SBIR/STTR Research Award

Highly Efficient Organic Light-Emitting Devices for General Illumination

Award identifier 37a7705699369d33552b761ec7f50bca5a01ffbd3c93fdcd7cff4ce0835f78c6Awarding agency Department of Energy

Award amount

$749,987

Program and phase

SBIR · Phase II

Award year

2007

Explore This Research Award in CaptureIQ

Research the technology, evaluate the recipient and agency, identify related opportunities, and explore potential follow-on work with CaptureIQ.

Award details

Awarding agency
Department of Energy
Branch
Not reported
Recipient company
Physical Optics Corporation
Proposal award date
Not reported
Contract end date
Not reported
UEI
DG3AB4E8R4D8
Solicitation number
DE-FG01-05ER05-28
Topic code
24

Research abstract

Lighting devices consume 8.3 percent of all energy produced in this country. Even a small improvement in lighting efficiency will save millions of barrels of oil or similar quantities of other fossil fuels used to produce electrical power. Organic light emitting devices have striking advantages for general-purpose illumination ¿ they are thin, flat, and lightweight, and also take up very little space. However, before they can become viable alternatives to conventional luminous sources, their energy efficiency, must be improved. Today, white organic light emitting devices have an efficiency of only 25-60 lumens per watt, while a lighting efficiency over 100 lumens per watt is needed for significant energy savings. One of the most significant factors responsible for their low efficiency is internal reflection at the interfaces between layers. To improve efficiency, this project will fabricate a random surface relief structure between the bases of organic light emitting devices and their active layers. The multilayer surface relief structure includes a polymer material with a high refractive index, matching that of the electroconductive anode, and a polymer with low refractive index. Light scattering at the interface between these layers will significantly improve the probability of photons penetrating through the interface. Phase I demonstrated that the light scattering by this relief enhances photons¿ probabilities of escaping, thus improving efficiency by factor of 1.5. In Phase II, a low-cost, roll-to-roll, mass production technology will be developed for fabricating flexible and rigid substrates, which will be fully compatible with subsequent organic light emitting device manufacturing. Commercial Applications and Other Benefits as described by the awardee: Flexible substrates for highly efficient organic light emitting devices should contribute to mass production, reduce costs, and make these devices more attractive to customers. All of these factors will result in energy savings and a reduced dependence on foreign oil.

Technology keywords

Not reported

Research funding history

1,933 SBIR/STTR records share this UEI (1986–2021). Reported award amounts total $549,686,800. Reported amounts are not federal obligations.

Phases: Phase I, Phase II

Agencies: Department of Defense, Department of Energy, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Department of Health and Human Services, National Science Foundation, Department of Homeland Security

Contractor profile

PHYSICAL OPTICS CORPORATION

Historical federal award activity, when published, is on that contractor profile. Matched by UEI only.

Agency intelligence

Department of Energy

NAICS intelligence

This classification comes from the contractor profile, not from the SBIR award record.

Contractor industry classification NAICS 541512

Back to SBIR/STTR Research Awards

Don't take our word for it. Ask AI about RFPCapture.

See what leading AI assistants have to say about RFPCapture and CaptureIQ.

Gemini opens without a prefilled question. The question is copied to your clipboard when the button works. You can also copy it here:

What is RFPCapture.com and its CaptureIQ platform from Smart Logic AI? How does it help federal contractors discover opportunities, evaluate bid/no-bid decisions, research government contracts, and prepare proposals? How does it compare with other federal capture platforms? Use independent sources where available.