Numerical study of the suppressed efficiency droop in blue InGaN LEDs with polarization-matched configuration

Jih-Yuan Chang; Fang-Ming Chen; Yen-Kuang Kuo; Ya-Hsuan Shih; Jinn-Kong Sheu; Wei-Chih Lai; Heng Liu

doi:10.1364/OL.38.003158

Optics Letters
Vol. 38,
Issue 16,
pp. 3158-3161
(2013)
•https://doi.org/10.1364/OL.38.003158

Numerical study of the suppressed efficiency droop in blue InGaN LEDs with polarization-matched configuration

Jih-Yuan Chang, Fang-Ming Chen, Yen-Kuang Kuo, Ya-Hsuan Shih, Jinn-Kong Sheu, Wei-Chih Lai, and Heng Liu

Not Accessible

Your library or personal account may give you access

Get PDF
Email
Share
Get Citation
Copy Citation Text
Jih-Yuan Chang, Fang-Ming Chen, Yen-Kuang Kuo, Ya-Hsuan Shih, Jinn-Kong Sheu, Wei-Chih Lai, and Heng Liu, "Numerical study of the suppressed efficiency droop in blue InGaN LEDs with polarization-matched configuration," Opt. Lett. 38, 3158-3161 (2013)

Export Citation
- BibTex
- Endnote (RIS)
- HTML
- Plain Text
Citation alert
Save article

Abstract

In blue InGaN light-emitting diodes (LEDs), the intuitive approaches to suppress Auger recombination by reducing carrier density, e.g., increasing the number of quantum wells (QWs) and thickening the width of wells, suffer from nonuniform carrier distribution and more severe spatial separation of electron and hole wave functions. To resolve this issue, LED structures with thick InGaN wells and polarization-matched AlGaInN barriers are proposed theoretically. Furthermore, the number of QWs is reduced for the purpose of mitigating the additional compressive strain in AlGaInN barriers. Simulation results reveal that, in the proposed structures, the quantum-confined Stark effect in strained wells is nearly eliminated through the utilization of polarization-matched barriers, which efficiently promotes internal quantum efficiency. Furthermore, the phenomenon of efficiency droop is also markedly improved because of the uniformly distributed or dispersed carriers, and accordingly the suppressed Auger recombination.

Full Article | PDF Article

More Like This

Reduced efficiency droop in blue InGaN light-emitting diodes by thin AlGaN barriers

Jih-Yuan Chang, Yi-An Chang, Tsun-Hsin Wang, Fang-Ming Chen, Bo-Ting Liou, and Yen-Kuang Kuo
Opt. Lett. 39(3) 497-500 (2014)

Influence of polarization-matched AlGaInN barriers in blue InGaN light-emitting diodes

Jih-Yuan Chang and Yen-Kuang Kuo
Opt. Lett. 37(9) 1574-1576 (2012)

Effect of Auger recombination and leakage on the droop in InGaN/GaN quantum well LEDs

Friedhard Römer and Bernd Witzigmann
Opt. Express 22(S6) A1440-A1452 (2014)

Previous Article Next Article

Cited By

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Cited by links are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Figures (6)

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Figure files are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Tables (2)

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Article tables are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Equations (1)

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Equations are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

	Well	Barrier
Original (well width: 2.5 nm)	${In}_{0.17} {Ga}_{0.83} N$	GaN
5.0 nm well	${In}_{0.14} {Ga}_{0.86} N$	GaN
$P$ -matched 5.0 nm well	${In}_{0.16} {Ga}_{0.84} N$	${Al}_{0.20} {Ga}_{0.58} {In}_{0.22} N$
$P$ -matched 10.0 nm well	${In}_{0.15} {Ga}_{0.85} N$	${Al}_{0.20} {Ga}_{0.59} {In}_{0.21} N$

	Well	Original Barrier	$P$ -matched Barrier	EBL
	${In}_{0.16} {Ga}_{0.84} N$ ( ${In}_{0.15} {Ga}_{0.85} N$ )	GaN	${Al}_{0.20} {Ga}_{0.58} {In}_{0.22} N$ ( ${Al}_{0.20} {Ga}_{0.59} {In}_{0.21} N$ )	${Al}_{0.1} {Ga}_{0.9} N$
$E_{g}$ (eV)	$2.60 / 2.64$	3.42	$2.93 / 2.97$	3.61
$P (C / m^{2})$	$- 0.0098$ ( $- 0.0114$ )	$- 0.0339$	$- 0.0103$ ( $- 0.0122$ )	$- 0.0402$
$a_{0}$ (Å)	3.246 (3.242)	3.189	3.252 (3.248)	3.181

	Well	Barrier
Original (well width: 2.5 nm)	${In}_{0.17} {Ga}_{0.83} N$	GaN
5.0 nm well	${In}_{0.14} {Ga}_{0.86} N$	GaN
$P$ -matched 5.0 nm well	${In}_{0.16} {Ga}_{0.84} N$	${Al}_{0.20} {Ga}_{0.58} {In}_{0.22} N$
$P$ -matched 10.0 nm well	${In}_{0.15} {Ga}_{0.85} N$	${Al}_{0.20} {Ga}_{0.59} {In}_{0.21} N$

	Well	Original Barrier	$P$ -matched Barrier	EBL
	${In}_{0.16} {Ga}_{0.84} N$ ( ${In}_{0.15} {Ga}_{0.85} N$ )	GaN	${Al}_{0.20} {Ga}_{0.58} {In}_{0.22} N$ ( ${Al}_{0.20} {Ga}_{0.59} {In}_{0.21} N$ )	${Al}_{0.1} {Ga}_{0.9} N$
$E_{g}$ (eV)	$2.60 / 2.64$	3.42	$2.93 / 2.97$	3.61
$P (C / m^{2})$	$- 0.0098$ ( $- 0.0114$ )	$- 0.0339$	$- 0.0103$ ( $- 0.0122$ )	$- 0.0402$
$a_{0}$ (Å)	3.246 (3.242)	3.189	3.252 (3.248)	3.181

Abstract

Cited By

Figures (6)

Tables (2)

Equations (1)

Optics Letters