Print 59 comment(s) - last by Suntan.. on Jul 23 at 3:52 PM

Purdue's Professor Sands and a graduate researcher man the reactor, which produces the first blue LEDs based on a silicon process. The new LEDs promise greater efficiency, longer lifetimes, and much lower costs.  (Source: Purdue University)
Purdue research have developed new production methods which will cut LED lighting costs to about a twentieth of current expenses

The U.S. Department of Energy recently announced a $20M USD "L Prize" for the first solid-state lighting meeting a strict standard of criteria.  While the prize sounded very intriguing, the fact of the matter is that solid-state lighting on the market today falls short of the requirements by a sizable margin.  Furthermore, it is far too expensive to see mass adoption.

However, a new breakthrough in processing from the Purdue University may change all of that.  Researchers at Purdue have developed a technique to manufacture LED solid-state lighting at low cost using metal-coated silicon wafers.

Traditionally, the light-emitting layer of an LED light is a gallium nitride crystal.  In sapphire based LEDs, used for green or blue lighting, mirror-like reflectors are need to reflect and resend emitted light, increasing the efficiency.  Typically, this layer is extremely expensive to produce, part of the reason the current generation of LED lighting costs so much, costing at least 20 times more than conventional incandescent and fluorescent bulbs.  Also, the LEDs are built on sapphire crystals, which provide the color, but are extremely expensive.  The method uses aluminum nitride to provide the tint.

The new LEDs use a layer of zirconium nitride to provide the mirror effect.  Normally, zirconium nitride reacts with silicon, making a silicon process difficult.  However, by isolating the zirconium nitride with a protective layer to prevent reaction, scientists are able to fully deposit the need layers, including the gallium nitride necessary to build a full LED.

Timothy D. Sands, the Basil S. Turner Professor of Materials Engineering and Electrical and Computer Engineering states, "When the LED emits light, some of it goes down and some goes up, and we want the light that goes down to bounce back up so we don't lose it.  One of the main achievements in this work was placing a barrier on the silicon substrate to keep the zirconium nitride from reacting."

With the advance, for the first time the LEDs will be able to be produced on standard silicon wafers.  The new wafers can be made using cheap existing processes.  To deposit the colored layer, reactive sputter deposition is used.  Aluminum is bombarded with positive Argon ions, which send it flying out into the air, reacting with nitrogen gas and being deposited on the silicon.  For the zirconium reflective layer, an identical process is used with zirconium metal in place of aluminum.  The final gallium layer is deposited using organometallic vapor phase epitaxy; a common deposition technique performed using high heat.

The new techniques yield a crystalline structure aligned to the crystalline silicon.  This means that the LEDs are less prone to defects and will perform more efficiently.  Further, by using common techniques costs are dramatically reduced from using more expensive alternative methods like crystal growth on glass using sapphire crystals.

Another advantage is that silicon dissipates heat more effectively than sapphires.  This will reduce damage during operation and lead to longer lifetimes and more reliability.

The new device is extremely promising as it may allow lighting to finally do primarily what it was intended -- make light.  Traditional incandescent bulbs are better heaters than lights, wasting 90 percent of energy as heat.  LEDs currently on the market have efficiencies from 47 to 64 percent of energy converted into light, with the Purdue design expected to fall on the high-end of this range.

With one third of U.S. electricity going to lighting and tremendous lighting-related consumption worldwide, widespread adoption of LED lighting could cut world electric usage by 10 percent.  Says Professor Sands, "If you replaced existing lighting with solid-state lighting, following some reasonable estimates for the penetration of that technology based on economics and other factors, it could reduce the amount of energy we consume for lighting by about one-third.  That represents a 10 percent reduction of electricity consumption and a comparable reduction of related carbon emissions."

Professor Sands expects the process to be commercially adopted and operating within two years.  A final hurdle for it to overcome is a problem with the gallium nitride layer cracking during cooling.  He believes this problem will soon be solved, though, with a bit more research.  He states, "These are engineering issues, not major show stoppers.  The major obstacle was coming up with a substrate based on silicon that also has a reflective surface underneath the epitaxial gallium nitride layer, and we have now solved this problem."

The researchers' findings are reported in this month's edition of the journal Applied Physics Letters, published by the American Institute of Physics. 

The other researchers contributing to the project led by Professor Sands were Jeremy L. Schroeder, David A. Ewoldt, Isaac H. Wildeson, Robert Colby, Patrick R. Cantwell and Vijay Rawat; Eric A. Stach, an associate professor of materials engineering.  The research was funded by the U.S. Department of Energy's solid-state lighting program, which the L Prize is based on.  The project is part of a broader effort by Purdue to perfect white LED lighting, and perhaps take home the L Prize.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

These will be successful if:
By 67STANG on 7/21/2008 12:29:42 PM , Rating: 3
1) They cost the less/the same/very close to CFL's.
2) They put out at least as much light as CFL's.

As they are LED's, they should definately kill CFL's in life and in power consumption. And my favorite: not having to wait 30-60 sec. for the the light to reach full brightness like current CFL's do.

RE: These will be successful if:
By Screwballl on 7/21/2008 1:10:26 PM , Rating: 4
Not sure what brand or type you are using but I have 20-30 of these around my house (equivalent from 40-100W) and they are at full brightness within 1-2 seconds.... these are the cheaper walmart off-brand ones too, not the more expensive sylvania or name brand types...

I wonder if you aren't talking about tube florescent and not the small CFL replacement lightbulbs? Or maybe using them in 20ºF temperatures???

RE: These will be successful if:
By SiliconJon on 7/21/2008 3:43:24 PM , Rating: 2
I have a large variety of CFL's as replacement for my standard bulbs. Many of them take upwards of 20 seconds to reach full brightness, and some of them have squeeling issues. About half work quite well. I would have to go home and take a survey to see which brands are working less than optimally. I probably won't remember to do that.

RE: These will be successful if:
By stromgald30 on 7/21/2008 4:25:54 PM , Rating: 3
I think there are different varieties of CFLs. Some, possibly newer ones, are designed to come on quicker.

I have both and some CFL recessed lighting bulbs. The spot/recessed lighting ones can take up to a minute to get to full brightness. The regular CFLs take 3-10 seconds depending on age, and the "quick-on" ones take like 1-2 seconds max.

RE: These will be successful if:
By daftrok on 7/22/2008 2:42:22 AM , Rating: 3
Dear God all these posts about CFL brightness timing. The only time I would find this annoying is with projectors and projector TVs but not with lights.

RE: These will be successful if:
By lumbergeek on 7/21/2008 11:43:02 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, they are the newer blue-label "Globe" brand they sell at wal-mart. I like them a lot, the light is much more white than the earlier generation yellowish types and they come on very quickly. I replaced all my CCFLs with them. They also come in up to 150w incandescent equivalent using only 40 watts.

RE: These will be successful if:
By FITCamaro on 7/21/08, Rating: -1
RE: These will be successful if:
By Natfly on 7/21/2008 2:19:32 PM , Rating: 4
Its a very common problem, even in brand new CFLs that I have bought I have noticed this.

RE: These will be successful if:
By FITCamaro on 7/21/08, Rating: 0
RE: These will be successful if:
By SiliconJon on 7/21/2008 3:47:08 PM , Rating: 2
I have a five-CFL-bulb lamp in the computer room that when used feels like a nuke effect out of a movie - the brightness goes from fair to sunlight over 10 seconds. It's quite noticeable, but I probably won't freak out from it unless I watch some crazy end of the world movie.

RE: These will be successful if:
By SiliconJon on 7/21/2008 3:53:22 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry, that's a bit of an's only about 3-4 seconds, though the first time it occurred time did slow to a crawl.

By Bruneauinfo on 7/21/2008 3:53:40 PM , Rating: 2
same issue here with all of mine. i have about 15. they all take a while to get to full brightness.

RE: These will be successful if:
By walk2k on 7/21/2008 3:18:33 PM , Rating: 2
CFL I have in my house all reach full brightness instantly, or within a few 1/10th of a second anyway. 3-5 seconds? are these outside in -20F temps??

RE: These will be successful if:
By Spuke on 7/21/2008 4:16:16 PM , Rating: 3
My office CFL takes a few seconds to warm up but my porch lights are at full brightness almost instantly.

RE: These will be successful if:
By kmmatney on 7/21/2008 4:06:41 PM , Rating: 2
A lot of my CFL bulbs can take up to 3 minutes to reach full brightness (and it also states this on the Ge website). I've had these bulbs for 4 years, so they may be older models and things might be better now.

RE: These will be successful if:
By mattclary on 7/21/2008 2:18:59 PM , Rating: 2
The temperature seems to have a big impact. I notice mine take a while to reach full brightness when the house is cold. When it is warm, they are pretty instant.

RE: These will be successful if:
By teldar on 7/22/2008 8:51:25 AM , Rating: 2
The ballast/starter has to warm up for CFL's to reach full brightness. It's normal for them to take some time.
I have a significant number of new ones (sylvania and nlight? as well as GE) and they all take some time to get as bright as they are going to get.

But I still like them quite a bit. I have 3 100watt replacements in a floor lamp in the living room and it puts out over 5000 lumens for 75 watts. To get that out of incandescent, it would be more like 400 watts.

"We shipped it on Saturday. Then on Sunday, we rested." -- Steve Jobs on the iPad launch

Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki