4.8 Article

Efficient Light-Emitting Diodes Based on in Situ Fabricated FAPbBr3 Nanocrystals: The Enhancing Role of the Ligand-Assisted Reprecipitation Process

期刊

ACS NANO
卷 12, 期 8, 页码 8808-8816

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.8b05172

关键词

perovskite nanocrystals; quantum dots; in situ fabrication; photoluminescence; light-emitting diode

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61722502, 21603012, 61735004]
  2. BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd., China

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this paper, we reported the in situ fabrication of highly luminescent formamidinium lead bromide (FAPbBr(3)) nanocrystal thin films by dropping toluene as an anti-solvent during the spin-coating with a perovskite precursor solution using 3,3-diphenylpropylamine bromide (DPPA-Br) as a ligand. The resulting films are uniform and composed of 5-20 nm FAPbBr(3) perovskite nanocrystals. By monitoring the solvent mixing of anti-solvent and precursor solution on the substrates, we illustrated the difference between the ligand-assisted reprecipitation (LARP) process and the nanocrystal-pinning (NCP) process. This understanding provides a guideline for film optimization, and the optimized films obtained through the in situ LARP process exhibit strong photoluminescence emission at 528 nm, with quantum yields up to 78% and an average photoluminescence lifetime of 12.7 ns. In addition, an exciton binding energy of 57.5 meV was derived from the temperature-dependent photoluminescence measurement. More importantly, we achieved highly efficient pure green perovskite based light-emitting diode (PeLEDs) devices with an average external quantum efficiency (EQE) of 7.3% (maximum EQE is 16.3%) and an average current efficiency (CE) of 29.5 cd A(-1) (maximum CE is 66.3 cd A(-1)) by adapting a conventional device structure of ITO/PEDOT:PSS/TFB/perovskite film/TPBi/LiF/Al. It is expected that the in situ LARP process provides an effective methodology for the improvement of the performance of PeLEDs.

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

4.8
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