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