4.7 Article

Semitransparent organic solar cells with light utilization efficiency of 4% using fused-cyclopentadithiophene based near-infrared polymer donor

期刊

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL
卷 452, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2022.139423

关键词

NIR-absorbing polymer donor; Semi-transparent organic solar cell; Average visible transmission; Light utilization efficiency

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Semi-transparent organic solar cells (ST-OSCs) have attracted significant attention for applications such as building-integrated photovoltaics and smart windows. In this study, cyclopentadithiophene (CPDT) core-based NIR-absorbing polymer donors (PL1 and PL2) were synthesized. The results showed that PL2 incorporation in ST-OSCs achieved higher power conversion efficiency and light utilization efficiency.
Semi-transparent organic solar cells (ST-OSCs) have attracted significant attention for various applications such as building-integrated photovoltaics and smart window technologies. Although various low-band gap non-fullerene acceptors have been developed, near-infrared (NIR) absorbing polymeric donors have been rarely re-ported for highly efficient ST-OSCs. In this study, we synthesize cyclopentadithiophene (CPDT) core-based NIR-absorbing polymer donors, PL1 and PL2. These polymer donors show strong NIR absorption capabilities with high transmittance in visible wavelength region and deep-lying HOMO levels for cascade energy level alignment with low-bandgap non-fullerene acceptors. The opaque device with PL2 and PCBM exhibits higher power con-version efficiency of 11.62% than that of the device with PL1 (PCE: 7.54%) due to lower charge-carrier recombination loss and balanced charge-carrier mobilities. Most significantly, incorporation of PL2 into ST-OSCs results in a PCE of 9.91 %, average visible transmittance of 40.4 % and light utilization efficiency (LUE) of 4.00 %. This work achieves the one of the highest LUE in ST-OSCs based on new NIR-absorbing polymer donors.

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