Quinoxaline-based Polymers with Asymmetric Aromatic Side Chain Enables 16.27% Efficiency for Organic Solar Cells

Li, Dongxu; Li, Shufang; Chen, Wen; Sun, Chaoyuan; Shi, Changzhou; Xia, Xinxin; Lu, Xinhui; Jiang, Lihui; Yuan, Jun; Zou, Yingping

doi:10.1007/s10118-023-2895-5

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…They also synthesized four polymers TPQ-0F, TPQ-1F, TPQ-1Fi, and TPQ-2F with asymmetric aromatic side chain. [96] The number of the F substituents on the side chain could affect molecular arrangement and crystallinity behavior of blend films. Finally, the binary OSCs based on TPQ-2F : Y6 achieved a PCE of 16.27 %.…”

Section: Pb-dfqxmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fluorinated Polymer Donors for Nonfullerene Organic Solar Cells

Li,

Wang,

Chen

et al. 2024

Chemistry A European J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The rapid development of narrow‐bandgap non‐fullerene acceptors (NFAs) has boosted the efficiency of organic solar cells over 19%. The new features of high‐performance NFAs, such as visible‐NIR light absorption, moderate HOMO, and high crystallinity, require polymer donors with matching physical properties. This emphasizes the importance of methods that can effectively tune the physical properties of polymers. Owning to very small atom size and strongest electronegativity, the fluorination has been proved the most efficient strategy to regulate the physical properties of polymer donors, including frontier energy level, absorption coefficient, dielectric constant, crystallinity and charge transport. Owing to the success of fluorination strategy, the vast majority of high‐performance polymer donors possess one or more fluorine atoms. In this review, the fluorination synthetic methods, the synthetic route of well‐known fluorinated building blocks, the fluorinated polymers which are categorized by the type of donor or acceptor units, and the relationships between the polymer structures, properties, and photovoltaic performances are comprehensively surveyed. We hope this review could provide the readers a deeper insight into fluorination strategy and lay a strong foundation for future innovation of fluorinated polymers.

show abstract

Section: Pb-dfqxmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fluorinated Polymer Donors for Nonfullerene Organic Solar Cells

Li,

Wang,

Chen

et al. 2024

Chemistry A European J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although the intermolecular noncovalent interactions resulting from conjugated solid additives with blend layers have been extensively studied, most conclusions only discuss the interaction between electron-rich additives and SMAs because of their charge distribution properties. , There are few studies regarding the intermolecular interactions and functional mechanisms between solid additives and donor materials. , Polymer donors typically consist of D–A or D-π–A-π repeat units, which also contain electron-withdrawing (A) structural units, especially fluorinated A units with a relatively good π-conjugate plane. − Therefore, the interaction between donor materials and solid additives should not be ignored when investigating the ordered packing of BHJ OSC active layers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this work, we developed two D–A polymers based on benzothiophene (BDT) as the D unit. We combined BDT with two A (fluorinated quinoxaline (Qx)) units distinguished by different aromatic side chains, leading to the polymers TPQ-3F (namely Y49 in referenced thesis) and TPQ-2F . In order to investigate the interactions between additives and fluorinated Qx units, three volatile solid additives (1,4-dibromo-2,5-difluorobenzene [ p -DBDF], 1,2-dibromo-4,5-difluorobenzene [ o -DBDF], and 1,3-dibromo-2,5-difluorobenzene [ m -DBDF]) were chosen with identical chemical formulas but varying dipole moments.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We combined BDT with two A (fluorinated quinoxaline (Qx)) units distinguished by different aromatic side chains, leading to the polymers TPQ-3F (namely Y49 in referenced thesis) 36 and TPQ-2F. 30 In order to investigate the interactions between additives and fluorinated Qx units, three volatile solid additives (1,4-dibromo-2,5difluorobenzene [p-DBDF], 1,2-dibromo-4,5-difluorobenzene [o-DBDF], and 1,3-dibromo-2,5-difluorobenzene [m-DBDF]) were chosen with identical chemical formulas but varying dipole moments. By employing density functional theory (DFT) simulations in conjunction with experimental results for comprehensive analysis purposes, we concluded that when blended with the same acceptor Y6, the different interactions between the additives and polymer donors significantly influence the stacking of the active layers.…”

Section: ■ Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Selecting Solid Additives to Control the Interaction between Polymer Donors and Additives for Constructing High-Efficiency Organic Solar Cells

Li,

Liang,

Hua

et al. 2024

Macromolecules

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The utilization of volatile solid additives has emerged as a promising approach to optimize the morphology and enhance the performance of organic solar cells (OSCs). This work presents a new insight that investigates the intermolecular interactions between polymer donors and volatile solid additives to induce a favorable morphology of the blend films for high-efficiency OSCs. Simulations and experiments demonstrate that the increased interaction between the additive and the polymer donor's electronwithdrawing unit would contribute to the ordered packing of blend film. Ultimately, the altered charge separation and transport lead to different photoelectric properties of devices, which also proves that the interaction between the solid additives and the donor cannot be ignored. Because of the strongest interaction between m-DBDF and the fluorinated quinoxaline unit of TPQ-3F, the OSC devices based on TPQ-3F:Y6:m-DBDF obtained the best power conversion efficiency (PCE) of 15.71% compared with the PCE of the p-DBDF-and o-DBDF-processed devices.

show abstract