4.7 Article

Nanoscale Phase Separation of P3HT PCBM Thick Films As Measured by Small-Angle X-ray Scattering

期刊

MACROMOLECULES
卷 44, 期 16, 页码 6503-6508

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ma2007706

关键词

-

资金

  1. EPSRC [EP/E046215/1, EP/F019297/1]
  2. EPSRC [EP/F019297/1, EP/E046215/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  3. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/F019297/1, EP/E046215/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The elusive and difficult to measure phase separation length scale in poly(3-hexylthiophene):C61-butyric acid methyl ester (P3HT: PCBM) bulk heterojunction layers was measured using small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS) from thick films of the blend. After drop-casting and allowing the material to dry, there was a distinct nanoscale phase separation of the two blend components as measured by SAXS. Thermal annealing reduced the degree of phase separation as qualitatively measured by the decrease in the SAXS invariant, and the phase separation length scale was virtually unchanged at 25 nm. We attribute this reduction in the SAXS invariant to diffusion of PCBM into the amorphous P3HT; this was also confirmed by a reduction in the photoluminescence (PL) and a small reduction in the PL lifetime. We show that a bulk heterojunction system blend of 1:0.7 P3HT:PCBM is not just a simple two-phase system with well-defined interfaces, but instead it is a much more complicated system incorporating regions of crystalline P3HT, PCBM, and a mixed phase of amorphous P3HT and PCBM. Our work confirms that PCBM penetrates into P3HT upon thermal annealing and so reinforces the view proposed by Kiel et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 2010, 105, 168701]. We suggest that, alongside device testing this type of thick film, SAXS experiments would aid efficiency improvements by permitting measurement of the phase separation length scale in bulk heterojunction organic photovoltaic materials. This is a key parameter for understanding and designing improved polymer solar cells.

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

4.7
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