4.8 Article

Charge Generation and Recombination in an Organic Solar Cell with Low Energetic Offsets

Journal

ADVANCED ENERGY MATERIALS
Volume 8, Issue 5, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/aenm.201701073

Keywords

energetic offset; fill factor; morphology; organic solar cells; recombination

Funding

  1. Department of the Navy, Office of Naval Research [N00014-14-1-0580]
  2. BMBF
  3. Deutsche Forschungsgesellschaft [INST 336/94-1 FUGG]
  4. Office of Naval Research [N00141512322]
  5. Department of Energy [DE-AC02-05CH11231]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Organic bulk heterojunction (BHJ) solar cells require energetic offsets between the donor and acceptor to obtain high short-circuit currents (J(SC)) and fill factors (FF). However, it is necessary to reduce the energetic offsets to achieve high open-circuit voltages (V-OC). Recently, reports have highlighted BHJ blends that are pushing at the accepted limits of energetic offsets necessary for high efficiency. Unfortunately, most of these BHJs have modest FF values. How the energetic offset impacts the solar cell characteristics thus remains poorly understood. Here, a comprehensive characterization of the losses in a polymer:fullerene BHJ blend, PIPCP:phenyl-C61-butyric acid methyl ester (PC61BM), that achieves a high V-OC (0.9 V) with very low energy losses (E-loss = 0.52 eV) from the energy of absorbed photons, a respectable J(SC) (13 mA cm(-2)), but a limited FF (54%) is reported. Despite the low energetic offset, the system does not suffer from field-dependent generation and instead it is characterized by very fast nongeminate recombination and the presence of shallow traps. The charge-carrier losses are attributed to suboptimal morphology due to high miscibility between PIPCP and PC61BM. These results hold promise that given the appropriate morphology, the J(SC), V-OC, and FF can all be improved, even with very low energetic offsets.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available