ENGINEERING ORGANIC SOLAR CELLS USING A NOVEL TRI-LAYER ARCHITECTURE
31
ENGINEERING ORGANIC SOLAR CELLS USING A NOVEL TRI-LAYER ARCHITECTURE Michael Crump 2008–2009
description
ENGINEERING ORGANIC SOLAR CELLS USING A NOVEL TRI-LAYER ARCHITECTURE. Michael Crump 2008–2009. ORGANIC SOLAR CELLS. http://www.inhabitat.com/wp-content/uploads/solarprint2.jpg. SOLAR CELL STRUCTURE STUDIED BY PEUMANS et al. (2003). [500 Å]. [100 Å]. [400 Å]. [200 Å]. [1500 Å]. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Transcript of ENGINEERING ORGANIC SOLAR CELLS USING A NOVEL TRI-LAYER ARCHITECTURE
ENGINEERING ORGANIC SOLAR CELLS USING A NOVEL TRI-LAYER ARCHITECTURE
Michael Crump2008–2009
ORGANIC SOLAR CELLS
http://www.inhabitat.com/wp-content/uploads/solarprint2.jpg
SOLAR CELL STRUCTURE STUDIED BY PEUMANS et al. (2003)
[1500 Å]
[200 Å]
[400 Å]
[100 Å]
[500 Å]
OSC EXPERIMENTAL ARCHITECTURE 1
[1500 Å]
[200 Å]
[10–100 Å]
[400 Å]
[100 Å]
[500 Å]
KUSHTO et al. (2005) ARCHITECTURE
[1500 Å]
[200 Å]
[400 Å]
[100 Å]
[500 Å]
NPD
OSC EXPERIMENTAL ARCHITECTURE 1
[1500 Å]
[200 Å]
[10–100 Å]
[400 Å]
[100 Å]
[500 Å]
NPD (donor)
ENERGY GRAPH
donorCuPc
(Donor) donorC60
(Acceptor)
RATIONALE FOR USING NPD(RAND et al. 2005)
donorCuPc (Donor)
donorC60 (Acceptor)
donorNPD (Donor)
THERMAL EVAPORATION CHAMBER
FABRICATING BILAYERORGANIC SOLAR CELLSPressure Gauge
0 atm 1 atm
FABRICATING ORGANIC SOLAR CELLS
TESTING ORGANIC SOLAR CELLS
Computer
Light -0.5 0.0 0.5-5
0
5
10
15
Cur
rent
Den
sity
(mA
/cm
^2)
Voltage (V)
Dark 71.72 mW/cm^2
JSC
VOC
VMAX
JMAX
JMAX
* VMAX
JSC
* VOC
FF =
JMAX x VMAX
JSC x VOC
Solar Cell Current
Diode Current
Photocurrent
DETERMINING EFFICIENCY
Efficiency = Voltage x Current x Fill Factor
NPD RESULTS
0 20 40 60 80 100
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
Effi
cien
cy (%
)
NPD Thickness (Angstroms)
Efficiency vs. NPD thickness
control
NPD RESULTS
0 20 40 60 80 100
0.005
0.010
0.015
0.020
0.025
0.030
0.035
Res
pons
ivity
(A/W
)
NPD Thickness (Angstroms)
Current vs. NPD thickness Fill Factor vs. NPD Thickness
control control
NPD RESULTS
0 20 40 60 80 1000.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Voc
(V)
NPD Thickness (Angstroms)
Voltage vs. NPD thickness
control
NPD ENERGY GRAPH
donorCuPc (Donor)
donorC60 (Acceptor)donor
NPD (Donor)
OSC EXPERIMENTAL ARCHITECTURE 2
[1500 Å]
[200 Å]
[10–100 Å]
[400 Å]
[100 Å]
[500 Å]
HOLMES et al. (2008) ARCHITECTURE
[1500 Å]
[200 Å]
[400 Å]
[100 Å]
[500 Å]
PtOEP
RATIONALE FOR USING PTOEP
donorCuPc (Donor)
donorC60 (Acceptor)
donorPtOEP (Donor)
PTOEP RESULTS
0 20 40 60 80 1000.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
Effi
cien
cy (%
)
PtOEP Thickness (Angstroms)
Efficiency vs. PtOEP Thickness
control
PTOEP RESULTS
0 20 40 60 80 100
0.0125
0.0150
0.0175
0.0200
0.0225
0.0250
0.0275
Res
pons
ivity
(A/W
)
PtOEP Thickness (Angstroms)
Current vs. PtOEP Thickness Fill Factor vs. PtOEP Thickness
control control
PTOEP RESULTS
0 20 40 60 80 1000.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Voc
(V)
PtOEP Thickness (Angstroms)
Voltage vs. PtOEP Thickness
control
YANG et al. (2008)
donorDonor donorAcceptordonorCuPc (Donor)
donorC60 (Acceptor)
donorPtOEP (Donor)
CONCLUSIONS
• Voltage depends only on energy gap between electron donor and electron acceptor (Yang)
• Low current
FUTURE WORK
• Dope NPD or PtOEP (Maennig et al. (2004))• Find optimal balance between electron donor
and NPD
FUTURE WORKPressure Gauge
0 atm 1 atm
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS• Dr. Russell Holmes• University of Minnesota• Kai-Yuan Cheng, Grant Lodden, Wade Luhman, and Richa Pandey• Dr. Marla Feller and Ms. Lois Fruen• The Breck Research Team
http://www.cems.umn.edu/about/people/facdetail.php?
cemsid=20785
ENGINEERING ORGANIC SOLAR CELLS USING A NOVEL TRI-LAYER ARCHITECTURE
Michael Crump2008–2009
RATIONALE FOR USING NPD(RAND et al. 2005)
donorCuPc (Donor)
donorC60 (Acceptor)
donorNPD (Donor)
DETERMINING EFFICIENCY
Efficiency = Voltage x Current x Fill Factor
