4.7 Article

Bipolar host materials comprising carbazole, pyridine and triazole moieties for efficient and stable phosphorescent OLEDs

期刊

DYES AND PIGMENTS
卷 192, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.dyepig.2021.109426

关键词

Bipolar host materials; Pyridine; 1; 2; 4-Triazole; Low roll-off; PhOLEDs

资金

  1. Excellent Talents Program in Anhui Universities [gxyq2019062, KJ2018A0525, 18030901087]
  2. Innovative Research Team of Undergraduates [X202010879045]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

By designing bipolar host materials with high triplet energies and bipolar charge transporting abilities, high efficiencies and slow efficiency roll-off were achieved in blue and green PhOLEDs, demonstrating high practical value for commercial applications.
Achieving an excellent device performance with slow roll-off efficiency is still a crucial requirement for phosphorescent OLEDs in displays and white lighting applications. Three bipolar host materials comprised of carbazole, pyridine and triazole units, namely o-CzTPy, p-CzTPy, and 3-CzTPy were synthesized and developed. They are designed by selecting the pyridine and triazole groups together as an electron-transporting unit, and varying the different linking modes of the functional groups to optimize performance. These materials possessed high triplet energies (2.66 eV-2.69 eV), and good bipolar charge transporting abilities. FIrpic and Ir(ppy)3 based blue and green PhOLEDs incorporating these bipolar hosts show low turn-on voltage, high efficiencies and slow efficiency roll-off. Among them, a maximum efficiency of 22.25% (41.98 cd A-1) was achieved for o-CzTPy based blue device. More importantly, the o-CzTPy based green device achieved the desirable high efficiency of 29.08% (96.98 cd A-1), which is among the highest values for PhOLEDs with dopant Ir(ppy)3 ever reported in public scientific literatures. These excellent results demonstrated that these bipolar hosts possess high practical value for application in commercial PhOLEDs.

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