See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/322128917

Advanced characterization of visible light-emitting diodes

Technical Report · December 2017

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18019.66087

CITATIONS READS
0 200

1 author:

Nasir Alfaraj
King Abdullah University of Science and Technology
36 PUBLICATIONS   108 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Thermal Management for Flexible Electronics View project

Photoinduced entropy of III-nitride nanowires View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Nasir Alfaraj on 29 December 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Advanced Characterization of Visible
Light-emitting Diodes

Nasir Alfaraj

December 29, 2017

 Abstract

The objective of this laboratory experiment was to measure and charac-

terize blue and green light-emitting diodes. Important characteristics such
as the light–current curves, current–voltage curves, and external quantum
efficiency were measured and analyzed.
Integrating Sphere
The integrating sphere (Figure 1) is a device for measuring optical radiation
through the integration of radiant flux. The theory of the integrating sphere
comes from the theory of radiation exchange within an enclosed structure
of diffused surfaces. To optimize an integrating sphere for low losses, white
surface coating (barium sulfate or PTFE/Teflon) is used to act as an ideal
Lambertian scatterer (i.e. the radiant (or luminous) intensity observed from
an ideal diffuse radiator is directly proportional to the cosine of the angle θ
between the direction of the incident light and the surface normal). Hypo-
thetically, all light rays arriving at the sides of the sphere are scattered in a
diffused manner (Lambertian reflectance), and only light rays that has been
diffused within the sphere arrives at the ports or detectors used for probing.
In other words, the scattered light is emitted in the hemisphere, in accor-
dance with the Lambert’s cosine law: radiant intensity is highest when the
incident light rays are perpendicular to the surface (see Figure 2). Having
a sphere structure results in all surface normal vectors pointing to its cen-
ter. Figure 3 illustrates the the use of the integrating sphere to measure the
transmittance and reflectance of a light-emitting sample.

Figure 1: A simple general schematic of an integrating sphere.

1
Figure 2: Emission rate (photons/s) in a normal and off-normal direction.

Figure 3: The use of an integrating sphere to measure the transmittance and

reflectance of a sample. Adapted from [1]

Efficiency Droop in InGaN-based Light-Emitting

Diodes
Efficiency droop is a phenomenon whereby light-emitting diodes (LEDs) ex-
hibit losses in external quantum efficiency while operating at high current
densities [2]. Efficiency droop has been attributed to:

2
 1. Electron leakage due to polarization mismatch [3].

2. Poor hole injection [4].

3. Delocalization of carriers [5, 6].

4. Demonstrate strong correlation between the diode voltage at the onset

of high-injection and the voltage at the onset of the efficiency droop
[7].

The mechanism causing efficiency droop was conclusively identified as

Auger recombination. A study in 2013 supported Auger recombination as the
cause of efficiency droop [8]. Possible solutions to the efficiency droop issue
include decreasing the non-radiative Auger processes by producing quantum
wells with soft confinement potentials [9, 10]. Also, since higher thermal con-
ductivity reduces self-heating effects, the efficiency droop can be decreased
by employing ceramic aluminium nitride (AlN) substrates, which are more
thermally conductive than the commercially used sapphire [11, 12].

Figure 4: Efficiency versus current curves of GaN-based ultraviolet (UV),

blue and green LEDs showing a decrease in efficiency with increasing injection
current. Green LEDs have largest efficiency droop. Adapted from [13].

3
Definitions
LED green gap
The term “green gap” makes a reference to the unavailability of suitable
green semiconductor light sources. Violet and blue LEDs are commonly fab-
ricated using c-plane GaN crystals, but achieving efficient operation of green
devices at wavelengths higher than 500 nm is challenging since the radiative
recombination rates in their active regions is reduced by large polarization
fields [14, 15, 16].

Quantum-confined Stark effect in LED

The quantum-confined Stark effect (QCSE) depicts an external electric field
effect on the light emission or absorption spectrum of a quantum well struc-
ture, such as group III–nitride-semiconductor-based quantum well heterostruc-
tures. As a consequence of the absence of an external electric field, charge
carriers in a quantum-well-based LED structure may only occupy states in-
side a discrete set of energy sub-bands and therefore only a discrete set of
light frequencies may be emitted or absorbed by the structure. Once an ex-
ternal electric field is applied, the hole states shift to higher energies, whereas
the electron states shift to lower energies, resulting in reduction of the per-
mitted light emission or absorption frequencies. The external electric field
also reduces the recombination efficiency of the structure and decreases the
overlap integral since it shifts holes and electrons to opposite sides of the
quantum well structure. [17, 18]. QCSE for InGaN/GaN LED heterostruc-
tures was observed to be dependent on the crystal symmetry and the com-
position, number, and thickness of the active layers. [19, 20, 21]. A study in
2012 suggests that InGaN quantum-well-based green-emitting LEDs display
a presence of strong QCSE in spontaneously formed radiative traps [22].

Light extraction efficiency in an LED

The LED extraction efficiency is the proportion of photons generated in the
active region that escape from the device and is defined mathematically as
the ratio of the external quantum efficiency (ηeqe ) to the internal quantum
efficiency (ηint ) [23]:

4
 ηeqe
Cex =
ηint
The external quantum efficiency is the ratio of the number of photons
emitted from the LED per unit time to the number of electrons passing
through the device per unit time. It quantifies the ability of an LED de-
vice to convert electrons to photons and permit them to escape (not to be
confused the concept of photoinduced entropy, which qualitatively describe
relative entropy generation at certain temperatures).[15, 24] On the other
hand, the internal quantum efficiency is the proportion of electron-hole re-
combinations within the active region of the LED that are radiative (i.e.
producing photons). The light extraction efficiency is strongly dependent on
the particular LED structure design and can be as low as 2% [25]. Reference
[23] reported a light extraction efficiency of 73%.

Measurements
Current–voltage (I–V) and light–current (L–I) curves
Figure 5 shows the current–voltage (I–V) characteristics curves for blue and
green LEDs. We calculated the series and shunt resistances using the same
methods we described in Lab 1. Figure 6 shows the light–current (I–V)
characteristics curves for the same LEDs. We observe that the peak optical
power of the blue LED is significantly higher than that of the green LED due
to the green gap phenomenon: Achieving efficient operation of green light
devices at wavelengths higher than 500 nm is challenging.

Efficiency versus injection current density curves

Figure 7 shows the measured external quantum efficiency versus injection
current curves for the blue and green LEDs. As expected, we observe that
the efficiency drops as the pump power and injected current density increase
(efficiency droop is present in both LEDs). As the injected current density
was varies between 0 and 3 mA/cm2 , the total efficiency drop in the green
LED was observed to be about 58.83%, compared to 50.96% in the blue LED.
Figure 8 shows the measured current efficiency and luminous efficacy
(effectiveness of illumination) versus injection current curves for the blue and
green LEDs. The luminous efficacy is defined by the ratio of the luminous

5
 Injection current density [log scale] Injection current density [log scale]
0
10
0
3.0
Injection current density [linear scale]
2.5 10 Injection current density [linear scale]
Current Density (mA/cm )

Current Density (mA/cm )

Current Density (mA/cm )

Current Density (mA/cm )

2

2
V = 230 mV V = 240 mV

I = 568.23 mA I = 603.46 mA 2.5

-1
-1
10 V = 2.60 V
2.0 10 V = 2.63 V
TH TH

r
s
= 0.40 r
s
= 0.40 2.0
-2
r = 633.33 M to 170 M 1.5 -2 r = 11.33 M to 80 M
10 sh sh

10
r
sh, avg
= 107.78 M r
sh, avg
= 31.10 M 1.5

-3 1.0
10 -3
10 1.0

0.5
-4
0.5
10 V = 2.60 V -4 V = 2.63 V
TH
10 TH

0.0 0.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5

Voltage (V) Voltage (V)

Figure 5: Blue LED (left) and green LED (right) current-voltage curves.
3.0
1.5

Blue LED optical power Green LED optical power

2.5
Optical Power (cm )

Optical Power (cm )

-1

-1

2.0
1.0

1.5

1.0
0.5

0.5

0.0
0.0

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

2 2
Current Density (mA/cm ) Current Density (mA/cm )

Figure 6: Blue LED (left) and green LED (right) light-current curves.

flux (Φ) emitted by a light source and the energy consumed by it in a time
unit ((dw/dt)pump ):
Φ Φ
ηz = = . (1)
(dw/dt)pump Ppump
We observe that the current efficiency drops in both LEDs as more current is
injected, while the luminous efficacy seems to stabilize at around 60 lm/mW,
which is relatively low when compared to commercially available LEDs that
operate at 110/120 V (such devices have luminous efficacies in the range of
58–93 lm/W).
Figure 9 shows the measured illuminance (luminous flux incident on a

6
 Blue LED pump power Green LED pump power
3.0 3.0 80
Blue LED external quantum efficiency 100 Green LED external quantum efficiency

External Efficiency (%)

External Efficiency (%)

2.5 2.5
Pump Power (W)

Pump Power (W)

2.0 2.0 60
80

1.5 1.5

60
1.0 1.0 40

0.5 0.5

40
0.0 0.0 20

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

2 2
Current Density (mA/cm ) Current Density (mA/cm )

Figure 7: Blue LED (left) and green LED (right) measured external quantum
efficiency and pump power versus injection current density curves.
9

0.18 60 0.7
Green LED current efficiency
8 Blue LED current efficiency
Green LED luminous efficacy
Luminous Efficacy (lm/W)

Luminous Efficacy (lm/W)

0.16
Current Efficiency (cd/A)

Current Efficiency (cd/A)

Blue LED luminous efficacy

0.6
50
7

0.14
0.5
6
40
0.12
0.4
5
30
0.10
0.3
4

0.08 20
3 0.2

0.06
10 0.1
2

0.04
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

2 2
Current Density (mA/cm ) Current Density (mA/cm )

Figure 8: Blue LED (left) and green LED (right) current efficiency and
efficacy.

unit area) and luminance (luminous intensity, or light brightness level) versus
injection current curves. Both quantities increase as more injection current
is applied.

7
 -3

1.6 1.2x10
7 -3

Blue LED illuminance Green LED illuminance 5.0x10

1.4 Blue LED luminance -3

Green LED luminance
1.0x10 6
Illuminance (lm/cm )

Illuminance (lm/cm )
Luminance (cd/cm )

Luminance (cd/cm )
2

2
-3

2
4.0x10
1.2
-4 5
8.0x10
1.0 -3
3.0x10
4
-4
0.8 6.0x10
3 -3
2.0x10
0.6 -4
4.0x10
2
0.4 -3
1.0x10
-4
2.0x10 1
0.2

0.0
0.0 0
0.0

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

2 2
Current Density (mA/cm ) Current Density (mA/cm )

Figure 9: Blue LED (left) and green LED (right) luminance and illuminance.

Chromaticity diagrams
The CIE chromaticity diagrams for the blue and green LEDs are shown in
Figures 10 and 11, respectively. These diagrams measure the quality/purity
of a color produced by an LED, regardless of its luminance level. We observe
that most of the normalized chromaticity coordinate points for both LEDs
lie within their corresponding color regions. As such, we observe from the
CIE 1931 and CIE 1976 chromaticity diagrams that the blue LED manifests
higher quality/color purity since most of its measured coordinate points are
either grouped within the blue region or at its edge, while for the green
LED, we find that the coordinate points generally tend to be scattered and,
to a great extent, lie further away from the edge of green region. Moreover,
varying the injection current causes color shifts.

8
 0.9 Blue LED CIE 1931 chromaticity diagram Blue LED CIE 1976 chromaticity diagram
520 0.7

0.8 540 520 540 560

0.6 580
600
0.7 620
560 500
0.5
0.6

500 580 0.4

0.5

v'
y

0.4 600
0.3

620 480
0.3
0.2

0.2

480 0.1
460
0.1

460 0.0
0.0

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

x u'

Figure 10: Blue LED chromaticity diagrams.

0.9 Green LED CIE 1931 chromaticity diagram Green LED CIE 1976 chromaticity diagram
520 0.7

0.8 540 520 540 560

0.6 580
600
0.7 620
560 500
0.5
0.6

500 580 0.4

0.5
v'
y

0.4 600
0.3

620 480
0.3
0.2

0.2

480 0.1
460
0.1

460 0.0
0.0

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

x u'

Figure 11: Green LED chromaticity diagrams.

9
Bibliography

[1] Wikipedia, “Integrating sphere—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia,”

2015. [Online; accessed 1-December-2015].

[2] J. Piprek, “Efficiency droop in nitride-based light-emitting diodes,”

physica status solidi (a), vol. 207, no. 10, pp. 2217–2225, 2010.

[3] M.-H. Kim, M. F. Schubert, Q. Dai, J. K. Kim, E. F. Schubert, J. Piprek,

and Y. Park, “Origin of efficiency droop in GaN-based light-emitting
diodes,” Applied Physics Letters, vol. 91, no. 18, 2007.

[4] I. Rozhansky and D. Zakheim, “Analysis of the causes of the decrease in

the electroluminescence efficiency of AlGaInN light-emitting-diode het-
erostructures at high pumping density,” Semiconductors, vol. 40, no. 7,
pp. 839–845, 2006.

[5] Y. Yang, X. A. Cao, and C. Yan, “Investigation of the nonthermal mech-

anism of efficiency rolloff in InGaN light-emitting diodes,” IEEE Trans-
actions on Electron Devices, vol. 55, pp. 1771–1775, July 2008.

[6] T. Mukai, M. Yamada, and S. Nakamura, “Characteristics of InGaN-

based UV/blue/green/amber/red light-emitting diodes,” Japanese
Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 38, no. 7R, p. 3976, 1999.

[7] D. S. Meyaard, G.-B. Lin, J. Cho, E. Fred Schubert, H. Shim, S.-H.

Han, M.-H. Kim, C. Sone, and Y. Sun Kim, “Identifying the cause of
the efficiency droop in GaInN light-emitting diodes by correlating the
onset of high injection with the onset of the efficiency droop,” Applied
Physics Letters, vol. 102, no. 25, p. 251114, 2013.

[8] J. Iveland, L. Martinelli, J. Peretti, J. S. Speck, and C. Weisbuch,

“Direct measurement of auger electrons emitted from a semiconductor

10
 light-emitting diode under electrical injection: Identification of the dom-
inant mechanism for efficiency droop,” Physical Review Letters, vol. 110,
p. 177406, 2013.

[9] R. Vaxenburg, A. Rodina, E. Lifshitz, and A. L. Efros, “The role of po-

larization fields in Auger-induced efficiency droop in nitride-based light-
emitting diodes,” Applied Physics Letters, vol. 103, no. 22, p. 221111,
2013.

[10] R. Vaxenburg, E. Lifshitz, and A. L. Efros, “Suppression of Auger-

stimulated efficiency droop in nitride-based light emitting diodes,” Ap-
plied Physics Letters, vol. 102, no. 3, p. 031120, 2013.

[11] M.-L. Tsai and K.-Y. Lai, “Ceramic-based thin-film blue LEDs with
high operation voltage and unsaturated output power at 1800 W/cm2 ,”
Applied Physics Express, vol. 7, no. 2, p. 022103, 2014.

[12] H. Sun, F. Wu, Y. J. Park, T. M. A. tahtamouni, K.-H. Li, N. Alfaraj,

T. Detchprohm, R. D. Dupuis, and X. Li, “Influence of TMAl preflow
on AlN epitaxy on sapphire,” Applied Physics Letters, vol. 110, no. 19,
p. 192106, 2017.

[13] J. Cho, E. F. Schubert, and J. K. Kim, “Efficiency droop in light-

emitting diodes: Challenges and countermeasures,” Laser & Photonics
Reviews, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 408–421, 2013.

[14] Y. Zhao, S. H. Oh, F. Wu, Y. Kawaguchi, S. Tanaka, K. Fujito, J. S.

Speck, S. P. DenBaars, and S. Nakamura, “Green semipolar (2021) In-
GaN light-emitting diodes with small wavelength shift and narrow spec-
tral linewidth,” Applied Physics Express, vol. 6, no. 6, p. 062102, 2013.

[15] N. Alfaraj, S. Mitra, F. Wu, I. A. Ajia, B. Janjua, A. Prabaswara,

R. A. Aljefri, H. Sun, T. K. Ng, B. S. Ooi, I. S. Roqan, and X. Li,
“Photoinduced entropy of InGaN/GaN p-i-n double-heterostructure
nanowires,” Applied Physics Letters, vol. 110, no. 16, p. 161110, 2017.

[16] S. Nakamura, T. Mukai, and M. Senoh, “Highbrightness InGaN/AlGaN

doubleheterostructure blue-green-light-emitting diodes,” Journal of Ap-
plied Physics, vol. 76, no. 12, pp. 8189–8191, 1994.

11
 [17] L. F. Zagonel, S. Mazzucco, M. Tenc, K. March, R. Bernard, B. Laslier,
G. Jacopin, M. Tchernycheva, L. Rigutti, F. H. Julien, R. Songmuang,
and M. Kociak, “Nanometer scale spectral imaging of quantum emitters
in nanowires and its correlation to their atomically resolved structure,”
Nano Letters, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 568–573, 2011.
[18] H. Haug and S. W. Koch, Quantum theory of the optical and electronic
properties of semiconductors, vol. 5. World Scientific, 1990.
[19] S. Nakamura, “The roles of structural imperfections in InGaN-Based
blue light-emitting diodes and laser diodes,” Science, vol. 281, no. 5379,
pp. 956–961, 1998.
[20] K. Okamoto, A. Kaneta, Y. Kawakami, S. Fujita, J. Choi, M. Terazima,
and T. Mukai, “Confocal microphotoluminescence of InGaN-based light-
emitting diodes,” Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 98, no. 6, p. 064503,
2005.
[21] W. Guo, M. Zhang, A. Banerjee, and P. Bhattacharya, “Catalyst-free
InGaN/GaN nanowire light emitting diodes grown on (001) silicon by
molecular beam epitaxy,” Nano Letters, vol. 10, no. 9, pp. 3355–3359,
2010.
[22] S. De, A. Layek, S. Bhattacharya, D. Kumar Das, A. Kadir, A. Bhat-
tacharya, S. Dhar, and A. Chowdhury, “Quantum-confined stark ef-
fect in localized luminescent centers within InGaN/GaN quantum-well
based light emitting diodes,” Applied Physics Letters, vol. 101, no. 12,
p. 121919, 2012.
[23] J. J. Wierer, A. David, and M. M. Megens, “III-nitride photonic-crystal
light-emitting diodes with high extraction efficiency,” Nature Photonics,
vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 163–169, 2009.
[24] N. Alfaraj, M. M. Muhammed, K.-H. Li, B. Janjua, R. A. Aljefri, H. Sun,
T. K. Ng, B. S. Ooi, I. S. Roqan, and X. Li, “Thermodynamic photoin-
duced disorder in AlGaN nanowires,” AIP Advances, vol. 7, no. 12,
p. 125113, 2017.
[25] M. Boroditsky and E. Yablonovitch, “Light-emitting diode extraction
efficiency,” in Photonics West’97, pp. 119–122, International Society for
Optics and Photonics, 1997.

12

View publication stats