Upload
lamkien
View
220
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
ONGOING LED R&D CHALLENGES (LED droop still challenge)
Steven P. DenBaars, Shuji Nakamura, James Speck
SOLID STATE LIGHTING AND ENERGY CENTER
UCSB, SANTA BARBARA, CA 93106 USA
2015 DOE SOLID-STATE LIGHTING WORKSHOP, JAN 27-29, 2015
Major Issues in SSL
•Current Droop still dominates performace
• Auger Recombination limits high current regime
• New LED crystal structures (nonpolar/semipolar)
• Pure bulk GaN
• (No Auger) LASER BASED LIGHT SOURCE
•Thermal Droop impacts delivered Light
• Higher Junction Temp Active layers
• Better Phosphors needed
Two Biggest Drawbacks of White LEDs
Thermal Droop Current Droop
UPDATE!! Quantum Efficiency
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Current Density (A/cm²)
Eff
icie
nc
y
Peak
Efficiency
Current Droop of Chip
Press Release 200 lm/W ACTUAL Commercial LEDs 70-90 lm/W (warm white)
Fundamental understanding of Droop: Auger Process in LEDs
28 Identify Interband Process
is dominant in Nitrides
Cover Article Compound Semi,
August 2009
Theory (Philips Lumileds, UCSB)
Experimental Confirmation (UCSB & Ecole Polytech)
Auger goes as N3
Quantum Efficiency
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Current Density (A/cm²)
Eff
icie
nc
y
Peak Efficiency
0 50 100 150 2000
50
100
150
200
250
300
Current (A/cm2)
Lig
ht
Ou
tpu
t P
ow
er
(mW
)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
EQ
E (
%)
Low-Efficiency Droop (Make more QW, Thicker Active Region)
Efficiency Droop 2011
(2011) -5% at 70A/cm2 (2009) >-50% at 70A/cm2
λ=445nm, T=300°K
chip size=0.001cm2
C-Plane and Nonpolar GaN Semi polar GaN
SOLUTION New GaN Crystal Planes
• Semipolar planes for blue, green and yellow LEDs
A. Romanov et al. : J. Appl. Phys. 100 (2006) 023533.
(1122) (1011)
(1010)
(2021) (2021)
Reduce piezoelectric fields
S. H. Park, et al, Jour. Quant. Elec. 43, 1175 (2007).
• Quantum confined stark effect is reduced or eliminated
• Optical matrix elements are larger for nonpolar and semipolar orientations
• Hole effective mass is smaller for nonpolar and semipolar orientations
• Predictions of lower transparency carrier densities and higher differential gains
• Reduced blue shift with increasing bias
Benefits of Nonpolar/Semipolar QuantumStructures
c-plane m-plane
Laser Based White Lighting
White LD Light 83 lm/W
LD EQE as high as 53%,
WPE of 24%
CRI: 56-71
Laser Diodes v. LED are Droop Free across a wider current range
LDs Are The Light Source of the Future
VISIBILITY RANGE: LASER HIGH BEAM, LED HIGH
BEAM, LOW BEAM
700M
11 2/08/12
LED
LD-Phosphor
LD
10
100
1,000
10,000
100,000
1,000,000
10,000,000
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
Rad
ian
ce (
W/s
r cm
^2)
Devices/ wafer sq in
LD vs. LED
“Delivered” Lum/W and $/Lum for LD sources is increasingly appealing, for specialty lighting applications
Substantially more LD devices per sq in of wafer (vs LED)
LDs are higher brightness by several orders of mag (vs LED)
LD WPE is increasing and cost is decreasing
Why LD Light--Game changing radiance
Laser diode based white light emitters
LD White
87 Lm/Watt
1000 lumen
6x better than
incandescent
Laser White Efficacies (lm/Watt)
YAG:Ce + Red
80 lm/W at 4200K
YAG:Ce
83 lm/W at 6200K
CRI 57
WPE 24%
Powder vs. Single Crystal Phosphors
Powder vs. Single Crystal YAG:Ce
Different long wave length emission due to reabsorption
Powder binder limits power output under CW
Single Crystal YAG:Ce plus Red
Increased CRI
Similar to Powdered YAG:Ce
Efficacy Limits to Laser Based Lighting
Dichromatic laser sources 360 lm/W
2 nm FWHM
Limited by WPE
Laser plus Phosphor ~280 lm/W
Limited by
- WPE
- Stokes Shift η ≈ 0.75
- Phosphor Quantum Efficiency η ≈ 0.9
Commercial LEDs
80-150 lm/W
CRI 75-90
CCT 2700 – 5500 K
Droop Ratio
20% by 70 A/cm2
40% by 150 A/cm2
WPE
40% at 70 A/cm2
<20% at 150 A/cm2
Laser White
87 lm/W
CRI 56-71
CCT 4100 – 6200 K
Droop Free:
1 to 5 kA/cm2
WPE
30% at 5 kA/cm2
20% at 17 kA/cm2
LED vs Laser White Performance