.46 | 8.87 | 10.76 | 17.47 | (0.68, 0.31) |
| D2 | 3.4 | 46 920 | 28.95 | 28.10 | 20.97 | 27.74 | 26.53 | (0.65, 0.33) |
| D3 | 3.6 | 60 950 | 40.68 | 30.54 | 33.63 | 37.10 | 26.79 | (0.63, 0.36) |
Applied voltage recorded at a luminance of 1 cd m–2.
Recorded at 1000 cd m–2.
Measured at 1000 cd m–2.
Fig. 5Characteristics of double emitting-layer devices: (a) EL spectra, (b) J–V–L, (c) ηc–L–ηp and (d) EQE–L curves.