4.6 Article

Screening and design of high-performance indoline-based dyes for DSSCs

期刊

RSC ADVANCES
卷 7, 期 33, 页码 20520-20536

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c6ra28396a

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [11404055, 11374353]
  2. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2016M590270]
  3. Heilongjiang Postdoctoral Grant [LBH-Z15002]
  4. Heilongjiang Provincial Youth Science Foundation [QC2013C006]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The molecular structures and photophysical properties of three D-A-pi-A dyes (WS-2, WS-92 and WS-95) were calculated based on density functional theory (DFT) and time-dependent DFT (TD-DFT). The results show that different donor (D) groups and pi-spacer bridges affect the photophysical properties. WS-95 presents the highest light harvesting efficiency (LHE), maximum absorption peak, dipole moment (mu(normal)), electron affinity (EA), electrophilicity (omega) and electron accepting power (omega(+)), as well as a small natural bond orbital (NBO) charge of the electron acceptor, ionization potential (IP) and chemical hardness (h). These critical parameters have a close relationship with the open-circuit photo-voltage (V-OC) and the short-circuit current density (J(SC)), and lead to WS-95 exhibiting higher efficiency. In order to obtain an efficient dye, we designed a series of dyes based on WS-95 and analyzed their optical and electronic properties. It was found that upon introducing a CN group into WS-95 (as in the designed molecules 1, 2, 3, 7, 8 and 9), the band gap energies of the dyes were decreased, leading to an absorption peak red-shift compared to WS-95. The structural modifications also result in an increase in the electrophilicity and electron accepting power, and a decrease in the chemical hardness. When -NH2 is introduced into WS-95 (4, 5, 6, 10, 11 and 12), the opposite trend is observed compared to dyes 1, 2, 3, 7, 8 and 9. We hope that these results will be helpful for experiments to synthesize new and highly efficient dyes.

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

4.6
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