Over 70% Fill Factor of All‐Polymer Solar Cells Guided by the Law of Similarity and Intermiscibility

Abstract

Poor miscibility between the polymer donor and acceptor in the active layer leads to low fill factors (FF). PCl and PCl‐Si are synthesized by polymerization of the accessible and inexpensive IDIC‐C16 with BDT‐Cl and BDT‐Cl‐Si, respectively. PCl and PCl‐Si involve a BDT skeleton that is definitely used in most highly efficient polymer donors, such as PM6. Guided by the law of similarity and intermiscibility, the similar building block acts as a bridge to improve the interfacial interaction and miscibility between the donor and acceptor, leading to a favorable morphology of the active layer. It is found that the miscibility of the active layer is sensitive to the structural similarity degree of the similar unit of the donor and acceptor. The PCl‐Si‐based device delivers a power conversion efficiency (PCE) of 9.25% with a moderate FF of 67.86%, whereas the PM6:PCl‐based device achieves a PCE of 10.02% with a higher FF of 70.25%, which is the highest FF of the device with an IDIC‐C16‐based polymer acceptor. In addition, the improved interaction between the donor and acceptor improves the device stability. These results demonstrate that regulating the structural similarity between donor and acceptor is a promising strategy to optimize and stabilize morphology for high‐performance all‐polymer solar cells.

Efficient Inhibition of Deep Conversion of Partial Oxidation Products in C-H Bonds’ Functionalization Utilizing O2 via Relay Catalysis of Dual Metalloporphyrins on Surface of Hybrid Silica Possessing Capacity for Product Exclusion

“…From the contact ang urements utilizing cyclohexane and its partial oxidation products as model com The affinities of hydrocarbons and their partial oxidation products to hybrid silica (Si@NH 2 ) and immobilized metalloporphyrins were investigated through contact angle measurements employing cyclohexane and its partial oxidation products (cyclohexanol and cyclohexanone) as model compounds. As demonstrated in Figure 7, because of the presence of a large number of polar hydroxyl and amino groups on the surface of Si@NH 2 , the contact angle between non-polar cyclohexane and Si@NH 2 reached up to 29 • (Figure 7a), and when cyclohexanol and cyclohexanone with higher polarity were dripped onto the surface of Si@NH 2 , the contact angles decreased to 25 • and 22 • (Figure 7b,c), which was consistent with the similarity-intermiscibility theory [43][44][45][46]. When metalloporphyrins Tris(perF)P(4-CH 2 Cl)PPCo (5-(4-(Chloromethyl)phenyl)-10,15,20tris(perfluorophenyl)porphyrin cobalt(II)) and Tris(perF)P(4-CH 2 Cl)PPCu were utilized as less polar fluorocarbons [30][31][32] and immobilized on the surface of Si@NH 2 , the contact angles of cyclohexane on Si@Porp.…”

Regioregular Narrow‐Bandgap n‐Type Polymers with High Electron Mobility Enabling Highly Efficient All‐Polymer Solar Cells

“…The TEM images also indicate that the ternary film can form nanoscale phase separated morphologies with appropriate domain sizes (Figure 4i-l). [51,52] To estimate the material compatibility among the polymers in a thermodynamic point of view, the contact angle of each polymer was measured to determine the surface free energy (γ) of each component. Figure S9 V oc The device area: 4.5 mm 2 ; b) Average values with standard deviation from 15 devices; c) Integrated current density obtained from EQE spectra.…”

Donor–acceptor polymer complex formation in solution confirmed by spectroscopy and atomic-scale modelling

“…Possible driving forces for donor-acceptor complex formation in dilute solutions, e.g., structural similarity of units in donor and acceptor polymers and electrostatic interactions between the donor and acceptor chains, are discussed. The presence of structurally identical or similar units, e.g., the BDT unit, between the donor copolymer and the acceptor copolymer, has been suggested by others 5,25 as the main driving force for donor-acceptor interaction. Structural similarity is, however, not a necessary criterion for the donor-acceptor complex formation that we observe.…”

“…The presence of structurally identical or similar units, e.g. , the BDT unit, between the donor copolymer and the acceptor copolymer, has been suggested by others 5,25 as the main driving force for donor–acceptor interaction. Structural similarity is, however, not a necessary criterion for the donor–acceptor complex formation that we observe.…”