| Literature DB >> 33802162 |
Shota Tsuneyasu1, Rikuya Watanabe1, Naoki Takeda1, Kojiro Uetani2, Shogo Izakura3, Keitaro Kasuya3, Kosuke Takahashi3, Toshifumi Satoh1.
Abstract
Powder electroluminescent (EL) devices with an electric field type excitation are surface light sources that are expected to have a wide range of practical applications, owing to their high environmental resistance; however, their low luminance has hindered their use. A clarification of the relationship between the properties of the film substrates and the electroluminescence is important to drastically improve light extraction efficiency. In this study, powder EL devices with different substrates of various levels of surface roughness and different optical transmittances were fabricated to quantitatively evaluate the relationships between the substrate properties and the device characteristics. A decrease in the surface roughness of the substrate caused a clear increase in both the current density and the luminance. The luminance was found to have a direct relationship with the optical transmittance of the substrates. The powder EL device, which was based on a cellulose nanofiber film and was the smoothest and most transparent substrate investigated, showed the highest luminance (641 cd/cm2) when 300 V was applied at 1 kHz.Entities:
Keywords: cellulose nanofiber; paper electronic device; paper-based light-emitting device; powder electroluminescent device
Year: 2021 PMID: 33802162 PMCID: PMC8001356 DOI: 10.3390/nano11030697
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanomaterials (Basel) ISSN: 2079-4991 Impact factor: 5.076
Figure 1Photographs of (a) 2,2,6,6-tetramethylpiperidine-1-oxyl (TEMPO)-oxidized cellulose nanofiber (CNF) (TO-CNF), (b) polyethylene naphthalate (PEN), (c) commercial CNF (C-CNF), and (d) tracing paper films. (e) Transmittance spectra of each film. (f) The relationship between root mean square (RMS) roughness and haze.
Figure 2Atomic force microscope (AFM) images of (a) TO-CNF, (b) PEN, (c) C-CNF, and (d) tracing paper substrates for the calculation of RMS roughness.
The characteristics of each film and the thickness of the functional layer on those devices.
| Film Thickness | RMS Roughness | Haze | Thickness of the Functional Layers | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TO-CNF | 22.0 ± 2.0 | 6.78 ± 2.3 | 1.99 ± 0.06 | 106.0 ± 2.3 |
| PEN | 128.0 ± 2.8 | 7.19 ± 0.54 | 1.15 ± 0.10 | 129.4 ± 3.8 |
| C-CNF | 54.0 ± 0.4 | 560.9 ± 72.7 | 74.34 ± 0.41 | 94.0 ± 3.6 |
| Tracing paper | 82.0 ± 1.4 | 769 ± 64.5 | 93.96 ± 0.04 | 122.6 ± 6.7 |
Figure 3Photographs of the powder EL devices with a substrate of (a) TO-CNF, (b) PEN, (c) C-CNF, and (d) tracing paper under the application of an AC voltage of ±170 V at 1.2 kHz. (e) Electroluminescent (EL) spectra of the devices with each substrate under the application of an AC voltage of ±170 V at 1.2 kHz. The inset shows the normalized EL spectra of the devices.
Figure 4EL property measurement. (a) The relationship between current density at an applied frequency of 1 kHz and applied voltage. (b) The relationship between current density at an applied voltage of ±300 V0–p at 1 kHz and the RMS roughness of the substrate films.
Figure 5(a) The luminance of the EL devices versus the applied voltage characteristics at an applied frequency of 1 kHz. The luminance of the EL devices at an applied voltage of 300 V0–p at 1 kHz versus (b) RMS roughness and (c) transmittance of each substrate at a wavelength of 490 nm.