Table 3.
PV parameters of PSC using MOFs.
| MOFs | Device | Voc(V) | Jsc (mA cm−2) | FF | PCE(%) | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MOF-525 | Perovskite filma) | 0.93 ± 0.02 | 23.04 ± 1.0 | 0.60 ± 0.03 | 12.0 ± 0.5 | Chang et al. (2015) |
| In-BTC | Perovskite filmb) | 1.10 ± 0.02 | 22.99 ± 0.79 | 0.77 ± 0.03 | 19.63 ± 1.24 | Zhou et al. (2020) |
| CuO @ NiO HTL(structure) | Hole-transport layer | 0.91 | 21.8 | 0.51 | 10.11 | Hazeghi et al. (2020) |
| POM@Cu-BTC HTL | Hole-transport layer | 1.11 | 23.9 | 0.80 | 21.44 | Dong et al. (2019) |
| HTM/In2 | Hole-transport layer | 1.01 | 21.03 | 0.74 | 15.8 | Li et al. (2018) |
| HTM/In10 | Hole-transport layer | 1.00 | 24.3 | 0.70 | 17 | Li et al. (2019) |
| nTi-MOF | Electron transport layer | 1.05 | 22.61 | 0.734 | 18.94(rigid) 17.43(flexible) |
Ryu et al. (2018) |
| MIL-125 (Ti) (structure) | Electron transport layer | 1.01 | 22.81 | 0.7184 | 16.56 | Hou et al. (2017) |
| Co-doped Ti-MOF | Electron transport layer | 1.027 | 24.078 | 0.6495 | 15.75 | Nguyen and Bark (2020a) |
| m-TiO2/ZIF-8 | Electron transport layer | 0.972 | 19.8 | 0.62 | 12 | Chung et al. (2018) |
| MOF-derived ZnO | Electron transport layer | 1.11 | 22.1 | 0.74 | 18.1 | Zhang et al. (2019a) |
| ZIF-8 derived porous carbon skeleton | Electron transport layer | 1.06 | 22.13 | 0.72 | 17.32 | Zhang et al.(2019b) |
| mp-TiO2/ZIF-8 | Interface layer | 1.02 | 22.82 | 0.73 | 16.99 | Shen et al. (2018) |
| NiO @ C | Interface layer | 1.018 | 22.394 | 0.6924 | 15.78 | Nguyen and Bark (2020b) |
| ZIF-8 | Interface layer | 1.23 | 21.8 | 0.59 | 16.8 | Ahmadian-Yazdi et al. (2020) |
a
From an average of 40 devices.
b
From an average of 20 devices.