journal article·2018-01-31Open access

Interplay of Interfacial Layers and Blend Composition To Reduce Thermal Degradation of Polymer Solar Cells at High Temperature

Sadok Ben Dkhil, Martin Pfannmöller, Rasmus R. Schröder, Riva Alkarsifi, Meriem Gaceur, Wolfgang Köntges, Hamed Heidari, Sara Bals, Olivier Margeat, Jörg Ackermann, Christine Videlot-Ackermann

Abstract

The thermal stability of printed polymer solar cells at elevated temperatures needs to be improved to achieve high-throughput fabrication including annealing steps as well as long-term stability. During device processing, thermal annealing impacts both the organic photoactive layer, and the two interfacial layers make detailed studies of degradation mechanism delicate. A recently identified thermally stable poly[[4,8-bis[(2-ethylhexyl)oxy]benzo[1,2- b:4,5- b ′]dithiophene-2,6-diyl][3-fluoro-2-[(2-ethylhexyl)carbonyl]thieno[3,4- b ]thiophenediyl]]:[6,6]-phenyl-C 71 -butyric acid methyl ester (PTB7:PC 70 BM) blend as photoactive layer in combination with poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) polystyrene sulfonate as hole extraction layer is used here to focus on the impact of electron extraction layer (EEL) on the thermal stability of solar cells. Solar cells processed with densely packed ZnO nanoparticle layers still show 92% of the initial efficiency after constant annealing during 1 day at 140 °C, whereas partially covering ZnO layers as well as an evaporated calcium layer leads to performance losses of up to 30%. This demonstrates that the nature and morphology of EELs highly influence the thermal stability of the device. We extend our study to thermally unstable PTB7:[6,6]-phenyl-C 61 -butyric acid methyl ester (PC 60 BM) blends to highlight the impact of ZnO on the device degradation during annealing. Importantly, only 12% loss in photocurrent density is observed after annealing at 140 °C during 1 day when using closely packed ZnO. This is in stark contrast to literature and addressed here to the use of a stable double-sided confinement during thermal annealing. The underlying mechanism of the inhibition of photocurrent losses is revealed by electron microscopy imaging and spatially resolved spectroscopy. We found that the double-sided confinement suppresses extensive fullerene diffusion during the annealing step, but with still an increase in size and distance of the enriched donor and acceptor domains inside the photoactive layer by an average factor of 5. The later result in combination with comparably small photocurrent density losses indicates the existence of an efficient transport of minority charge carriers inside the donor and acceptor enriched phases in PTB7:PC 60 BM blends.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Organic Electronics and Photovoltaics · Thin-Film Transistor Technologies · Conducting polymers and applications

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Aix Marseille Univ., UMR CNRS 7325, CINaM, 13009 Marseille Cedex 09, France

Electron Microscopy for Materials Research (EMAT), University of Antwerp, Groenenborgerlaan 171, 2020 Antwerp, Belgium

Centre for Advanced Materials, Heidelberg University, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany

Funding

FP7 Information and Communication Technologies · Fonds Unique Interminist?riel · Heidelberg Karlsruhe Research Partnership

References (53)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1038/ncomms241110.1038/ncomms2411 ↗
2. 10.1002/adma.20130001710.1002/adma.201300017 ↗
3. 10.1021/ar200244610.1021/ar2002446 ↗
4. 10.1039/C5EE02145F10.1039/C5EE02145F ↗
5. 10.1002/aenm.20160029010.1002/aenm.201600290 ↗
6. 10.1002/adma.20150282710.1002/adma.201502827 ↗
7. 10.1038/ncomms1027910.1038/ncomms10279 ↗
8. 10.1021/jacs.7b0267710.1021/jacs.7b02677 ↗
9. 10.1002/adma.20110418710.1002/adma.201104187 ↗
10. 10.1063/1.496121010.1063/1.4961210 ↗
11. 10.1021/acsami.6b1567310.1021/acsami.6b15673 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.rser.2017.04.00310.1016/j.rser.2017.04.003 ↗
13. 10.1039/C6RA28501E10.1039/C6RA28501E ↗
14. 10.1016/j.orgel.2011.11.02710.1016/j.orgel.2011.11.027 ↗
15. 10.1039/C5CS00593K10.1039/C5CS00593K ↗
16. 10.1002/aenm.20150120810.1002/aenm.201501208 ↗
17. 10.1002/aenm.20150140710.1002/aenm.201501407 ↗
18. 10.1021/nl048120i10.1021/nl048120i ↗
19. 10.1016/j.solmat.2008.01.00610.1016/j.solmat.2008.01.006 ↗
20. 10.1002/adma.20050178710.1002/adma.200501787 ↗
21. 10.1002/adma.20110446110.1002/adma.201104461 ↗
22. 10.1021/nl202691n10.1021/nl202691n ↗
23. 10.1021/cm900928210.1021/cm9009282 ↗
24. 10.1002/adfm.20110277110.1002/adfm.201102771 ↗
25. 10.1021/cm203706h10.1021/cm203706h ↗
26. 10.1002/adfm.20130043710.1002/adfm.201300437 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.solmat.2012.12.00710.1016/j.solmat.2012.12.007 ↗
28. 10.1021/cm800431s10.1021/cm800431s ↗
29. 10.1038/ncomms322710.1038/ncomms3227 ↗
30. 10.1021/nn404687s10.1021/nn404687s ↗
31. 10.1002/pi.471210.1002/pi.4712 ↗
32. 10.1002/adma.20140106210.1002/adma.201401062 ↗
33. 10.1063/1.487099710.1063/1.4870997 ↗
34. 10.1039/c3ta11018d10.1039/c3ta11018d ↗
35. 10.1039/C4TA02515F10.1039/C4TA02515F ↗
36. 10.1002/aenm.20130143710.1002/aenm.201301437 ↗
37. 10.1002/adfm.20120110010.1002/adfm.201201100 ↗
38. 10.1002/aenm.20160148610.1002/aenm.201601486 ↗
39. 10.1002/adfm.20090104510.1002/adfm.200901045 ↗
40. 10.1002/aenm.20160128910.1002/aenm.201601289 ↗
41. 10.1063/1.12470810.1063/1.124708 ↗
42. 10.1063/1.217178110.1063/1.2171781 ↗
43. 10.1002/adfm.20060091710.1002/adfm.200600917 ↗
44. 10.1063/1.311751310.1063/1.3117513 ↗
45. 10.1021/ma047589x10.1021/ma047589x ↗
46. 10.1088/1674-1056/25/3/03840210.1088/1674-1056/25/3/038402 ↗
47. 10.1002/aenm.20140080510.1002/aenm.201400805 ↗
48. 10.1002/aenm.20130169410.1002/aenm.201301694 ↗
49. 10.1021/acs.nanolett.5b0243710.1021/acs.nanolett.5b02437 ↗
50. 10.1016/j.mattod.2013.10.00110.1016/j.mattod.2013.10.001 ↗
51. 10.1016/j.orgel.2014.11.00710.1016/j.orgel.2014.11.007 ↗
52. 10.1021/nl201078t10.1021/nl201078t ↗
53. 10.1002/aenm.20160236010.1002/aenm.201602360 ↗