Comparative Investigation of Ultrafast Excited-State Electron Transfer in Both Polyfluorene-Graphene Carboxylate and Polyfluorene-DCB Interfaces

Abstract

The Photophysical properties, such as fluorescence quenching, and photoexcitation dynamics of bimolecular non-covalent systems consisting of cationic poly[(9,9-di(3,3′-N,N′-trimethyl-ammonium) propyl fluorenyl-2,7-diyl)-alt-co-(9,9-dioctyl-fluorenyl-2,7-diyl)] diiodide salt (PFN) and anionic graphene carboxylate (GC) have been discovered for the first time via steady-state and time-resolved femtosecond transient absorption (TA) spectroscopy with broadband capabilities. The steady-state fluorescence of PFN is quenched with high efficiency by the GC acceptor. Fluorescence lifetime measurements reveal that the quenching mechanism of PFN by GC is static. Here, the quenching mechanisms are well proven via the TA spectra of PFN/GC systems. For PFN/GC systems, the photo electron transfer (PET) and charge recombination (CR) processes are ultrafast (within a few tens of ps) compared to static interactions, whereas for PFN/1,4-dicyanobenzene DCB systems, the PET takes place in a few hundreds of ps (217.50 ps), suggesting a diffusion-controlled PET process. In the latter case, the PFN+•–DCB−• radical ion pairs as the result of the PET from the PFN to DCB are clearly resolved, and they are long-lived. The slow CR process (in 30 ns time scales) suggests that PFN+• and DCB−• may already form separated radical ion pairs through the charge separation (CS) process, which recombine back to the initial state with a characteristic time constant of 30 ns. The advantage of the present positively charged polyfluorene used in this work is the control over the electrostatic interactions and electron transfers in non-covalent polyfluorene/quencher systems in DMSO solution.

Role of Side Chains in Charge Localization and Transfer in Azothiazol-Dithiophene Conjugated Copolymers

“…On the other hand, the intensity of the ICT emission band at 750 nm is almost unchanged upon addition of DCB, indicating that the ICT transition of these polymers does not contribute to the CT process. This is likely due to the lower LUMO energy level of ICT compared to that of DCB. − …”