Push–pull type alkoxy-wrapped N-annulated perylenes for dye-sensitized solar cells

Qingbiao Qi a, Jing Zhangb, Soumyajit Dasa, Wangdong Zenga, Jie Luoc, Jie Zhangc, Peng Wang*b and Jishan Wu*ac
aDepartment of Chemistry, National University of Singapore, 3 Science Drive 3, 117543, Singapore. E-mail: chmwuj@nus.edu.sg
bDepartment of Chemistry, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, 310028, P. R. China. E-mail: pw2015@zju.edu.cn
cInstitute of Materials Research and Engineering, Agency For Science, Technology And Research (A*STAR), 2 Fusionopolis Way, Innovis, #08-03, 138634, Singapore

Received 18th July 2016 , Accepted 21st August 2016

First published on 22nd August 2016


Abstract

Three push–pull type, alkoxy-wrapped N-annulated perylene based sensitizers with different electron-accepting moieties were designed and synthesized. All the three dyes exhibited broad and intense absorption in the visible region. Co(II)/(III) based dye-sensitized solar cells showed overall power conversion efficiencies up to 8.38% for QB5 under the 100 mW cm−2, simulated AM1.5G sunlight. The detailed optical, electrochemical, photovoltaic measurements and theoretic calculations were conducted and discussed to understand the relationship between the structure and properties.


Introduction

Dye-sensitized solar cells (DSCs) have drawn intensive interest since the seminal demonstration in 1991 due to their low production cost, good conversion efficiency, simple fabrication and environmental concerns.1 Development of push–pull type organic dyes with appropriate energy level alignment and good light-harvesting capabilities was one of the crucial strategies to achieve high performance devices.2 Considering of the rarity and high cost of the ruthenium metal, Ru-free organic dyes have caught much attention.3 Great progress has been achieved by using porphyrin based sensitizers and power conversion efficiency (PCE) has been further improved to 13%.4 In addition, researchers spent more and more efforts on metal-free organic dyes because of the wide availability and flexibility.5

Our attention was laid on a new perylene derivative, the so-called N-annulated perylene (NP), in which a nitrogen atom is annulated at the bay position. As well-known, perylene and its derivatives are widely used dyes and pigments in a variety of applications due to their outstanding chemical, thermal and photochemical stability as well as excellent photophysical properties.6 Compared to normal perylene, modification (e.g., alkylation) can be done on the amine site of NP to improve the solubility and suppress aggregation, and regio-selective functionalization at the peri-positions can be easily done. Moreover, the higher electron density of NP leads to new opto-electronic properties due to electron-donating character of amine. All these factors make NP a superior building block for the design of organic sensitizers in photovoltaic devices. Recently, our group first demonstrated that NP can be used as an electron donor as well as a π-spacer in high performance DSCs.7 Meanwhile, P. Wang and Z. Wang's groups also showed very good results by employing NP as a basic building block for organic sensitizers.8

In this work, we designed and synthesized three new alkoxyl-chain wrapped NP sensitizers (QB4–QB6 shown in Fig. 1) to further explore the fundamental structure–physical property–device performance relationships. The design is based on the following considerations: (1) NP with bulky o-alkoxy-substituted phenyl group rather than flexible alkyl chain on amine site was chosen to suppress the problematic dye aggregation, to eliminate charge recombination at the TiO2 interface, and to improve the dye solubility;9 (2) triphenylamine (TPA) with long alkoxyl chain was chosen as the donor because of its excellent electron donating character as well as good solubility;2 (3) carbon–carbon triple bond was inserted as a π bridge between the TPA and NP (QB4 and QB5) or between the NP and the acceptor moieties (QB5) in order to extend the π-conjugation and to form a rigid structure;10 (4) benzoic acid was chosen as acceptor for QB4 (ref. 4) while for QB5, an electron-deficient benzothiadiazole (BT) moiety was inserted to facilitate intramolecular charge separation as well as to tailor the light-harvesting property;11 (5) for QB6, cyclopentadithiophene (CPDT) together with cynoacetic acid was used as electron acceptor part because CPDT has been proved to be an efficient building block for many metal-free sensitizers,12 and it also allows us to compare with QB4 and QB5 in this work and another dye (QB2) in our previous work.9


image file: c6ra18221f-f1.tif
Fig. 1 Chemical structures of sensitizers QB4, QB5 and QB6.

Results and discussion

Synthesis of materials

The synthetic route for the dyes QB4, QB5 and QB6 is outlined in Scheme 1. The NP building blocks 1 and 4 were synthesized according to our previous report.9 Sonogashira coupling between 1 and terminal alkynes 2 and 3 in one step gave the QB4 in 30% yield. Compound 5 was synthesized in 70% yield by selective bromination of 4 with one equivalent of N-bromosuccinimide (NBS). Then iodination of 5 with N-iodosuccinimide (NIS) resulted in compound 6 in 60% yield. The key intermediate compound 7 was synthesized by Sonogashira coupling reaction between 2 and 6 in 45% yield. Another Sonogashira coupling reaction between 7 and compound 8[thin space (1/6-em)]13 gave the target compound QB5 in 35% yield. Pd-Catalysed borylation of 7 with pinacolborane followed by Suzuki coupling with compound 9 (ref. 11) afforded the aldehyde 10 in 50% yield for two steps. QB6 was then prepared by Knoevenagel condensation of compound 10 with cyanoacetic acid in 87% yield. All the dyes QB4, QB5 and QB6 are black powder and soluble in normal organic solvents such as dichloromethane (DCM), chloroform and tetrahydrofuran (THF). They were thoroughly characterized by 1H NMR, 13C NMR, and high resolution mass spectrometry (HR MS) (ESI).
image file: c6ra18221f-s1.tif
Scheme 1 Synthetic route of sensitizers QB4–QB6. Conditions: (a) Pa2(dba)3/AsPh3, THF/Et3N, 75 °C; (b) NBS, CHCl3, 0 °C; (c) NIS/TFA (one drop), CH2Cl2; (d) Pd(PPh3)2Cl2/CuI, THF/Et3N, 75 °C; (e) (i) pinacolborane, Pd(PPh3)2Cl2/Et3N/1,2-dichloroethane, 90 °C; (ii) Pd(PPh3)4/K2CO3, toluene, reflux; (f) cyanoacetic acid, CHCl3/piperidine, reflux.

Optical properties

The absorption spectra of QB4, QB5 and QB6 in DCM are shown in Fig. 2 and the corresponding data are collected in Table 1. QB4 exhibits an intense and broad absorption band with peak at 507 nm (ε = 4.11 × 104 M−1 cm−1). Compared to QB4, when BT unit was inserted between the NP and benzoic acid moieties, the absorption spectrum of QB5 becomes even broader, and the absorption maximum is bathochromically shifted by 25 nm from 507 to 532 nm (ε = 4.47 × 104 M−1 cm−1), while the absorption onset is remarkably red-shifted by about 100 nm. This suggests the presence of the electron-withdrawing BT unit can further increase the intramolecular donor–acceptor interaction and enhance the light-harvesting capability. QB6 shows an intense band covering the major part of visible region with absorption maximum at 525 nm (ε = 4.86 × 104 M−1 cm−1). The absorption band shape of QB6 is quite different from that of QB4 and QB5 due to a different acceptor part. Interestingly, when QB6 was compared with its analogue QB2 in which the carbon–carbon triple bond is missed,9 the absorption is blue shifted by 25 nm. Such a change may be due to the increase of the distance between the donor and acceptor unit in QB6. UV-vis absorption spectra of three organic dyes on TiO2 transparent film are also shown in Fig. S1 (ESI). The absorption maximum of the dyes QB4, QB5 and QB6 is hypsochromically shifted by 23, 48 and 6 nm on TiO2 film in comparison to that in solution, which could be attributed to either the formation of H-aggregates14 or deprotonation of carboxylic acid.15
image file: c6ra18221f-f2.tif
Fig. 2 UV-vis absorption spectra of QB4 (black), QB5 (red) and QB6 (blue) in DCM.
Table 1 Summary of optical and electrochemical properties of QB4, QB5 and QB6
Dye λabs (nm) ε (M−1 cm−1) Eoptg (eV) Eox1/2 (V) Ered1/2 (V) HOMOa (eV) LUMOa (eV) EECg (eV)
a The HOMO and LUMO energy levels were determined from the onset of first oxidation and reduction wave vs. Fc+/Fc, respectively.
QB4 501 41[thin space (1/6-em)]100 2.21 0.34, 0.58 −1.47 −5.10 −3.46 1.64
QB5 532 44[thin space (1/6-em)]700 1.95 0.36, 0.57 −1.27, −1.48, −1.72 −5.12 −3.52 1.60
QB6 525 48[thin space (1/6-em)]600 1.88 0.37, 0.50 −1.34 −5.09 −3.51 1.58


Electrochemical properties and DFT calculations

The electrochemical properties of QB4, QB5 and QB6 were investigated by cyclic voltammetry (CV) and differential pulse voltammetry (DPV) in deoxygenated DCM solution containing 0.1 M tetra-n-butylammonium hexafluorophosphate (TBAPF6) as supporting electrolyte (Fig. 3 and S2 in ESI). Multiple quasi-reversible or irreversible redox waves were observed for all three compounds (see the list of half-wave potentials Eox1/2 (anodic scan) and Ered1/2 (cathodic scan) in Table 1). The HOMO and LUMO energy levels were estimated according to equations: HOMO = −[4.8 + Eonsetox] eV, and LUMO = −[4.8 + Eonsetred] eV, where Eonsetox and Eonsetred are the onset of the first oxidation and reduction wave, respectively (vs. Fc+/Fc).16 The HOMO and LUMO energy levels of QB4–QB6 were determined to be −5.10, −5.12, −5.09 eV (HOMO) and −3.46, −3.52, −3.51 eV (LUMO), respectively (Table 1). The electrochemical energy gaps were calculated accordingly to be 1.64, 1.60, and 1.58 eV for QB4–QB6. The trend is in agreement with the optical energy gaps.
image file: c6ra18221f-f3.tif
Fig. 3 Cyclic voltammograms of QB4–QB6 in dry DCM.

To gain better understanding of the molecular structure and electron distribution, density functional theory (DFT) calculations were conducted at the B3LYP/6-31G* level. Fig. 4 shows their optimized molecular structures and frontier molecular orbital profiles together with the calculated energy levels of HOMOs and LUMOs (Fig. 4 and Tables S1–S3 in ESI). For QB4, the HOMO is delocalized along both the donor group and the NP core, while the LUMO is delocalized through the NP core and the acceptor group. Compared to QB4, QB5 and QB6 exhibit even more segregated HOMO and LUMO with a proper overlap. Such a spatially well-separated orbital distribution is desirable for efficient intramolecular charge separation and fast injection of photo-excited electron into the conduction band of TiO2 via the carboxylic group adsorbed on the TiO2 surface. Time-dependent DFT calculations also predicted that QB5 and QB6 showed more red-shifted spectra than that of QB4 (Tables S4–S6 and Fig. S3–S5 in ESI), and this trend is well in agreement with the experimental data.


image file: c6ra18221f-f4.tif
Fig. 4 Calculated HOMO and LUMO profiles and energy levels of QB4, QB5 and QB6 (B3LYP/6-31G*). Hydrogen atoms are omitted for clarity.

Photovoltaic properties

Although N-annulated perylene with bulky phenyl group as core is used, due to the high planarity of the sensitizers favored by the presence of the perylene spacer and triple bond linker, a fast intramolecular charge transfer should be expected as well as an unfavorable π–π stacking during the uptake process, which may lead to intermolecular quenching or back transfer of the injected electrons from the TiO2 conduction band.17d In this case, the addition of chenodeoxycholic acid (CDCA) to the dye solutions could be useful because the CDCA can insert itself between the sensitizers minimizing detrimental dye aggregation effects.17 In addition, the use of a co-adsorbent such as CDCA ensures a uniform coverage of the inorganic semiconductor, thereby lowering the probability of recombination. Meanwhile, CDCA also could lower the amount of sensitizers loaded on the working electrode. On this basis, the use of CDCA as co-adsorbent has been evaluated: we prepared solutions of the dyes with or without 30 mM CDCA and studied the influence of the amount of additive on photovoltaic parameters and on the dye loading, which are shown in Table 2. The efficiencies of QB4–6 without the presence of CDCA were measured to be 4.71% (Voc = 0.82 V, Jsc = 7.96 mA cm−2, ff = 0.72), 5.65% (Voc = 0.78 V, Jsc = 10.24 mA cm−2, ff = 0.71) and 4.27% (Voc = 0.75 V, Jsc = 8.77 mA cm−2, ff = 0.65), respectively (Fig. S6 in ESI). With the addition of 30 mM CDCA the performances of the QB4, QB5 and QB6 sensitized devices were significantly improved. In particular, the short-circuit photocurrent density (Jsc) augmented from 7.92 to 8.73, from 10.24 to 14.49, and from 8.77 to 13.30 mA cm−2 for QB4, QB5 and QB6 based cells, respectively, resulting from large enhancement of charge generation efficiencies, although the dye loading density (cm) was decreased from 2.74 to 1.94, 3.78 to 2.61, 2.19 to 1.77, 10−8 mol cm−2 μm−1, respectively. The relatively low dye loading of QB6 may due to the larger molecular size and the floppy feature of the C[double bond, length as m-dash]C double bond which might tilt the molecules adsorbed on TiO2 film.10 The Voc of QB4–QB6 was slightly changed from 0.82 to 0.76 V, 0.78 to 0.78 V and 0.75 to 0.79 V, respectively. On the whole, PCEs of 5.14%, 8.38%, and 7.78% have been achieved with QB4, QB5 and QB6 sensitized devices. The action spectrum of incident photon-to-electron conversion efficiency (IPCE) and the photocurrent density–voltage (JV) curves based on the three sensitizers in the presence of 30 mM CDCA are illustrated in Fig. 5. Remarkably broad and high IPCE covering most of the visible region were observed for all dyes, which is in consistence with their absorption spectra. The IPCE spectra of QB4 dye showed a maximum of ∼85% at 450 nm, slightly higher with respect to the ∼80% obtained for the QB5-based device at 450 nm and to the plateau at 75%, ranging from 450 to 550 nm, observed for QB6. Meanwhile, the onset of IPCE was largely red-shifted from 650 nm for QB4 to 770 nm for QB5 and QB6. All these factors confirm the superior photovoltaic properties of the QB4–QB6 dyes.
Table 2 Photovoltaic parameters of cells measured at simulated AM1.5 sunlight
Cell name η/% JEQEa/mA cm−2 Jsc/mA cm−2 Voc/V ff cm/10−8 mol cm−2 μm−1
a JEQE was derived by wavelength integration of the product of the standard AM1.5 emission spectrum (ASTM G173-03) and the EQEs measured at the short circuit. The validity of measured photovoltaic parameters was evaluated by comparing the calculated JEQE value with the experimentally measured Jsc value.b Co-adsorbed with CDCA (30 mM).
QB4 4.71 7.92 7.96 0.82 0.72 2.74
QB4 + CDCA 5.14b 8.32 8.73 0.76 0.78 1.94
QB5 5.65 10.35 10.24 0.78 0.71 3.78
QB5 + CDCA 8.38b 14.43 14.49 0.78 0.74 2.61
QB6 4.27 8.74 8.77 0.75 0.65 2.19
QB6 + CDCA 7.78b 13.06 13.30 0.79 0.74 1.77



image file: c6ra18221f-f5.tif
Fig. 5 (a) Photocurrent action spectra and (b) current–voltage characteristics recorded for DSCs devices fabricated with the dyes QB4–QB6 in the presence of 30 mM CDCA.

To further understand the dye structure–device performance relationship, we conducted further physical measurements of QB4–QB6 cells in their better testing condition. For a short-circuit DSC device, it is known that the Jsc is measured at the condition of a considerable low electron density in the nanocrystalline titania film and the charge recombination flux is significantly reduced. Thereby, the measured Jsc is roughly proportional to the photocarrier generation flux. The validity of this analysis motivated us to compare the dye structure correlated Voc variation at a given Jsc by measuring JV curves under various light intensities and plotting Voc as a function of Jsc (Fig. 6a). It is noted that at a given Jsc, the QB6 cell exhibits a higher Voc than QB5, while QB4 gives the lowest Voc value.


image file: c6ra18221f-f6.tif
Fig. 6 (a) Open-circuit photovoltage plotted as a function of short-circuit photocurrent density. (b) Plots of open-circuit photovoltage versus extracted charge. (c) Plots of lifetime of photoinjected electrons in titania as a function extracted charge.

It is widely recognized that for a fixed redox electrolyte in DSCs, the rise or fall of Voc is determined by the titania electron quasi-Fermi-level (EF,n), which intrinsically stems from a change of titania conduction band edge (Ec) and/or a variation of titania electron density.18 At a given flux of photocarrier generation, the titania electron density is determined by the interfacial recombination rate of titania electrons with electron accepting species in electrolytes and/or dye cations. Thereby charge extraction (CE) and transient photovoltage decay (TPD) measurements19 were further carried out to understand the electronic origins of the aforesaid Voc fluctuation. As shown in Fig. 6b, the cells made with QB4, QB5 and QB6 give similar extracted charge (Q) at the same potential bias Voc, suggesting a fixed conduction-band edge of titania with respect to the electrolyte Fermi-level. In Fig. S6d, similar phenomena was found without CDCA. As shown in Fig. S6e, without CDCA, at a given charge Q, charge recombination lifetime (τ) increases in the order of the QB4 > QB5 > QB6. However, with CDCA, as Fig. 6c presents, at a given charge Q, charge recombination lifetime (τ) increases in the order of the QB6 > QB5 > QB4, accounting for the change of Voc and aforementioned photovoltage tendency at a given Jsc.

Conclusions

In summary, we have synthesized three new push–pull type dyes (QB4–QB6) by using the alkoxy-wrapped N-annulated perylene unit as the π-bridge and triple bond as π-spacer. Varying the acceptor unit in the general selected structure, all dyes exhibited remarkable solar-to-energy conversion efficiencies resulting from favourable light-harvesting capacity and high absorptivity. Due to the high planarity of the structure, the addition of CDCA additive helps the efficiency of the final device by minimizing detrimental dye aggregation effects. In fact, all dyes show a better PCE value in the presence of CDCA co-adsorbent. In particular, QB5 based device showed PCE as high as 8.38%, highlighting that the coplanar NP unit is a good building block for the design of sensitizers for high performance DSCs. New structures can be engineered by selecting different donor units and anchoring groups, as partners of the coplanar NP, in order to gain deeper insight into the potentialities of this new class.

Experiments

Materials and instruments

All reagents and starting materials were obtained from commercial suppliers and used without further purification unless otherwise noted. Anhydrous toluene and THF were distilled from sodium-benzophenone immediately prior to use. The 1H NMR and 13C NMR spectra were recorded in solution of CDCl3 or THF-d8 on Bruker DPX 300 or DRX 500 NMR spectrometers with tetramethylsilane (TMS) as the internal standard. The following abbreviations were used to explain the multiplicities: s = singlet, d = doublet, t = triplet, m = multiplet. MALDI-TOF or APCI mass spectrometry was used to confirm the mass of compound. The electrochemical measurements were carried out in anhydrous methylene chloride with 0.1 M TBAPF6 as the supporting electrolyte at room temperature under the protection of nitrogen. A gold stick was used as working electrode, platinum wire was used as counting electrode, and Ag/AgCl (3 M KCl solution) was used as reference electrode. The potential was externally calibrated against the ferrocene/ferrocenium couple. The absorption spectra of dyes in solutions and sensitized ∼3 μm thick films were measured by a Shimadzu UV-1700 spectrometer. The solvents used for UV-vis measurements are of HPLC grade (Merck). The synthetic details of QB4, QB5 and QB6 are described in the ESI.

DSC fabrication and characterization

A 4.5 μm-thick, transparent layer of 25 nm-sized TiO2 particles was first screen-printed on FTO glass (Nippon Sheet Glass, Solar, 4 mm thick) and further coated with a 5.0 μm-thick second layer of scattering titania particles (WER4-O, Dyesol) to produce a bilayer titania film, which was used later as the negative electrode of a DSC. The preparation procedures of TiO2 nanocrystals and paste for screen-printing were reported in a previous paper.16 The film thickness was monitored with a bench-top Ambios XP-1 stylus profilometer. After sintering at 500 °C and cooling to room temperature, a circular titania electrode (∼0.28 cm2) was stained by immersing it overnight into a solution of 150 μM dye dissolved in a binary solvent of chloroform and ethanol (volume ratio, 1/4). The dye-coated titania electrode was then rinsed with acetonitrile and dried by air flow, and was further assembled with a thermally platinized FTO positive electrode by a 25 mm-thick Surlyn (DuPont) hot-melt gasket and sealed up by heating. The internal space was perfused with an electrolyte with the aid of a vacuum-back-filling system. The infiltrated Co-bpy electrolyte is composed of 0.25 M tris(2,2′-bipyridine)cobalt(II)di[bis-(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)imide], 0.05 M tris(2,2′-bipyridine)cobalt(III)tris[bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)imide], 0.5 M tBP, and 0.1 M lithium bis(trifluoromethanesulfonyl)imide (LiTFSI) in acetonitrile.

Transient photoelectrical experiments were measured with an Autolab-PGSTAT302N electrochemical workstation. The steady and perturbing lights on the photoanode side of a testing cell were supplied with white and red light-emitting diodes, respectively. We used the red light to generate a photovoltage perturbation near the open-circuit photovoltage of a testing cell under a certain white light and measured the voltage decay process thereafter. The modulated photovoltage by the red pulse of a testing cell was below 5 mV. The electron lifetime can be obtained by fitting a stretched exponential function to the photovoltage decay. The electron density was estimated by the charge extraction method. A testing cell was first kept at open circuit under white light and subsequently the white light was turned off upon switching the cell from open circuit to short circuit to record the resulting current transient, and the electron density was obtained by current integration.

Acknowledgements

J. W. and J. Z. acknowledge financial support from A*STAR-DST joint grant (IMRE/14-2C0239) and MOE Tier 2 grant (MOE2011-T2-2-130). P. W. thanks the National Science Foundation of China (No. 91233206) and the National 973 Program (2015CB932204) for financial support.

Notes and references

  1. (a) B. Oregan and M. Grätzel, Nature, 1991, 353, 737 CrossRef CAS; (b) H. Imahori, T. Umeyama and S. Ito, Acc. Chem. Res., 2009, 42, 1809 CrossRef CAS PubMed; (c) A. Hagfeldt, G. Boschloo, L. Sun, L. Kloo and H. Pettersson, Chem. Rev., 2010, 110, 6595 CrossRef CAS PubMed; (d) B. E. Hardin, H. J. Snaith and M. D. McGehee, Nat. Photonics, 2012, 6, 162 CrossRef CAS; (e) W. Ying, J. Yang, M. Wielopolski, T. Moehl, J.-E. Moser, P. Comte, J. Hua, S. M. Zakeeruddin, H. Tian and M. Grätzel, Chem. Sci., 2014, 5, 206 RSC; (f) Z. Huang, H. Feng, X. Zang, Z. Iqbal, H. Zeng, D. Kuang, L. Wang, H. Meierd and D. J. Cao, J. Mater. Chem. A, 2014, 2, 15365 RSC.
  2. (a) J. N. Clifford, E. Martínez-Ferrero, A. Viterisi and E. Palomares, Chem. Soc. Rev., 2011, 40, 1635 RSC; (b) M. Liang and J. Chen, Chem. Soc. Rev., 2013, 42, 3453 RSC.
  3. (a) A. Mishra, M. K. R. Fischer and P. Bäuerle, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 2009, 48, 2474 CrossRef CAS PubMed; (b) Y. Ooyama, S. Inoue, T. Nagano, K. Kushimoto, J. Ohshita, I. Imae, K. Komaguchi and Y. Harima, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 2011, 50, 7429 CrossRef CAS PubMed; (c) C. Li and H. Wonneberger, Adv. Mater., 2012, 24, 613 CrossRef CAS PubMed; (d) Y. Çakmak, S. Kolemen, M. Buyuktemiz, Y. Dede and S. Erten-Ela, New J. Chem., 2015, 39, 4086 RSC; (e) S. Erten-Ela, H. Chen, A. Kratzer, A. Hirschc and C. J. Brabec, New J. Chem., 2016, 40, 2829 RSC.
  4. (a) L.-L. Li and E. W.-G. Diau, Chem. Soc. Rev., 2013, 42, 291 RSC; (b) A. Yella, H.-W. Lee, H. N. Tsao, C. Yi, A. K. Chandiran, M. K. Nazeeruddin, E. W.-G. Diau, C.-Y. Yeh, S. M. Zakeeruddin and M. Grätzel, Science, 2011, 334, 629 CrossRef CAS PubMed; (c) S. Mathew, A. Yella, P. Gao, R. Humphry-Baker, B. F. E. Curchod, N. Ashari-Astani, I. Tavernelli, U. Rothlisberger, M. K. Nazeeruddin and M. Grätzel, Nat. Chem., 2014, 6, 242 CrossRef CAS PubMed; (d) A. Yella, C.-L. Mai, S. M. Zakeeruddin, S.-N. Chang, C.-H. Hsieh, C.-Y. Yeh and M. Grätzel, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 2014, 53, 2973 CrossRef CAS PubMed; (e) T. Higashino and H. Imahori, Dalton Trans., 2015, 44, 448 RSC; (f) Y. Wang, B. Chen, W. Wu, X. Li, W. Zhu, H. Tian and Y. Xie, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 2014, 53, 10779 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
  5. (a) B. Vercelli, G. Zotti and A. Berlin, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces, 2012, 4, 3233 CrossRef CAS PubMed; (b) W. J. Wu, F. L. Guo, J. Li, J. X. He and J. L. Hua, Synth. Met., 2010, 160, 1008 CrossRef CASK. M. Karlsson, X. Jiang, S. K. Eriksson, E. Gabrielsson, H. Rensmo, A. Hagfeldt and L. C. Sun, Chem.–Eur. J., 2011, 17, 6415 CrossRef CAS PubMed; (c) K. Funabiki, H. Mase, Y. Saito, A. Otsuka, A. Hibino, N. Tanaka, H. Miura, Y. Himori, T. Yoshina, Y. Kubota and M. Matsui, Org. Lett., 2012, 14, 1246 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
  6. (a) L. Chen, C. Li and K. Müllen, J. Mater. Chem. C, 2014, 2, 1938 RSC; (b) Y. Shibano, T. Umeyama, Y. Matano and H. Imahori, Org. Lett., 2007, 9, 1971 CrossRef CAS PubMed; (c) T. Edvinsson, C. Li, N. Pschirer, J. Schöneboom, F. Eickemeyer, R. Sens, G. Boschloo, A. Herrmann, K. Müllen and A. Hagfeldt, J. Phys. Chem. C, 2007, 111, 15137 CrossRef CAS; (d) C. Li, J.-H. Yum, S.-J. Moon, A. Herrmann, F. Eickemeyer, N. G. Pschirer, P. Erk, J. Schöneboom, K. Müllen, M. Grätzel and M. K. Nazeeruddin, ChemSusChem, 2008, 1, 615 CrossRef CAS PubMed; (e) Y. H. Jin, J. L. Hua, W. J. Wu, X. M. Ma and F. S. Meng, Synth. Met., 2008, 158, 64 CrossRef CAS; (f) M. Planells, F. J. Cespedes-Guirao, L. Goncalves, A. Sastre-Santos, F. Fernandez-Lazaro and E. Palomares, J. Mater. Chem., 2009, 19, 5818 RSC; (g) C. Li, Z. H. Liu, J. Schoneboom, F. Eickemeyer, N. G. Pschirer, P. Erk, A. Herrmann and K. Müllen, J. Mater. Chem., 2009, 19, 5405 RSC; (h) H. Imahori and S. Mathew, J. Mater. Chem., 2011, 21, 7166 RSC; (i) C. Jiao, N. Zu, K.-W. Huang, P. Wang and J. Wu, Org. Lett., 2011, 13, 3652 CrossRef CAS PubMed; (j) G. D. Sharma, P. Balraju, J. A. Mikroyannidis and M. M. Stylianakis, Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells, 2009, 93, 2025 CrossRef CAS; (k) G. D. Sharma, P. Suresh, J. A. Mikroyannidis and M. M. Stylianakis, J. Mater. Chem., 2010, 20, 561 RSC.
  7. (a) J. Luo, M. Xu, R. Li, K. Huang, C. Jiang, Q. Qi, W. Zeng, J. Zhang, C. Chi, P. Wang and J. Wu, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2014, 136, 265 CrossRef CAS PubMed; (b) J. Luo, X. Wang, L. Fan, G. Li, Q. Qi, K.-W. Huang, T. L. D. Tam, J. Zhang, Q. Wang and J. Wu, J. Mater. Chem. C, 2016, 4, 3709 RSC.
  8. (a) Z. Yao, C. Yan, M. Zhang, R. Li, Y. Cai and P. Wang, Adv. Energy Mater., 2014, 4, 1400244 CrossRef; (b) M. Zhang, Z. Yao, C. Yan, Y. Cai, Y. Ren, J. Zhang and P. Wang, ACS Photonics, 2014, 1, 710 CrossRef CAS; (c) Z. Yao, H. Wu, Y. Ren, Y. Guo and P. Wang, Energy Environ. Sci., 2015, 8, 1438 RSC; (d) Z. Yao, M. Zhang, H. Wu, L. Yang, R. Li and P. Wang, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2015, 137, 3799 CrossRef CAS PubMed; (e) Z. Yao, H. Wu, L. Yang, J. Wang, J. Zhang, M. Zhang, Y. Guo and P. Wang, Energy Environ. Sci., 2015, 8, 3192 RSC; (f) X. Li, Z. Zheng, W. Jiang, W. Wu, Z. Wang and H. Tian, Chem. Commun., 2015, 51, 3590 RSC; (g) L. Yang, Z. Zheng, Y. Li, W. Wu, H. Tian and Z. Wang, Chem. Commun., 2015, 51, 4842 RSC.
  9. Q. Qi, X. Wang, L. Fan, B. Zheng, W. Zeng, J. Luo, K.-W. Huang, Q. Wang and J. Wu, Org. Lett., 2015, 17, 724 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
  10. T. Ripolles-Sanchis, B.-C. Guo, H.-P. Wu, T.-Y. Pan, H.-W. Lee, S. R. Raga, F. Fabregat-Santiago, J. Bisquert, C.-Y. Yeh and E. W.-G. Diau, Chem. Commun., 2012, 48, 4368 RSC.
  11. X. Z. Wang, J. Yang, H. Yu, F. Li, L. Fan, W. Sun, Y. Liu, Z. Y. Koh, J. H. Pan, W.-L. Yim, L. Yan and Q. Wang, Chem. Commun., 2014, 50, 3965 RSC.
  12. M. Zhang, Y. Wang, M. Xu, W. Ma, R. Li and P. Wang, Energy Environ. Sci., 2013, 6, 2944 CAS.
  13. J. Luo, J. Zhang, K. W. Huang, Q. Qi, S. Dong, J. Zhang, P. Wang and J. Wu, J. Mater. Chem. A, 2016, 4, 8428 CAS.
  14. W. Zhu, Y. Wu, S. Wang, W. Li, X. Li, J. Chen, Z.-S. Wang and H. Tian, Adv. Funct. Mater., 2011, 21, 756 CrossRef CAS.
  15. L.-Y. Lin, C.-H. Tsai, K.-T. Wong, T.-W. Huang, L. Hsieh, S.-H. Liu, H.-W. Lin, C.-C. Wu, S.-H. Chou, S.-H. Chen and A.-I. Tsai, J. Org. Chem., 2010, 75, 4778 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
  16. J. A. Page and G. Wilkinson, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1952, 74, 6149 CrossRef CAS.
  17. (a) Y. Wu, M. Marszalek, S. M. Zakeeruddin, Q. Zhang, H. Tian, M. Grätzel and W. Zhu, Energy Environ. Sci., 2012, 5, 8261 RSC; (b) S. Haid, M. Marszalek, A. Mishra, M. Wielopolski, J. Teuscher, J.-E. Moser, R. Humphry-Baker, S. M. Zakeeruddin, M. Grätzel and P. Bäuerle, Adv. Funct. Mater., 2012, 22, 1291 CrossRef CAS; (c) D. H. Lee, M. J. Lee, H. M. Song, B. J. Song, K. D. Seo, M. Pastore, C. Anselmi, S. Fantacci, F. De Angelis, M. K. Nazeeruddin, M. Grätzel and H. K. Kim, Dyes Pigm., 2011, 91, 192 CrossRef CAS; (d) A. L. Capodilupo, E. Fabiano, L. D. Marco, G. Ciccarella, G. Gigli, C. Martinelli and A. Cardone, J. Org. Chem., 2016, 81, 3235 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
  18. (a) P. Wang, S. M. Zakeeruddin, P. Comte, R. Charvet, R. Humphry-Baker and M. Grätzel, J. Phys. Chem. B, 2003, 107, 14336 CrossRef CAS; (b) T. Stergiopoulos and P. Falaras, Adv. Energy Mater., 2012, 2, 616 CrossRef CAS.
  19. (a) B. O'Regan, K. Bakker, J. Kroeze, H. Smit, P. Sommeling and J. R. Durrant, J. Phys. Chem. B, 2006, 110, 17155 CrossRef PubMed; (b) N. W. Duffy, L. M. Peter, R. M. G. Rajapakse and K. G. U. Wijayant, Electrochem. Commun., 2000, 2, 658 CrossRef CAS.

Footnotes

Electronic supplementary information (ESI) available: The synthetic procedures and characterization data of QB4, QB5 and QB6; DFT calculation details. See DOI: 10.1039/c6ra18221f
These authors contributed equally to this work.

This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2016
Click here to see how this site uses Cookies. View our privacy policy here.