4.7 Article

Highly efficient CH3NH3PbI3 perovskite solar cells prepared by AuCl3-doped graphene transparent conducting electrodes

期刊

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL
卷 323, 期 -, 页码 153-159

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2017.04.097

关键词

AuCl3; p-Type doping; Graphene; Transparent conducting electrode; Perovskite solar cells

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) under the Ministry of Science, ICT & Future Planning (Basic Science Research Program) [2014R1A5A1009799]
  2. Technology Development Program to Solve Climate Change [2015M1A2A2055631]
  3. Global Frontier R&D Program on Center for Multiscale Energy System [2012M3A6A7054855]
  4. Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy, Republic of Korea (New & Renewable Energy Core Technology Program of the Lorea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP)) [20163010012470]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We employed AuCl3-doped graphene as a p-type transparent conducting electrode (TCE) in an p-i-n type CH3NH3PbI3 perovskite solar cell using poly (3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene):poly(styrene sulfonate) and phenyl-C61-butyric acid methyl ester as the hole and electron transporting layers, respectively, and obtained 17.4-17.9% power conversion efficiency at 1 Sun condition. The work function of the AuCl3-doped graphene TCE was controllable from similar to 4.52 to similar to 4.86 eV. Due to the p-type doping by the AuCl3 treatment, the graphene TCE shows good hole mobility and greatly-improved sheet resistance (-70 ohm/cm(2)) compared to the pristine graphene TCE (similar to 890 ohm/cm(2)) but its transmittance was gradually decreased with the doping concentration (no). Owing to the trade-off correlation between the sheet resistance and the transmittance of the AuCl3-doped graphene TCE, the ratio of DC conductivity and optical conductivity was the highest at n(D) = 7.5 mM. Therefore, the highest performance was achievable by using 7.5 mM AuCl3-doped graphene TCE. (C) 2017 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

4.7
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