Utilizing spiro-OMeTAD as a hole transport material (HTM) in perovskite solar cells (PSCs) has demonstrated an excellent device efficiency. However, the increasing commercial cost of spiro-OMeTAD highlights the need for gainful alternatives. This study used a donor–acceptor–donor′ (D–A–D′) architecture to develop two carbazole-based compounds, MK01 and MK01-alkyl. The acceptor (A) unit is a cyanopyridone or cyanopyridine ring, while the donor (D) and donor′ (D′) units are fluorene and N-ethylcarbazole rings, respectively. These compounds were synthesized from readily available starting materials at an estimated cost of $12.90/g for MK01 and $25.82/g for MK01-alkyl, substantially lower than the $400/g cost of spiro-OMeTAD. Photophysical studies revealed absorption maxima (λabs) at 386 nm (MK01) and 352 nm (MK01-alkyl), with emission maxima (λem) at 556 nm (MK01) and 520 nm (MK01-alkyl), respectively, in solution. The absolute quantum yields of MK01 and MK01-alkyl were 19.55% and 71.50%, respectively, in DMSO, while in the solid state, they were 1.84% and 15.50%. Thermogravimetric analysis showed a 5% weight loss at 401 °C for MK01 and 378 °C for MK01-alkyl, and the corresponding glass transition temperatures (Tg’s) were 173 and 119 °C, respectively. Electrochemical analyses showed that their HOMO energy levels were compatible with perovskite valence bands and that LUMO levels were sufficient for electron-blocking functionality. Further, all these experimental findings were well supported by DFT calculations. Moreover, MK01-alkyl exhibited hole mobility (3.5 × 10–5 cm2 V–1 s–1), while MK01 films showed minimal charge transport and no detectable photoresponse.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chetri et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: