Seyed Mehrdad Hosseini, Steffen Roland, Jona Kurpiers, Zhiming Chen, Kai Zhang, Fei Huang, Ardalan Armin, Dieter Neher, Safa Shoaee

• Power conversion efficiencies of donor/acceptor organic solar cells utilizing nonfullerene acceptors have now increased beyond the record of their fullerene-based counterparts. There remain many fundamental questions regarding nanomorphology, interfacial states, charge generation and extraction, and losses in these systems. Herein, we present a comparative study of bulk heterojunction solar cells composed of a recently introduced naphthothiadiazole-based polymer (NT812) as the electron donor and two different acceptor molecules, namely, [6,6]-phenyl-C71-butyric acid methyl ester (PCBM)[70] and 3,9-bis(2-methylene-(3-(1,1-dicyanomethylene)-indanone))-5,5,11,11-tetrakis(4-hexylphenyl)-dithieno[2,3-d:2′,3′-d′]-s-indaceno[1,2-b:5,6-b′]dithiophene (ITIC). A comparison between the photovoltaic performance of these two types of solar cells reveals that the open-circuit voltage (Voc) of the NT812:ITIC-based solar cell is larger, but the fill factor (FF) is lower than that of the NT812:PCBM[70] device. We find the key reason behind thisPower conversion efficiencies of donor/acceptor organic solar cells utilizing nonfullerene acceptors have now increased beyond the record of their fullerene-based counterparts. There remain many fundamental questions regarding nanomorphology, interfacial states, charge generation and extraction, and losses in these systems. Herein, we present a comparative study of bulk heterojunction solar cells composed of a recently introduced naphthothiadiazole-based polymer (NT812) as the electron donor and two different acceptor molecules, namely, [6,6]-phenyl-C71-butyric acid methyl ester (PCBM)[70] and 3,9-bis(2-methylene-(3-(1,1-dicyanomethylene)-indanone))-5,5,11,11-tetrakis(4-hexylphenyl)-dithieno[2,3-d:2′,3′-d′]-s-indaceno[1,2-b:5,6-b′]dithiophene (ITIC). A comparison between the photovoltaic performance of these two types of solar cells reveals that the open-circuit voltage (Voc) of the NT812:ITIC-based solar cell is larger, but the fill factor (FF) is lower than that of the NT812:PCBM[70] device. We find the key reason behind this reduced FF in the ITIC-based device to be faster nongeminate recombination relative to the NT812:PCBM[70] system.…