Utilizing Carbon Nanotubes to Improve Efficiency of Organic Solar Cells
ENMA 490 Spring 2006
Motivation
Problem: Lack of power in remote locations
Possible solution: Organic solar cells are less expensive and more portable than conventional solar cells Main issue: Inadequate efficiency
What We Did
Focus: Increase the efficiency through the addition of carbon nanotubes Research Goal: Model a basic device and propose an ideal structure for more efficient power generation Experimental Goal: Build selected devices to test parameters
Project Organization
Research Team Erik Lowery Nathan Fierro Adam Haughton Richard Elkins Experimental Team Erin Flanagan Scott Wilson Matt Stair Michael Kasser
How Organic Solar Cells Work
1. Photon absorption, excitons are created
2. Excitons diffusion to an interface 3. Charge separation due to electric fields at the interface. 4. Separated charges travel to the electrodes.
High Work Function Electrode Donor Material Acceptor Material
Low Work Function Electrode
Critical Design Issues
Exciton creation via photon absorption
Material
absorption characteristics
Exciton diffusion to junction
Interfaces
within exciton diffusion length (nanoscale structure) band alignment
Charge separation
Donor/Acceptor
High
Transport of charge to electrodes
charge mobility
The Active Layer
Composed of an electron donor and electron acceptor 3 types of junctions
Bilayer Diffuse
Bilayer Bulk heterojunction
Usually the excitons from the electron donor are responsible for the photocurrent
Electron Acceptor
0.7 1750 1550 1350 1150 0.4 950 750 550 350 0.1 150 0 0 -0.1 1 2 3 4 5 6 -50 -250
MEH-PPV-CN
0.6
Solar Spectrum MEH-PPV-CN
Electron acceptor
0.3
Electrical Properties
Poor charge mobility
0.2
Optical Properties
Peak emission at 558 nm Peak absorption at 405 nm (~3eV)
Energy, eV
Irradiance (W/m^2)
CN group Increased band alignment Higher electron affinity
Absorption (arb. Units)
0.5
Electron Donor
Carbon Nanotubes
Orders
of magnitude better conductance than polymers Our nanotubes specifications (Zyvex)
Functionalized Diameter: 5-15 nm Length: 0.5-5 microns MWNT (60% metallic 40% semiconducting)
AFM Amplitude Scan
Electron Donor (cont.)
Carbon Nanotubes
Optical
Properties
Diameter SW vs. MW Chirality (Semiconducting vs metallic)
Modeling
Model Geometry Photogeneration of Excitons Exciton Transport to Junction Electron Hole Separation Charge Transport to Electrode
Model Geometry
Incoming Light
X=0 X=L
ITO
CNT
MEH-PPV-CN
Define A to be the area perpendicular to the incoming light.
Al
Photogeneration of Excitons
Photogeneration of Excitons
Start with Beer-Lambert absorption equation:
S ( x, ) S Inc ( )e ( ) x I ( x, )
0 x
S Inc ( ) ( ) e d hc S Inc ( ) ( ) e d d hc
2 x
I ( x)
10
Arrive at expression for # Photons absorbed per unit area, per unit time Use either blackbody approximation or numerical data for the solar spectrum (Sinc)
Exciton Transport to Junction
Diffusion Model
du( x, t ) d 2 u ( x, t ) D R u ( x, t ) A I ( x ) 2 dt dx
Decay Term, simple time-dependent model Source Term, accounts for exciton generation
Diffusion Term
Initial and Boundary Conditions
u (0, t ) 0 u ( L, t ) 0 u ( x,0) 0
Excitons destroyed at CNT/Electrode Interface
Excitons destroyed at CNT/Polymer Junction
Initially, assume ground state, no excitons anywhere.
Charge Transport to Electrode
Holes move along CNTs
Hole
Mobility ~ 3000 cm2/Vs Mobility ~ 3.3x10-7 cm2/Vs
Electrons move along MEH-PPV-CN
Electron
Current density is directly related to mobility; Increased mobility leads to higher current densities.
Modeling Summary
CNT/MEH-PPV junctions within diffusion length of exciton generation points Thickness Optimization Problem:
Maximizing
thickness gives more excitons Minimizing thickness leads to higher current
Ideal Structure
Nanotubes Nanoscale mixing ITO
MEH-PPV-CN Al
Nanoscale mixing allows excitons to charge separate before they recombine Structure allows for the bulk heterojunction and minimizes the travel distance to the electrodes
Experimental Design
Experimental
CNT
design parameters
concentration Method of mixing Spin Parameters Solvents
Device Process Flow
ITO
.4 mm
.7 mm
.2 mm
2.5 mm
Device Process Flow
PEDOT ~100nm
Al contacts ~600
Active Layer
Device Process Flow
LiF ~ 20
Al contacts
Final Product
Nanotube
Experimental Results
Pure Polymer #3 IV Curves
0.01 0.008 0.006
Device 1 Device 2 Device 3 Device 4
0.004 0.002 0 -15 -10 -5 -0.002 0 5 10 15
Pure polymer devices acted like diodes. Light emission was observed at higher currents (8 mA)
Experimental Results
0.005 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.001
Device 4 dark Linear (Device dark) y= 0.0038x - 4 1E-06
0 -1.5 -1 -0.5 -0.001 -0.002 -0.003 -0.004 -0.005 0 0.5 1 1.5
Pure CNT acted like a resistor, R >350.
Experimental Design Issues We Addressed
Nanotube Processing
Method of dispersion Type of solvent
Concentration CNT
amount
of CNT in solvent CNT to Polymer
Diffused junction vs. bulk heterojunction
Results Summary
Absorption spectra measured AFM to check spatial distribution of nanotubes No successful devices made Possible causes:
CNT
shorting Functionalized CNTs might be a problem
Conclusions
Experimental:
Device
process recipe needs to be refined Solve experimental design problems to work on successful device
Modeling:
Diffusion
model considerations point towards improving efficiency by creating nanoscale structure Need to consider charge transport in more detail
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the following people/organizations:
Dr.
Gary Rubloff Dr. Danilo Romero Laboratory for Physical Sciences Zyvex
