OSA's Digital Library

Optics Express

Optics Express

  • Editor: C. Martijn de Sterke
  • Vol. 18, Iss. 4 — Feb. 15, 2010
  • pp: 3238–3243
« Show journal navigation

Emitter apodization dependent angular luminance enhancement of microlens-array film attached organic light-emitting devices

Kuan-Yu Chen, Yung-Ting Chang, Yu-Hsuan Ho, Hoang-Yan Lin, Jiun-Haw Lee, and Mao-Kuo Wei  »View Author Affiliations


Optics Express, Vol. 18, Issue 4, pp. 3238-3243 (2010)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/OE.18.003238


View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (224 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

Taking organic emitter apodization calculated from electromagnetic theory as input, the angular luminance enhancement of a microlens-array-film (MAF) attached OLED (organic light-emitting device) can be further evaluated by ray-tracing approach. First, we assumed artificial emitters and revealed that not every OLED with MAF has luminance enhancement. Then, the OLEDs of different Alq3 thickness were fabricated and their angular luminance measurement validated simulation results. Mode analyses for different layers were performed to estimate the enhancement potential of the MAF attached devices. In conclusion, the organic emitters with higher off-axis-angle luminous intensity cause lower out-coupling efficiency but gain higher enhancement after the MAF attached.

© 2010 OSA

1. Introduction

OLEDs usually suffer from low light-extraction efficiency or coupling efficiency (CE) around 20% [1

1. A. Chutinan, K. Ishihara, T. Asano, M. Fujita, and S. Noda, “Theoretical analysis on light-extraction efficiency of organic light-emitting diodes using FDTD and mode-expansion methods,” Org. Electron. 6(1), 3–9 (2005). [CrossRef]

]. This deficiency is primarily caused by three factors: (1) Waveguiding – the total internal reflection (TIR) that occurs at the interfaces of substrate (n = 1.52 for glass)/air and organic layers (n = 1.7 ~ 1.9)/substrate; (2) Absorption – the plasmonic dissipation of optical power to the metal cathode or other material with nonzero extinction coefficient; (3) Fresnel loss – the refractive indexes mismatch between interfaces and thus causing reflection loss.

Absorption and Fresnel loss are somehow inevitable or difficult to avoid without sacrificing other device properties. Thus, the waveguiding loss is most likely to be lessened. As a result, we focus on eliminating this effect. To solve this problem, one can optimize the layer thickness of the OLED itself by electromagnetic theory [2

2. C.-L. Lin, H.-C. Chang, K.-C. Tien, and C.-C. Wu, “Influences of resonant wavelengths on performances of microcavity organic light-emitting devices,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 90(7), 071111 (2007). [CrossRef]

]. To apply this theory, we would set the total optical cavity length to be integer times half of the desired wavelength, and the distance of dipole location to the reflective electrode to be integer times one-fourth of the desired wavelength [3

3. A. Dodabalapur, L. J. Rothberg, R. H. Jordan, T. M. Miller, R. E. Slusher, and J. M. Phillips, “Physics and applications of organic microcavity light emitting diodes,” J. Appl. Phys. 80(12), 6954–6964 (1996). [CrossRef]

]. In addition, devices with capping layers form stronger microcavity and have enhanced spontaneous emission [4

4. H. Riel, S. Karg, T. Beierlein, W. Ries, and K. Neyts, “Tuning the emission characteristics of top-emitting organic light-emitting devices by means of a dielectric capping layer: An experimental and theoretical study,” J. Appl. Phys. 94(8), 5290–5296 (2003). [CrossRef]

].

An alternative method, geometric optics, is to optimize the characteristics of the micro-structured films attached to a specified OLED, which dictates that microlenses should be fabricated with a high fill factor, a large height ratio and a small diameter [5

5. M.-K. Wei and I.-L. Su, “Method to evaluate the enhancement of luminance efficiency in planar OLED light emitting devices for microlens array,” Opt. Express 12(23), 5777–5782 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. Furthermore, other techniques, such as micropyramid-array films [6

6. L. Lin, T. Shia, and C. Chiu, “Silicon-processed plastic micropyramids for brightness enhancement applications,” J. Micromech. Microeng. 10(3), 395–400 (2000). [CrossRef]

], the insertion of aerogel layer [7

7. T. Tsutsui, M. Yahiro, H. Yokogawa, K. Kawano, and M. Yokoyama, “Doubling Coupling-Out Efficiency in Organic Light-Emitting Devices Using a Thin Silica Aerogel Layer,” Adv. Mater. 13(15), 1149–1152 (2001). [CrossRef]

] and photonic-crystal structures [8

8. Y. J. Lee, S. H. Kim, J. Huh, G. H. Kim, Y. H. Lee, S. H. Cho, Y. C. Kim, and Y. R. Do, “A high-extraction-efficiency nanopatterned organic light-emitting diode,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 82(21), 3779–3781 (2003). [CrossRef]

] were also reported.

However, according to the electromagnetic or geometrical optics theories, the OLED stack itself and the characteristics of microstructured films cannot be optimized at the same time by either approach. Because the performance of the coherent OLED stack whose thickness of each layer is around desired wavelength cannot be calculated by geometric optics. On the other hand, the incoherent substrate and microstructures whose thickness is much larger than desired wavelength can cause difficulty as analyzed by electromagnetic theory. To deal with the deficiency of low light-extraction efficiency of the OLED, we aim to achieve higher normal-direction luminance for a display and higher luminous power for lighting by attaching MAFs to the OLEDs.

However, among all the literatures mentioned above, they didn’t provide any clear relationship between the light extraction enhancement or angular luminance enhancement and the emitter apodization inside the OLED. In this paper, in order to find such relationship, we take the advantages of both classical electromagnetic and ray-tracing theories and evaluate them once at a time without losing either physical importance. At first, angular luminous intensity (lm/sr) into the substrate of the OLED is evaluated by the rigorous electromagnetic theory or Hertzian dipole antenna theory [13

13. H.-C. Chen, J.-H. Lee, C.-C. Shiau, C. C. Yang, and Y.-W. Kiang, “Electromagnetic Modeling of Organic Light-Emitting Devices,” J. Lightwave Technol. 24(6), 2450–2457 (2006). [CrossRef]

]. Then, we take this angular luminous intensity as a source apodization input of the Monte Carlo based ray-tracing software, and finally retrieve the far-field angular luminance in the air.

2. Simulation

2.1 Theory

Light extraction from an OLED can be divided into two stages: the first step is from the OLED stack into the substrate and the second step is from the substrate into the air. The most suitable thickness of each layer for desired source apodization can be carefully chosen by using electromagnetic theory. Moreover, the characteristic optimization of the MAF which was attached to the OLED can be done by using geometric optics theory.

The angular intensity distribution of the light propagation from the OLED stack into the substrate was first calculated. Since the OLED thickness is comparable with the wavelength, light interference in the OLED stack should be considered. For higher accuracy, the formulation used in analysis of the OLED structure is based on electromagnetic theory. The Hertzian dipole antenna theory [13

13. H.-C. Chen, J.-H. Lee, C.-C. Shiau, C. C. Yang, and Y.-W. Kiang, “Electromagnetic Modeling of Organic Light-Emitting Devices,” J. Lightwave Technol. 24(6), 2450–2457 (2006). [CrossRef]

] was introduced to generate the electric field radiation pattern of the OLED dipole source, i.e., the emitter apodization. These radiation patterns are then taken in the second step as the input for the calculation of light propagation and extraction in the substrate. For light emitted from the substrate to air, since the substrate thickness is much greater than the wavelength, we use a ray-tracing approach based on geometric optics. The commercial software LightTools was applied to calculate the far-field angular luminance of the OLED with and without the MAF. In this way, the electromagnetic and geometrical optics theories are combined in a physically correct manner.

2.2 Input parameters

Second, the size and thickness of the attached MAF are 10 × 10 mm2 and 50 μm, respectively. In addition, the microlenses of the MAF in ray-tracing program are 10 μm in diameter, 3.8 μm in height and rectangular-arranged with gaps of 2.5 μm and these parameters were confirmed by SEM measurements. The MAF was made of transparent PET (Polyethylene terephthalate) film covered with PMMA (Polymethyl methacrylate) microlenses [14

14. H. Y. Lin, Y.-H. Ho, J.-H. Lee, K.-Y. Chen, J.-H. Fang, S.-C. Hsu, M.-K. Wei, H. Y. Lin, J. H. Tsai, and T. C. Wu, “Patterned microlens array for efficiency improvement of small-pixelated organic light-emitting devices,” Opt. Express 16(15), 11044–11051 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]; the refractive index of PET and PMMA applied in the program were 1.5750 and 1.4893, respectively.

3. Results

3.1 Artificial light sources

In first part, two artificial OLEDs’ intensity distributions were chosen as source apodizations where angular distributions of different directivity for the Lambertian (the first order cosine function) emitter and the 63-th order one are shown in Fig. 1(a)
Fig. 1 (a) Two artificial source emitting patterns and (b) the geometrical optics calculations of relative luminance (all values were normalized to normal direction value of each reference device).
. To quantify their directivity, those two sources were characterized by their powers of the cosine function with respect to viewing angle. Cosine functions of larger power represent higher source directivity. As can be seen in Fig. 1(b) and Table 1

Table 1. Coupling efficiency, luminous power ratio, and normal luminance ratio of the two artificial sources

table-icon
View This Table
| View All Tables
, sharper angular intensity profile or smaller angular FWHM (full width at half maximum) or smaller θ1/2, where θ1/2 is defined as the off-axis angle where the luminous intensity is a half of the peak intensity, resulted in higher coupling efficiency out of the planar substrate, but less enhancement after adhesion of MAFs.

After MAF attachment, the normal direction luminous intensity of sample B even down to 64% of the device without the MAF due to the light trapping phenomenon by the microlens edge [14

14. H. Y. Lin, Y.-H. Ho, J.-H. Lee, K.-Y. Chen, J.-H. Fang, S.-C. Hsu, M.-K. Wei, H. Y. Lin, J. H. Tsai, and T. C. Wu, “Patterned microlens array for efficiency improvement of small-pixelated organic light-emitting devices,” Opt. Express 16(15), 11044–11051 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. Besides, more portions of large viewing-angle rays were extracted by microlenses, thus caused sample A to reach higher luminous power ratio (LPR), which is the power in air with MAF over the power in air without MAF, and normal direction luminance ratio (NLR), which is similarly normalized to normal direction luminance without MAF. Considering ray-tracing method, coupling efficiency (CE) is defined as luminous power integral through total forward hemisphere divided by optical power generated inside the device without taking the plasmonic metal dissipation and organic/ITO modes into account, i.e. the power in air over the power into the substrate. As a consequence, CE ratio is proportional to LPR. To evaluate the out-coupling efficiency improvements that the MAF yields, we integrate the luminous intensity over all viewing angles. These results are summarized in Table 1.

3.2 Real devices with different Alq3 thickness

In second part, to further apply the rules to the OLED model in electromagnetic approach, four devices of Al (100 nm)/Alq3 (60, 90, 120 and 150 nm)/NPB (60 nm)/ITO (100 nm)/Glass (0.7 mm) were fabricated and simulated. The angular luminous intensity distributions from OLED emitters into substrate were first evaluated as shown in Fig. 2 (a)
Fig. 2 (a) The simulated source apodization varying Alq3 thickness from electromagnetic theory; (b) the simulated luminance from geometrical optics; (c) the validation of experimental results.
. Taking this result as the initial condition for ray-tracing program led to Fig. 2 (b). The angular luminance of the OLEDs with and without the MAF and the enhancement ratio were measured by a spectroradiometer Minolta CS-1000S and shown in Fig. 2 (c).

With increasing angular FWHM, the CE decreases and the LPR and NLR increases; the angular FWHM from large to small are for Alq3 thicknesses of 150, 120, 90 and 60 nm, thereby the resulted CE from large to small are for those of 60, 90, 120 and 150 nm; the NLR and LPR from large to small are for those of 150, 120, 90 and 60 nm both numerically and experimentally.

In Table 2

Table 2. Luminous power ratio and normal direction luminance gain of four devices of different Alq3 thickness

table-icon
View This Table
| View All Tables
, the NLR and LPR of the four different OLED Alq3 thicknesses with MAF attachment were shown. The θpeak is defined as the viewing angle where the luminous intensity is the peak intensity. In addition, we can conclude from Table 2 that the OLED with Alq3 thickness of 60 nm had the best CE due to its smallest angular FWHM and that of 150 nm had the best NLR and LPR because of its most broad emitter intensity distribution or the highest off-axis viewing-angle intensity into the substrate.

The experimental result of Alq3 150nm without the MAF also has the largest luminance in off-axis viewing angle in reference device and thus best NLR, and the simulation results were also validated. In summary, devices with broader apodization, which has high intensity in off-axis angle, have better power gain and normal-direction luminance gain.

3.3 Mode analyses

From section 3.1 & 3.2, methods of Hertzian dipole antenna theory and Monte Carlo ray-tracing theory were combined to enlighten us the relationship between the apodization profiles inside and the angular luminance outside. However, to estimate the efficiency enhancement limitation of the MAFs and to include the influences of surface plasmon metal dissipation and organic/ITO modes into calculation, a transfer-matrix method with embedded source in planar structures [15

15. K. Neyts, “Simulation of light emission from thin-film microcavities,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 15(4), 962–971 (1998). [CrossRef]

-16

16. M.-H. Lu and J. C. Sturm, “External coupling efficiency in planar organic light-emitting devices,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 78(13), 1927–1929 (2001). [CrossRef]

] was presented in this section. This method separated the optical power distributions into four modes, which were the air, substrate, organic/ITO and surface plasmon modes. The substrate texturing techniques can only extract the substrate mode into the air mode. Thus, the enhancement limitation of the MAFs can be evaluated. Moreover, with the help of ray-tracing approach, the extra air mode extracted from the textured substrate can be validated with the experimental external mode and substrate mode data [17

17. T. Nakamura, N. Tsutsumi, N. Juni, and H. Fujii, “Improvement of coupling-out efficiency in organic electroluminescent devices by addition of a diffusive layer,” J. Appl. Phys. 96(11), 6016–6022 (2004). [CrossRef]

]. Furthermore, the experimental results of section 3.2 are compared to the calculated results as shown in Fig. 3(b)
Fig. 3 Mode ratios calculated by transfer matrix method with embedded sources. The blank area of each bar represented the optical power ratio of the surface plasmonic mode; (b) the experimental mode ratios. The extra air mode was according to the air mode multiplied by (LPR - 1).
and the relative experimental air mode ratio of Alq3 60 nm were set to align with the calculated ratio.

From Fig. 3, the OLED with Alq3 thickness of 60 nm had the best air mode ratio of 23.8% because 50-80 nm was corresponding to quarter-wave optical thickness (QWOT) from dipole emitters to the reflective cathode. But device with Alq3 thickness of 90 nm attached by the MAF had the best air mode plus extracted substrate mode due to its slightly broader emitter apodization. Although device of Alq3 thickness of 150 nm had the best LPR (for both Sim & Exp) in Table 2, it still had the lowest air mode after attaching the MAF owing to its lowest air mode ratio without the MAF. Furthermore, the blank area of each device in Fig. 3 represented the surface plasmonic mode. Therefore, the longer dipole distances or Alq3 thickness to the cathode, the less plasmonic mode ratio was.

4. Conclusion

The OLED efficiency improvement by the MAF is greatly influenced by not only the characteristics of microstructures but also the emitter apodization. The combination model of electromagnetic and geometrical optics theories was shown to provide insight of device optimization. To design a large CE device, a small angular FWHM of emitter profile, i.e., a microcavity device can be chosen; conversely, a large LPR and NLR device needs an emitter with wide angular FWHM. Besides, mode analyses of the air mode plus extracted substrate mode ratio can reveal more information about the potential for efficiency improvement. From the real case studies, the best CE device without the MAF was that with Alq3 thickness of 60 nm, which is the optimized QWOT of the spectral peak of Alq3; while the best CE device with the MAF was that with Alq3 thickness of 90 nm, which is slightly longer than the optimized QWOT. The latter one has broader emitter apodization and larger substrate mode ratio potentially to be coupled out, and hence more substrate mode can be extracted by the MAF.

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support given by the National Science Council of the Republic of China under projects NSC-98-2221-E-002-035, NSC 98-2221-E-002-038-MY3, NSC 98-2221-E-259-003, NSC 98-2622-E-259-001-CC3, and NTU under the Aim for Top University Project. We also acknowledge the financial support by Chung-Shan Institute of Science and Technology of the Republic of China. We also thank for the helpful discussions with Wen-Lan Yeh and Prof. Yi-Peng Chiou.

References and links

1.

A. Chutinan, K. Ishihara, T. Asano, M. Fujita, and S. Noda, “Theoretical analysis on light-extraction efficiency of organic light-emitting diodes using FDTD and mode-expansion methods,” Org. Electron. 6(1), 3–9 (2005). [CrossRef]

2.

C.-L. Lin, H.-C. Chang, K.-C. Tien, and C.-C. Wu, “Influences of resonant wavelengths on performances of microcavity organic light-emitting devices,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 90(7), 071111 (2007). [CrossRef]

3.

A. Dodabalapur, L. J. Rothberg, R. H. Jordan, T. M. Miller, R. E. Slusher, and J. M. Phillips, “Physics and applications of organic microcavity light emitting diodes,” J. Appl. Phys. 80(12), 6954–6964 (1996). [CrossRef]

4.

H. Riel, S. Karg, T. Beierlein, W. Ries, and K. Neyts, “Tuning the emission characteristics of top-emitting organic light-emitting devices by means of a dielectric capping layer: An experimental and theoretical study,” J. Appl. Phys. 94(8), 5290–5296 (2003). [CrossRef]

5.

M.-K. Wei and I.-L. Su, “Method to evaluate the enhancement of luminance efficiency in planar OLED light emitting devices for microlens array,” Opt. Express 12(23), 5777–5782 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

6.

L. Lin, T. Shia, and C. Chiu, “Silicon-processed plastic micropyramids for brightness enhancement applications,” J. Micromech. Microeng. 10(3), 395–400 (2000). [CrossRef]

7.

T. Tsutsui, M. Yahiro, H. Yokogawa, K. Kawano, and M. Yokoyama, “Doubling Coupling-Out Efficiency in Organic Light-Emitting Devices Using a Thin Silica Aerogel Layer,” Adv. Mater. 13(15), 1149–1152 (2001). [CrossRef]

8.

Y. J. Lee, S. H. Kim, J. Huh, G. H. Kim, Y. H. Lee, S. H. Cho, Y. C. Kim, and Y. R. Do, “A high-extraction-efficiency nanopatterned organic light-emitting diode,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 82(21), 3779–3781 (2003). [CrossRef]

9.

H. Peng, Y. Ho, X. Yu, M. Wong, and H. Kwok, “Coupling efficiency enhancement in organic light-emitting devices using microlens array-theory and experiment,” J. Display Technol. 1(2), 278–282 (2005). [CrossRef]

10.

Y. Sun and S. Forrest, “Organic light emitting devices with enhanced outcoupling via microlenses fabricated by imprint lithography,” J. Appl. Phys. 100(7), 073106 (2006). [CrossRef]

11.

B. C. Krummacher, M. K. Mathai, V. Choong, S. A. Choulis, F. So, and A. Winnacker, “General method to evaluate substrate surface modification techniques for light extraction enhancement of organic light emitting diodes,” J. Appl. Phys. 100(5), 054702 (2006). [CrossRef]

12.

H. Greiner, “Light Extraction from Organic Light Emitting Diode Substrates: Simulation and Experiment,” Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 46(No. 7A), 4125–4137 (2007). [CrossRef]

13.

H.-C. Chen, J.-H. Lee, C.-C. Shiau, C. C. Yang, and Y.-W. Kiang, “Electromagnetic Modeling of Organic Light-Emitting Devices,” J. Lightwave Technol. 24(6), 2450–2457 (2006). [CrossRef]

14.

H. Y. Lin, Y.-H. Ho, J.-H. Lee, K.-Y. Chen, J.-H. Fang, S.-C. Hsu, M.-K. Wei, H. Y. Lin, J. H. Tsai, and T. C. Wu, “Patterned microlens array for efficiency improvement of small-pixelated organic light-emitting devices,” Opt. Express 16(15), 11044–11051 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

15.

K. Neyts, “Simulation of light emission from thin-film microcavities,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 15(4), 962–971 (1998). [CrossRef]

16.

M.-H. Lu and J. C. Sturm, “External coupling efficiency in planar organic light-emitting devices,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 78(13), 1927–1929 (2001). [CrossRef]

17.

T. Nakamura, N. Tsutsumi, N. Juni, and H. Fujii, “Improvement of coupling-out efficiency in organic electroluminescent devices by addition of a diffusive layer,” J. Appl. Phys. 96(11), 6016–6022 (2004). [CrossRef]

OCIS Codes
(080.3630) Geometric optics : Lenses
(230.3990) Optical devices : Micro-optical devices

ToC Category:
Optical Devices

History
Original Manuscript: October 26, 2009
Revised Manuscript: January 16, 2010
Manuscript Accepted: January 20, 2010
Published: February 1, 2010

Citation
Kuan-Yu Chen, Yung-Ting Chang, Yu-Hsuan Ho, Hoang-Yan Lin, Jiun-Haw Lee, and Mao-Kuo Wei, "Emitter apodization dependent angular luminance enhancement of microlens-array film attached organic light-emitting devices," Opt. Express 18, 3238-3243 (2010)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-18-4-3238


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. A. Chutinan, K. Ishihara, T. Asano, M. Fujita, and S. Noda, “Theoretical analysis on light-extraction efficiency of organic light-emitting diodes using FDTD and mode-expansion methods,” Org. Electron. 6(1), 3–9 (2005). [CrossRef]
  2. C.-L. Lin, H.-C. Chang, K.-C. Tien, and C.-C. Wu, “Influences of resonant wavelengths on performances of microcavity organic light-emitting devices,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 90(7), 071111 (2007). [CrossRef]
  3. A. Dodabalapur, L. J. Rothberg, R. H. Jordan, T. M. Miller, R. E. Slusher, and J. M. Phillips, “Physics and applications of organic microcavity light emitting diodes,” J. Appl. Phys. 80(12), 6954–6964 (1996). [CrossRef]
  4. H. Riel, S. Karg, T. Beierlein, W. Ries, and K. Neyts, “Tuning the emission characteristics of top-emitting organic light-emitting devices by means of a dielectric capping layer: An experimental and theoretical study,” J. Appl. Phys. 94(8), 5290–5296 (2003). [CrossRef]
  5. M.-K. Wei and I.-L. Su, “Method to evaluate the enhancement of luminance efficiency in planar OLED light emitting devices for microlens array,” Opt. Express 12(23), 5777–5782 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. L. Lin, T. Shia, and C. Chiu, “Silicon-processed plastic micropyramids for brightness enhancement applications,” J. Micromech. Microeng. 10(3), 395–400 (2000). [CrossRef]
  7. T. Tsutsui, M. Yahiro, H. Yokogawa, K. Kawano, and M. Yokoyama, “Doubling Coupling-Out Efficiency in Organic Light-Emitting Devices Using a Thin Silica Aerogel Layer,” Adv. Mater. 13(15), 1149–1152 (2001). [CrossRef]
  8. Y. J. Lee, S. H. Kim, J. Huh, G. H. Kim, Y. H. Lee, S. H. Cho, Y. C. Kim, and Y. R. Do, “A high-extraction-efficiency nanopatterned organic light-emitting diode,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 82(21), 3779–3781 (2003). [CrossRef]
  9. H. Peng, Y. Ho, X. Yu, M. Wong, and H. Kwok, “Coupling efficiency enhancement in organic light-emitting devices using microlens array-theory and experiment,” J. Display Technol. 1(2), 278–282 (2005). [CrossRef]
  10. Y. Sun and S. Forrest, “Organic light emitting devices with enhanced outcoupling via microlenses fabricated by imprint lithography,” J. Appl. Phys. 100(7), 073106 (2006). [CrossRef]
  11. B. C. Krummacher, M. K. Mathai, V. Choong, S. A. Choulis, F. So, and A. Winnacker, “General method to evaluate substrate surface modification techniques for light extraction enhancement of organic light emitting diodes,” J. Appl. Phys. 100(5), 054702 (2006). [CrossRef]
  12. H. Greiner, “Light Extraction from Organic Light Emitting Diode Substrates: Simulation and Experiment,” Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 46(No. 7A), 4125–4137 (2007). [CrossRef]
  13. H.-C. Chen, J.-H. Lee, C.-C. Shiau, C. C. Yang, and Y.-W. Kiang, “Electromagnetic Modeling of Organic Light-Emitting Devices,” J. Lightwave Technol. 24(6), 2450–2457 (2006). [CrossRef]
  14. H. Y. Lin, Y.-H. Ho, J.-H. Lee, K.-Y. Chen, J.-H. Fang, S.-C. Hsu, M.-K. Wei, H. Y. Lin, J. H. Tsai, and T. C. Wu, “Patterned microlens array for efficiency improvement of small-pixelated organic light-emitting devices,” Opt. Express 16(15), 11044–11051 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. K. Neyts, “Simulation of light emission from thin-film microcavities,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 15(4), 962–971 (1998). [CrossRef]
  16. M.-H. Lu and J. C. Sturm, “External coupling efficiency in planar organic light-emitting devices,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 78(13), 1927–1929 (2001). [CrossRef]
  17. T. Nakamura, N. Tsutsumi, N. Juni, and H. Fujii, “Improvement of coupling-out efficiency in organic electroluminescent devices by addition of a diffusive layer,” J. Appl. Phys. 96(11), 6016–6022 (2004). [CrossRef]

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.

Figures

Fig. 1 Fig. 2 Fig. 3
 

« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited