4.6 Article

Competition between morphological attributes in the thermal annealing and additive processing of polymer solar cells

Journal

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS CHEMISTRY C
Volume 1, Issue 33, Pages 5023-5030

Publisher

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c3tc30679h

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Division of Materials Science and Engineering, Basic Energy Science, Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy [DE-FG02-98ER45737]
  2. Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, of the U.S. Department of Energy [DE-AC02-05CH11231]
  3. Chinese Natural Science Foundation of China [51173189]
  4. International S&T Cooperation Program of China [2011DFG63460]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Thermal annealing and additive processing are employed and compared using alkoxy substituted (QxO) and extended pi conjugated alkythienyl substituted (QxT) benzo[1,2-b:4,5 b']dithiophene based heterojunction (BHJ) solar cells. The characteristic median length of the morphology, average composition fluctuations, interface structure, crystallinity and molecular miscibility are investigated based on these two processes. Our results suggest that focusing on single structural, morphological or thermodynamic measurements is not sufficient to explain differences in device performance. In the current work, no blends are close to the ideal morphology containing either domains that are too large, too mixed or too pure. An optimization strategy is proposed to improve those devices. Importantly, we find that domain size and relative domain purity are overall correlated with molecular miscibility, i.e. the more immiscible system induces larger and purer domains irrespective of the processing and even in non-equilibrium structures. This indicates that the relative domain size and purity, and device performance can be potentially predicted by the donor-acceptor molecular miscibility, a factor not yet widely considered when designing new materials for BHJ devices.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available