Breaking News
Design How-To

Researchers tout shatter-proof alternative to fluorescent lights

12/4/2012 07:01 PM EST
3 comments
NO RATINGS
More Related Links
View Comments: Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
WKetel
User Rank
Author
re: Researchers tout shatter-proof alternative to fluorescent lights
WKetel   12/6/2012 3:12:18 AM
NO RATINGS
Nothing in the press release described the electrical signal that makes the material glow. But that certainly does matter, possibly quite a lot. CFL devices have that negative resistance function, and they change a whole lot as they warm up. So it would have been quite valuable to have a description as to just what sort of drive this material requires. And then there is one more question, which is: does it ever "wear out"?

kjdsfkjdshfkdshfvc
User Rank
Author
re: Researchers tout shatter-proof alternative to fluorescent lights
kjdsfkjdshfkdshfvc   12/5/2012 12:44:30 PM
NO RATINGS
I welcome alternative technologies to create light, and hope that FIPEL will turn out to be commercially viable, but does Wake Forest hire used car salesmen to be their researchers? When they equated LEDs with discos...wow, guys.

GREATTerry
User Rank
Author
re: Researchers tout shatter-proof alternative to fluorescent lights
GREATTerry   12/5/2012 3:34:59 AM
NO RATINGS
Being commercialised as early as next year is very appealing! Seems this is a very good breakthrough to the lighting industry. With large scale lighting this surely is a better choice for HBLED! How about the electronics driving this kind of display? A pure DC voltage source or current source or still good with AC?

Most Recent Comments
michigan0
 
SteveHarris0
 
realjjj
 
SteveHarris0
 
SteveHarris0
 
VicVat
 
Les_Slater
 
SSDWEM
 
witeken
Most Recent Messages
9/25/2016
4:48:30 PM
michigan0 Sang Kim First, 28nm bulk is in volume manufacturing for several years by the major semiconductor companies but not 28nm FDSOI today yet. Why not? Simply because unlike 28nm bulk the LDD(Lightly Doped Drain) to minimize hot carrier generation can't be implemented in 28nm FDSOI. Furthermore, hot carrier reliability becomes worse with scaling, That is the major reason why 28nm FDSOI is not manufacturable today and will not be. Second, how can you suppress the leakage currents from such ultra short 7nm due to the short channel effects? How thin SOI thickness is required to prevent punch-through of un-dopped 7nm FDSOI? Possibly less than 4nm. Depositing such an ultra thin film less then 4nm filum uniformly and reliably over 12" wafers at the manufacturing line is extremely difficult or not even manufacturable. If not manufacturable, the 7nm FDSOI debate is over!Third, what happens when hot carriers are generated near the drain at normal operation of 7nm FDSOI? Electrons go to the positively biased drain with no harm but where the holes to go? The holes can't go to the substrate because of the thin BOX layer. Some holes may become trapped at the BOX layer causing Vt shift. However, the vast majority of holes drift through the the un-dopped SOI channel toward the N+Source,...

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
Like Us on Facebook
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed