research review Inserting InGaN slashes LED droop
Reductions in external quantum efficiency at high current densities diminish when p-doped InGaN is inserted after the electron-blocking layer
A TAIWANESE COLLABORATION has unveiled a novel LED architecture for combatting droop, the decline in device efficiency as current is cranked up.
The team’s modification to the standard LED structure is the insertion of a p-type InGaN layer after the p-AlGaN electron- blocking layer. Thanks to this refinement, the drive current associated with optimum external quantum efficiency (EQE) is increased by an order of magnitude to 316 mA. Meanwhile droop – evaluated as the percentage fall from the peak value of EQE to its value at 1A – plummets from 42 percent for a conventional control sample to just 7 percent.
These improvements in high-current LED performance are thought to result from mitigating the asymmetric carrier distribution in the device, thanks to enhanced hole injection and suppression of electron overflow.
When a conventional electron-blocking layer is used in an LED, the results are not ideal because this barrier to electrons impedes the flow of holes into the active region. Making matters worse, at high current densities a significant proportion of electrons overflow into the p-type region, where they recombine with holes. This may be a non-radiative process, but even if it is radiative, it will be at a significantly different emission wavelength from that produced by the active region.
One approach to combatting droop, which has been shown to work by researchers at Philips Lumileds, is to use a very thick InGaN quantum well in the active region. The Taiwanese team has also built and studied these so-called double heterostructure LEDs. According to Sheng-Fu Yu from National Cheng Kung University, their performance is not particularly good, due to poor carrier transport and the strong quantum-confined Stark effect.
The team believes that it has uncovered a superior structure for addressing droop via a study that compares a conventional LED with those featuring additional undoped and p-doped InGaN layers inserted after the AlGaN electron-blocking layer. All the
wells to 1.1 x 1019 cm-3 and 2.5 x 1019 cm-3 ,
respectively. Real measurements prove that the addition of an InGaN layer, particularly if it is p-doped, is highly beneficial (see Figure). The conventional LED and that with an undoped InGaN layer produce a peak EQE of more than 40 percent at a drive current below 100 mA.
Although the LED with the p-doped InGaN layer before the AlGaN electron-blocking layer produces an inferior external quantum efficiency at lower currents,it is the most efficient at high drive currents
structures, which were grown with a Taiyo Nippon Sanso SR2000 MOCVD reactor on sapphire, featured a strain relaxation region comprising two pairs of 3 nm-thick InGaN and 12 nm-thick GaN.
This strain relaxation section preceded the multiple quantum well – four pairs of 3 nm- thick In0.16
Ga0.84 N sandwiched between
12 nm-thick GaN barriers, followed by another 3 nm-thick In0.16
Ga0.84 3 nm-thick GaN barrier.
The control had an additional 5 nm-thick layer of GaN, while in the other two devices the final GaN layer was followed with 5 nm of In0.07
. Onto all of these structures the team added a 20 nm-thick, p-type Al0.2
layer with a doping level of 1 x 1020 cm-3 . Ga0.8 N cm-3
and a 100 nm-thick p-type GaN layer with a doping level of 5 x 1019
Simulations with SiLENSe software made and sold by the STR Group suggest that InGaN insertion benefits the distributions of electrons and holes. With the standard LED design, at a drive current of 1 A for a 1 mm x 1mm chip, the leakage current in the p-side is 7 x 108
cm-3 cm-3 and the hole
concentration in the well nearest to the p- side is 9 x 1017
. In comparison,
inserting undoped and doped InGaN before the electron-blocking layer slashes electron leakage in the p-side to 1.5 x 106
cm-3 and 9 x 105 cm-3 and increases hole concentration in the 52
www.compoundsemiconductor.net October 2012
with a magnesium concentration of 5 x 1019 cm-3
Ga0.93N, either undoped or p-type N well and a
In comparison, although the device with the p-InGaN layer produces a significantly lower EQE in this regime, it overtakes the other two devices in the efficiency stakes at a few hundred milliamps, and at a 1A drive current its output power can hit 950 mW, compared to about 800 mW and 700 mW for LEDs with an undoped InGaN layer and the control design, respectively.
One interesting feature of the LED with the p-doped InGaN layer is its low forward voltage. “This is a high-power chip, so I think its forward voltage should be judged at 350 mA,” says Yu. On that basis, the forward voltage is just 3.32 V, 0.3 V lower than the conventional design.
The team suspects that the decrease in operating voltage stems from a change in the location of the p-n junction that makes it more favourable for holes to be transported into the active layer. However, these engineers admit that they will have to carry out more experiments to confirm this hypothesis. Efforts to date have been directed at understanding the relatively low EQE of the best device at lower current densities. Three weaknesses have been uncovered: Reversed current- voltage plots have unveiled a hike in the current of this type of LED compared to the others, indicating far greater defect- assisted tunnelling; analysis of current at low positive voltages shows severe tunnelling leakage, implying insufficient radiative recombination; and secondary ion mass spectrometry has revealed that the magnesium dopant atoms in the p- type InGaN layer have diffused into the active region.
Yu says that they will now try to improve the growth process to prevent magnesium atoms from diffusing into the active region.
, respectively,
R –M. Lin et al. Appl. Phys. Lett. 101 081120 (2012)
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131