4.4 Article Proceedings Paper

Tungsten oxides as interfacial layers for improved performance in hybrid optoelectronic devices

期刊

THIN SOLID FILMS
卷 519, 期 17, 页码 5748-5753

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.tsf.2010.12.207

关键词

Tungsten oxide; Electronic structure; Organic optoelectronic devices

资金

  1. Directorate For Engineering
  2. Div Of Electrical, Commun & Cyber Sys [0823996] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tungsten oxide (WO3) films with thicknesses ranging from 30 to 100 nm were grown by Hot Filament Vapor Deposition (HFVD). Films were studied by X-Ray Photoemission Spectroscopy (XPS) and were found to be stoichiometric. The surface morphology of the films was characterized by Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM). Samples had a granular form with grains in the order of 100 nm. The surface roughness was found to increase with film thickness. HFVD WO3 films were used as conducting interfacial layers in advanced hybrid organic-inorganic optoelectronic devices. Hybrid-Organic Light Emitting Diodes (Hy-OLEDs) and Organic Photovoltaics (Hy-OPVs) were fabricated with these films as anode and/or as cathode interfacial conducting layers. The Hy-OLEDs showed significantly higher current density and a lower turn-on voltage when a thin WO3 layer was inserted at the anode/polymer interface, while when inserted at the cathode/polymer interface the device performance was found to deteriorate. The improvement was attributed to a more efficient hole injection and transport from the Fermi level of the anode to the Highest Occupied Molecular Orbital (HOMO) of a yellow emitting copolymer (YEP). On the other hand, the insertion of a thin WO3 layer at the cathode/polymer interface of Hy-OPV devices based on a polythiophene-fullerene bulk-heterojunction blend photoactive layer resulted in an increase of the produced photogenerated current, more likely due to improved electron extraction at the Al cathode. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.4
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