4.6 Article

Inductive effects of diphenylphosphoryl moieties on carbazole host materials: Design rules for blue electrophosphorescent organic light-emitting devices

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY C
卷 112, 期 21, 页码 7989-7996

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jp800079z

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We show that the inductive electron-withdrawing effect of diphenylphosphoryl (Ph2P=O) groups lowers both the highest occupied and lowest unoccupied molecular orbitals (HOMO and LUMO) of a carbazole chromophore. This improves electron injection from a cathode without affecting the high triplet exciton energy (E-T approximate to 3.0 eV) of the host material. Three new carbazole derivatives, 3,6-bis(diphenylphosphoryl)-9-ethylcarbazole (PO 10), 3,6-bis(diphenylphosphoryl)-9-phenylcarbazole (PO9), and N-(4-diphenylphosphoryl phenyl) carbazole (MPO12), were investigated as host materials in blue phosphor-doped organic light-emitting devices (OLEDs). Photophysical characterization showed all three carbazole derivatives exhibit monomer UV fluorescence (367-385 nm) in solution and contributions from molecular aggregates or excimers in solid-state films (378-395 nm). The polar MPO12 derivative exhibited solvatochromism and had the highest propensity for aggregate formation in the solid state. Testing of OLEDs using PO9, PO10, and MPO12 as host materials for the sky blue organometallic phosphor iridium(III) bis(4,6-(difluorophenyl)-pyridinato-N,C-2') picolinate (FIrpic) gave external quantum efficiencies (EQE) and operating voltages at a similar current density (J = 13 mA/cm(2)) of 6-8% at <7 V. The best device performance was exhibited using MPO12 as the host when an appropriate hole-blocking layer was implemented. The higher performance of MPO12 was attributed to the ambipolar charge-transporting character of the polar carbazole derivative. However, exciton relaxation on nonradiative aggregate states of all host materials studied may limit further improvements in device efficiencies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据