4.7 Article

Electrochromic devices based on poly(3-methylthiophene) and various secondary electrochromic materials

Journal

SOLAR ENERGY MATERIALS AND SOLAR CELLS
Volume 94, Issue 8, Pages 1338-1345

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.solmat.2010.03.025

Keywords

Poly(3-methylthiophene); Poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene); Niobium pentoxide; Electrochromic device

Funding

  1. CNPq [473299/2004-6]
  2. CT-Energ/CNPq

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this paper, the electrochemical properties of poly(3-methylthiophene) (PMT), poly(3,4-ethylene-dioxythiophene) (PEDOT) and niobium pentoxide (Nb2O5) films deposited on ITO are described. PMT films were made by galvanostatic electrodeposition. PEDOT and Nb2O5 were deposited by spin-coating from a suspension, in the case of PEDOT, and from a precursor solution obtained by the Pechini method, for Nb2O5. Three electrochromic devices were assembled from these films, with different arrangements of electrodes, using poly(epichlorohydrin-co-ethylene oxide) (P(EPI-EO)) + LiClO4 as the polymer electrolyte. The PMT films were employed as the working electrode (E-1) and PEDOT, Nb2O5 or ITO as counter-electrodes (E-2). The devices showed color changes from red to blue in response to the applied potential from -1.5 to +1.5 V (PMT vs. E-2), respectively. The transmittance variation was measured in the visible region (lambda = 650 nm) during the polarization. The systems were also characterized with respect to their coulombic efficiency (CE), electrochromic efficiency (eta) and response time (tau). The three devices gave similar results, as follows: CE of 107%, eta from 92 to 126 cm(2) C-1 and tau similar to 2 s. The cycle life and optical memory were also analyzed and the devices showed good durability for 1000 cycles and good optical memory, demonstrating the potential applicability of the electrochromic devices presented here. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available