JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSICS

VOLUME 86, NUMBER 8

15 OCTOBER 1999

Transparent stacked organic light emitting devices. II.

Device performance and applications to displays
G. Gu, G. Parthasarathy, P. Tian, P. E. Burrows, and S. R. Forrest
Center for Photonics and Optoelectronic Materials, Department of Electrical Engineering
and Princeton Materials Institute, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey 08544

Received 28 May 1999; accepted for publication 12 July 1999

Vertical stacking of organic light emitting devices OLEDs that emit the three primary colors is
shown to be a means for achieving efficient and bright full-color displays. In Paper I, we addressed
stacked OLED SOLED design and fabrication principles to optimize emission colors, operating
voltage, and efficiency. Here, we present results on two different metal-containing and metal-free
cathode SOLED structures that exhibit performance suitable for many full-color display
applications. The operating voltages at 10 mA/cm2 corresponding to video display brightnesses are
6.8, 8.5, and 12.1 V for the red R, green G, and blue B elements of the metal-containing
SOLED, respectively. The respective subpixel luminous efficiencies are 0.53, 1.44, and 1.52 cd/A,
and the Commission Internationale de LEclairage CIE chromaticity coordinates are 0.72, 0.28,
0.42, 0.56, and 0.20, 0.22. In the high transparency metal-free SOLED, an insulating layer was
inserted between the two upper subpixels to allow for independent grounding of all color emitters
in the stack. At operating voltages of 1214 V, video display brightnesses were achieved with
luminous efficiencies of 0.35, 1.36, and 1.05 cd/A for the R, G, and B subpixels, respectively. The
respective CIE coordinates for R, G, and B emissions are 0.72, 0.28, 0.26, 0.63, and 0.17, 0.28
in the normal viewing direction, shifting inperceptibly as the viewing angle is increased to as large
as 60. Finally, we discuss addressing schemes of SOLED displays, and compare them with other
strategies for achieving full-color, OLED-based displays. 1999 American Institute of Physics.
S0021-89799903220-X

I. INTRODUCTION

In this paper we describe the fabrication and characterization of two example SOLEDs using metal-containing and
metal-free transparent contacts. This paper Paper II is organized as follows: Sec. II presents a semitransparent, low
operating voltage, metal-containing SOLED, and Sec. III describes a high-transparency metal-free SOLED MFSOLED with independently grounded subpixels. Section IV
provides a discussion of the relative performance of metalfree and metal-containing SOLEDs, and considers the issues
inherent in using these devices in full-color displays based
on the characteristics obtained in this study. Finally, a summary is presented in Sec. V.

Organic light emitting devices OLEDs1 have shown

sufficient brightness,2,3 range of color,2 and operational
lifetime4 for use in full-color, emissive flat panel displays.3,5
Among the potential strategies3,5 for making such full-color
displays, one approach uses vertically stacked red R, green
G, and blue B emitting OLEDs to form a pixel, leading to
a threefold increase in resolution and display fill factor compared to the traditional side-by-side subpixel arrangement.3,5
Organic layers in OLEDs are often highly transparent
over their own emission bands and throughout the visible
spectrum, allowing for the fabrication of transparent OLEDs
TOLEDs68 that are necessary components in the stacked
OLED SOLED architecture. The emission from a subpixel
can be transmitted through the adjacent ones in the stack
provided that transparent electrodes with appropriate carrier
injection properties are available. Both metal-containing and
metal-free transparent compound electrodes have been previously demonstrated, and were the subject of Paper I.9
While a metal-containing transparent cathode consists of a
very thin 100 metal film capped with an indiumtin
oxide ITO overlayer sputter deposited at room
temperature,6 a metal-free cathode uses a high-transparency,
thin organic electron injection layer in place of the metal
film.8 In a SOLED, the ITO overlayer of the transparent
cathode of a lower subpixel also serves as the anode for an
upper subpixel deposited onto its surface.
0021-8979/99/86(8)/4076/9/$15.00

II. A SEMITRANSPARENT SOLED USING THIN

METAL FILM CATHODES

Using the sputtered ITO anode with improved hole injection described in Paper I,9 we fabricated a full-color semitransparent SOLED as follows: A glass substrate
commercially10 precoated with a thin film of ITO was
cleaned and photolithographically patterned to form the anode for the bottom, red-emitting subpixel. The anode was
then treated for 2 min in a 31 W rf oxygen plasma, followed
by sequential deposition of the organic and contact layers
shown in Table I. All organic and thin Mg:Ag films were
thermally evaporated in a vacuum of 106 Torr. The ITO
layers were sputtered at 5 W rf power from a 2-in.-diam
target using 99.9999% pure Ar at a flow rate of 150 sccm.
For deposition of the last 100 of the middle ITO layers,
4076

1999 American Institute of Physics

Downloaded 04 Jul 2011 to 139.82.146.123. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions

Gu et al.

J. Appl. Phys., Vol. 86, No. 8, 15 October 1999

4077

TABLE I. Layer structure of the full-color metal-containing SOLED.

Layer
number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

Function

Material

Thickness

Substrate
Bottom anode
HTL
Red emitting ETL
ETL
Transparent contact

Glass
1.1mm
Commercial ITO
1600
-NPD
500
Alq3 :PtOEP 9% by mass
400
Alq3
100
Mg:Ag 9:1 by mass
100
Sputtered ITO
550
Hole injection layer CuPc
50
HTL
-NPD
500
450
Blue emitting ETL
Alq2OPh
ETL
Alq3
150
Transparent contact Mg:Ag
100
Sputtered ITO
550
Hole injection layer CuPc
50
HTL
-NPD
500
Green emitting ETL Alq3 :DMQA 1% by mass 400
ETL
Alq3
150
Transparent contact Mg:Ag
100
Sputtered ITO
550

99.99% pure O2 was added to the sputter gas, first at a rate of

0.2 sccm, and subsequently increased to 1.0 sccm for deposition of the final 20 . Discrete red, blue, and green emitting TOLEDs were deposited as controls on precoated ITO
anodes simultaneously with the growth of the bottom,
middle, and top subpixels, respectively.
Due to the relatively low sensitivity of the eye to the 2,
3, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17, 18-octaethyl-21H,23H-porphine
platinum11 PtOEP emission peaked at wavelength
650 ), the red subpixel was placed at the bottom of the
stack to ensure adequate brightness and luminous efficiency.
Calculations using the microcavity model9 show, however,
that the optimal element ordering to minimize color distortion is red top/blue middle/green bottom. Hence, the
layer thicknesses and ordering as shown in Table I are determined by making a tradeoff between a high luminous efficiency and the desired chromaticity. This device is referred
to as SOLED 1.

FIG. 1. Current density vs voltage characteristics of SOLED 1. Inset: Optical transmission, reflection, and absorption spectra of this device.

The forward biased current density vs voltage (J V)

characteristics of the three subpixels are shown in Fig. 1. The
drive voltages required to obtain a current density of 10
mA/cm2 corresponding to video display brightnesses, see
Table II are only 6.8 and 8.5 V for the red and green stacked
elements, respectively, as compared to 7.0 and 8.3 V for the
respective control TOLEDs. The drive voltage to achieve the
same current density is 12.1 V for the blue subpixel, comparable to 11.6 V for the blue-emitting control TOLED. All
three subpixels exhibited significant improvement in the operating voltage relative to previously demonstrated12,13
SOLEDs at 20 V, due to the use of excess O2 during the
final deposition stages of the intermediate ITO anodes.9 Both
the blue subpixel and control TOLED exhibit considerably
higher drive voltage than the other subpixels due to the use
of a double heterostructure and the blue-emitting electron
transport layer ETL material, bis-8-hydroxyquinaldine
aluminum phenoxide (Alq 2 OPh).
The transparent contacts for the lower and middle subpixels also serve as anodes for the OLEDs positioned immediately above them. Hence, we compared the blue subpixel
with a discrete blue-emitting OLED deposited on a room-

TABLE II. Performance of the full-color metal-containing SOLED.

Subpixel
Drive voltage V
at J10 mA/cm2
Substrate emission quantum
efficiency %
Total quantum
efficiency %
Luminance cd/m2 at
J10 mA/cm2
Luminous efficiency lm/W
at J10 mA/cm2
Luminous efficiency cd/A
CIE coordinates of substrate
normal emission
CIE coordinates of substrate
60 off-normal emission

Bottom, red
6.8

Middle, blue
12.1

Top, green
8.5

1.6

0.81

0.40

1.7

0.96

1.0

53
0.27

152
0.43

144
0.59

0.53
0.72,0.28

1.52
0.20,0.22

1.44
0.42,0.56

0.72,0.28

0.21,0.25

0.41,0.58

Downloaded 04 Jul 2011 to 139.82.146.123. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions

4078

J. Appl. Phys., Vol. 86, No. 8, 15 October 1999

Gu et al.

FIG. 2. Luminance vs current density characteristics of SOLED 1 subpixels

and control devices as measured through the substrate surface.

temperature sputtered ITO film using identical organic layers

employed in the subpixel, but with a 1500--thick Mg:Ag
cathode. The discrete device requires V10.7 V at J
10 mA/cm2, comparable to V12.1 V for the middle subpixel in the stack. Hence, the use of metal-containing, compound transparent contacts in SOLEDs does not lead to a
significant increase in operating voltages relative to those of
discrete OLEDs, consistent with observations reported in Paper I.9
Figure 2 shows the luminance versus current density
(L J) characteristics for the subpixels as measured from the
substrate surface, along with those of the discrete control
TOLEDs included for comparison. The quantum efficiencies
of the subpixels are listed in Table II, along with other performance characteristics of the SOLED. The top-to-bottom
emitted power ratios are 0.09:1, 0.19:1, and 1.6:1 for the red,
blue, and green subpixels, respectively. The ratios are low
for the two lower subpixels due to optical absorption by the
semitransparent contacts, consistent with the measured optical transmission of the completed SOLED shown in the inset
of Fig. 1. For the same reason, the stack elements are less
efficient than the control TOLEDs. The nonlinear behavior
of the L J curves for the red subpixel and control is due to
triplet annihlation at the emissive PtOEP phosphor sites. The
brightnesses and luminous efficiencies at J10 mA/cm2 are
also listed in Table II.
As shown in the inset of Fig. 1, the optical transmission,
T, of the SOLED is 10% between 625 and 750 nm, and
T10% at other visible wavelengths. From the peak transmission of T15% at 665 nm we infer that the absorption of a single Mg:Ag/ITO compound electrode is 41%,
considering the absorption of CuPc layers and the reflection
of the top ITO surface. This is consistent with the measured
value of 43% for a discrete TOLED see Fig. 5 of Paper I.9
Figures 3a and 3b show the normal and 60 offnormal emission spectra of the SOLED viewed through the
substrate, respectively, along with calculated fits using the
model described in Paper I.9 All three subpixels exhibit negligible angular dependence of emission colors, as indicated
by their Commission Internationale de LEclairage CIE
chromaticity coordinates listed in Table II. While reasonably

FIG. 3. The substrate normal and 60 off-normal emission spectra of

SOLED 1 with respective fits. a Normal emission. b 60 off-normal
emission.

saturated red and blue emissions are achieved, the green

emission is shifted to the yellow, due to microcavity effects
on the already yellowish emission of N,N-dimethyl quinacridone DMQA. The shoulder at 585 nm in the DMQA
emission spectrum14 is magnified by a microcavity resonance, resulting in a secondary emission peak. This can be
avoided by using a green lumophore with a shorter wavelength peak such as coumarine 6 (C6). The calculated fits
are close to the measured spectra, with discrepancy due to
errors in the refractive indices used in the fitting. These results confirm previous observations9 that the model is predictive and sufficiently accurate to be used in SOLED structure
design.
To examine the optimal pixel ordering that minimizes
color distortion, we fabricated a second SOLED SOLED 2
using similar layer compositions and thicknesses, but with
the bottom and top subpixels reversed from SOLED 1. The
electron transporting electroluminescence EL region of the
green subpixel consisted of a 500--thick undoped tris-8hydroxyquinoline aluminum (Alq3) film. The substrate normal and 45 off-normal emission spectra of SOLED 2 are
shown in Fig. 4. The CIE coordinates of the subpixel emissions are shown in Fig. 5, in comparison with those of
SOLED 1. Also shown are the CIE coordinates of an MFSOLED to be discussed in the following section. Better
green emission is achieved with SOLED 2 relative to
SOLED 1 due to the use of an optimized structure that mini-

Downloaded 04 Jul 2011 to 139.82.146.123. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions

Gu et al.

J. Appl. Phys., Vol. 86, No. 8, 15 October 1999

4079

FIG. 6. Equivalent circuit of SOLEDs. The driving circuit is symbolized as

batteries for simplicity. a A SOLED without insulating layers. b A
SOLED having an insulating layer between the top and middle subpixels.

FIG. 4. Emission spectra of SOLED 2 which uses the subpixel ordering

optimized for minimal color distortion. The bottom, middle, and top stack
elements emit in green, blue, and red, respectively.

mizes microcavity induced color distortion. However, the

quantum efficiency and brightness at J10 mA/cm2 of the
top, red subpixel of SOLED 2 are 0.11% and 3.6 cd/m2,
respectively, compared to 1.6% and 53 cd/m2 for the red
subpixel of SOLED 1 which was positioned at the bottom of
the stack. Hence, there is a tradeoff between optimum stacking to attain the best color versus the highest efficiency.
From these experiments, it is apparent that positioning the
red emitter at the bottom of the stack significantly increases
efficiency at a small penalty in color distortion of the various
subpixel emitters.
III. A HIGH-TRANSPARENCY METAL-FREE SOLED
WITH INDEPENDENTLY GROUNDED SUBPIXELS

To reduce optical absorption by contact layers and further suppress microcavity effects in SOLEDs, we also demonstrated full-color SOLEDs by incorporating metal-free
contacts.15,16 To elucidate SOLED structure design using the
microcavity model, we show in Fig. 1 of Paper I the structure
of a previously demonstrated MF-SOLED. The equivalent
circuit of that device is shown here in Fig. 6a, where the

FIG. 5. The Commission Internationale de LEclairage CIE chromaticity

coordinates of the metal-containing SOLEDs. Also shown for comparison
are those of a metal-free SOLED using a similar structure.

subpixels are represented by diode symbols, along with the

driving circuit symbolized as batteries for simplicity. Although one of the shared contacts can be used as the common ground, differential subpixel biasing is still required for
the second pair of adjacent subpixels, complicating the display drive circuit.3 An insulating layer inserted between two
subpixels is therefore desirable to simplify the SOLED drive
scheme.
A full-color MF-SOLED with an insulating layer inserted between two neighboring subpixels allows for independent ground referencing of all subpixels. Such a device
was fabricated using the layer compositions and thicknesses
defined in Table III. Figure 7 shows a simplified crosssection of this device, whose equivalent circuit is shown in
Fig. 6b. A thin film of bathocuproine BCP was used for
the electron injection layer EIL in the metal-free contacts in
place of copper phthalocyanine CuPc employed
previously.9,15 Here, BCP is transparent across the entire vis-

TABLE III. Layer structure of the high-transparency MF-SOLED.

Layer
number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Function

Material

Thickness

Substrate
Bottom anode
HTL
Red emitting ETL
ETL
Transparent contact

Glass
Commercial ITO
-NPD
Alq3 :PtOEP 9% by mass
Alq3
BCP
Sputtered ITO
CuPc
-NPD
Alq2OPh
Alq3
BCP
Sputtered ITO
Alq3
BCP
-NPD
Alq3
BCP
Sputtered ITO
CuPc
-NPD
Alq3:C6 1% by mass
Alq3
BCP
Sputtered ITO

1.1 mm
1600
400
400
100
60
400
50
400
400
150
60
400
200
100
400
400
80
400
50
400
400
100
60
400

Hole injection layer

HTL
Blue emitting ETL
ETL
Transparent contact
Insulating layer

Transparent contact
Hole injection layer
HTL
Green emitting ETL
ETL
Transparent contact

Downloaded 04 Jul 2011 to 139.82.146.123. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions

4080

Gu et al.

J. Appl. Phys., Vol. 86, No. 8, 15 October 1999

FIG. 7. A simplified cross-section of the high-transparency MF-SOLED

with independently grounded subpixels.

ible spectrum, thereby avoiding absorption in the yellow and

red due to the use of CuPc as the EIL material. The organic
insulating layer was chosen to efficiently block bipolar current leakage between the top two subpixels. The ITO cap
layer 13 of the middle subpixel cathode does not efficiently
inject electrons into the Alq3 layer layer 14 deposited onto
its surface, and the residual injected electrons are blocked by
the 4,4-bisN-1-napthyl-N-phenyl-aminobiphenyl NPD layer layer 16. The hole currents in both directions
are blocked17 by the two BCP films layers 15 and 18. Electrons injected from the ITO anode layer 19 of the top subpixel and transported through the second Alq3 film layer 17
are also blocked by the -NPD layer.
The light emitting region of the green subpixel consisted
of coumarine 6(C6) doped into Alq3 at (1.00.3)% by
mass. The layer thicknesses and subpixel ordering were determined prior to fabrication as discussed in Paper I. Fabrication procedures are similar to those for the SOLED described in the preceding section. Discrete red, blue, and
green emitting MF-TOLEDs were fabricated as controls on
precoated ITO anodes simultaneously with the growth of the
bottom, middle, and top subpixels, respectively.
Figures 8a and 8b show the forward and reverse biased J V characteristics of the subpixels, respectively. The
forward biased J V curves of the control devices are also
shown in Fig. 8a, indicating that the operating voltages of
the subpixels are comparable to those of the respective controls. The operating voltage at J10 mA/cm2 is listed along
with other performance properties in Table IV for each subpixel. The reverse biased current of 106 to 103 mA/cm2
is a limiting factor in the size of passive matrix addressed
displays, as discussed in Sec. IV. Note that in Fig. 6b the
insulating layer is connected in parallel with the middle
blue subpixel. Hence, the current densities for the blue subpixel shown in Figs. 8a and 8b are the sum of current
densities through the subpixel and the insulating layer. To
investigate the electrical properties of the insulating layer,
the forward and reverse biased J V characteristics of an
identical structure deposited separately are also shown in
Figs. 8a and 8b, respectively. Here, forward bias corresponds to the case where E 4 is positively biased relative to

FIG. 8. Forward a and reverse b biased current density vs voltage characteristics of the MF-SOLED subpixels, control devices, and the insulating
layer.

E 3 see Figs. 7b and 8. At typical operating voltages, the

current through the insulating layer is a negligible fraction of
the blue subpixel current. Under reverse bias, the leakage
current through the insulating layer is approximately three
orders of magnitude smaller than that through the blue subpixel. Hence, the insulating layer provides electrical isolation
under both forward and reverse biases.

TABLE IV. Performance of the high-transparency MF-SOLED.

Subpixel
Drive voltage V at
J10 mA/cm2
Luminance cd/m2 at
J10 mA/cm2
Luminous efficiency
lm/W J10 mA/cm2
Luminous efficiency cd/A
Top emission quantum
efficiency %
Total quantum
efficiency %
CIE coordinates of top
normal emission x, y
CIE coordinates top 60
off-normal emission x, y
a

Bottom, red
11.8
35

Middle, blue
13.9
105

Top, green
13.3
136

0.10

0.26

0.35

0.35a
1.1a

1.05
0.56

1.36
0.51

1.9a

1.1

0.75

0.72,0.28

0.17,0.28

0.26,0.63

0.72,0.28

0.17,0.25

0.23,0.64

Value at J10 mA/cm2.

Downloaded 04 Jul 2011 to 139.82.146.123. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions

J. Appl. Phys., Vol. 86, No. 8, 15 October 1999

Gu et al.

4081

FIG. 9. Luminance vs current density characteristics of the MF-SOLED

subpixels and control devices as measured through the top device surface.

Figure 9 shows the L J characteristics for the subpixels

as measured from the top device surface. The top emission
quantum efficiencies of the red bottom, blue middle, and
green top subpixels are 1.3%, 0.56%, and 0.51%, respectively. The top-to-substrate surface emitted optical power ratios for the bottom, middle, and top subpixels are 1.3:1,
2.1:1, and 1.1:1, respectively. Hence, the respective total external quantum efficiencies for the bottom, middle, and top
subpixels are 2.1%, 0.75%, and 1.1%, comparable with
1.7%, 0.81%, and 1.2% for the red-, blue-, and greenemitting control MF-TOLEDs. Figure 9 also shows, for comparison, the L J curves for the discrete control devices,
which emit approximately equal optical powers from both
top and substrate surfaces. Once again, the nonlinear behavior of the L J curves for the red subpixel and control is due
to saturation of emissive PtOEP phosphor sites.13 The luminance of each subpixel at J10 mA/cm2 is listed in Table IV
along with other performance parameters. Although the luminance for red emission is relatively low, 35 cd/m2 is sufficient to meet video display standards.18
Figure 10a and 10b show the normal and 60 offnormal emission spectra as viewed through the top contact,
respectively, along with corresponding fits using the model
described in Paper I.9 The green and blue emission spectra
show some shift and narrowing or broadening relative to the
corresponding PL spectra depending on the viewing angle as
predicted, indicative of weak microcavity effects resulting
primarily from the refractive index mismatches at the ITO
glass and ITOair interfaces. The green subpixel normal
emission spectrum contains a secondary peak at
530 nm, resulting from the emission of the undoped region
of the ETL, which is suppressed in the 60 off-normal direction. Once again, the discrepancy between the blue emission
spectra and corresponding fits is attributed to errors in the
refractive index data of the numerous layers. The red emission spectra do not show an angular dependence due to the
narrow emission peak of PtOEP.
The CIE chromaticity coordinates of the red, blue, and
green subpixels are 0.72, 0.28, 0.17, 0.28, and 0.26,
0.63 for top normal emission, and 0.72, 0.28, 0.17, 0.25,
and 0.23, 0.64 for top 60 off-normal emission, indicating a
minimal perceptible change of colors over a large variation

FIG. 10. Top emission spectra of the MF-SOLED in the normal and 60
off-normal directions.

in viewing angle. Figure 5 shows the CIE coordinates of the

top normal and 60 off-normal emission of this device, along
with those of the two metal-containing SOLEDs discussed in
Sec. II. Improved green emission was achieved by using C6
as the lumophore in contrast to DMQA and undoped Alq3
used in the metal-containing SOLEDs.
The device transparency is significantly improved compared to SOLED 1 and the previously demonstrated MFSOLED using CuPc in the metal-free contacts.15 Figure 11
shows the optical transmission, reflection, and absorption of
this device. The device is 50% transparent at 430 nm,
and is between 60% and 80% transparent throughout most of
the visible spectral region. Residual loss results from Fresnel

FIG. 11. Optical transmission, reflection, and absorption of the independently driven MF-SOLED using BCP in the metal-free contact.

Downloaded 04 Jul 2011 to 139.82.146.123. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions

4082

Gu et al.

J. Appl. Phys., Vol. 86, No. 8, 15 October 1999

A. Metal-free versus metal-containing SOLEDs

reflections from the top ITO surface, and absorption between

600 and 700 nm due to CuPc thin films used as hole
injection layers in the upper two subpixels. Also, at short
wavelengths
(450 nm),
absorption
of
tris-8hydroxyquinoline aluminum (Alq3) 19 becomes apparent.
Photographs of an MF-SOLED emitting in red, blue,
green, and white are shown in Figs. 12a12d, respectively. The white emission was obtained by turning on all
three subpixels, showing the ability to emit mixed colors
from a single stacked pixel. A second MF-SOLED, which
was not turned on, is also shown in the photographs, clearly
illustrating the device transparency.

Compared to metal-containing SOLEDs, the MFSOLED emission spectra are less affected by microcavity
resonances due to weaker reflections at the contacts. On the
other hand, metal-containing SOLEDs exhibit lower operating voltages relative to MF-SOLEDs due to better electron
injection properties of the former devices. Discrete metalcontaining TOLEDs also have higher efficiencies than their
metal-free counterparts, while the metal-free contacts provide for a lower optical absorption that results in a higher
relative efficiency. Hence, as shown in Secs. II and III, the
external quantum efficiencies of both types of SOLEDs are
comparable.
Due to the low optical transmission of the metalcontaining compound contacts and the relatively low sensitivity of the eye to deep red and blue colors, the red and blue
subpixels of a metal-containing SOLED usually have to be
placed close to the viewing side, sometimes differing from
the optimal subpixel ordering required to minimize microcavity effects. In SOLED 1 discussed in Sec. II, the green
emission was distorted by microcavity resonances as a result
of using a subpixel stacking order that maximizes luminous
efficiency of the red element. SOLED 2 was fabricated using
the layer compositions and thicknesses required by microcavity calculations and hence emits better green color see
Fig. 5. Although the blue emission of the MF-SOLED is
less saturated than that of the SOLEDs, it is closer to the PL
spectrum of Alq2OPh due to the weakening of microcavity
effects resulting from higher contact transparency. For the
same reason, it also exhibits a weaker angular dependence. A
larger color gamut can be achieved using lumophores emitting more saturated colors.
The subpixel far from the viewing side of an MFSOLED has sufficient brightness and luminous efficiency for
video display applications due to the high transparency of the
metal-free contacts. In addition, a recently demonstrated
TOLED20 using Ca in the compound transparent cathode in
place of Mg:Ag was 75% transparent throughout the visible spectrum. The operating voltage of that device was 5.9
V at J10 mA/cm2, comparable to that of a TOLED using
Mg:Ag in the transparent cathode. With such hightransparency Ca-based contacts, both high luminous efficiency and minimal color distortion can be achieved using
metal-containing SOLEDs.
In summary, while the efficiency of the metal-containing
SOLED is comparable to that of MF-SOLED due to competition between the relatively high internal efficiency and high
contact absorption in the former structure, tradeoffs between
high luminous efficiency, and weak color distortion in many
cases must be made in the design of such devices.

IV. DISCUSSION

B. Impact of leakage current on SOLED performance

Given the results of the preceding sections, we now

compare the metal-containing and metal-free SOLEDs, discuss addressing issues particular to full-color displays based
on the results obtained here, and consider the efficiency of
the SOLED emission in the context of alternative strategies
for achieving full-color OLED-based displays.

In past work, we have considered methods for addressing SOLED arrays in a display format.3 Here, we consider
the performance of such displays based on the experimental
results presented above. The passive PM and active matrix
AM addressing schemes for an N(columns)M (rows)
full-color, SOLED-based display are identical to those used

FIG. 12. Photographs of a high-transparency MF-SOLED emitting in red

a, blue b, green c, and white d. Another identical MF-SOLED, which
was not turned on, is also shown in the photographs, manifesting the device
transparency.

Downloaded 04 Jul 2011 to 139.82.146.123. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions

Gu et al.

J. Appl. Phys., Vol. 86, No. 8, 15 October 1999

4083

quired to obtain such a current density. By using Figs. 8a

and 8b, we obtain V on7 V and J rev(V max2Von)
0.002 mA/cm2, which is only slightly higher than that of a
conventional OLED cf. Fig. 9, Paper I. The numbers of
columns and gray levels are therefore limited by NN g
(1/3)10/0.0021.7103 . Hence, the number of columns is limited to N100 for a 48-row PM array that displays 16 gray levels.
FIG. 13. a Circuit diagram of a PM SOLED array. b Equivalent circuit
of a PM SOLED array when only one subpixel is selected in the addressed
row.

for a 3NM monochrome display, provided that each subpixel is independently referenced to ground with the same
polarity. This can be accomplished by inserting an insulating
layer between each pair of adjacent subpixels. A PM SOLED
array is constructed as in Fig. 13a where only one pixel is
shown in each row, and current sources I B , I M , and I T correspond to the column drive circuits for the bottom, middle,
and top subpixels, respectively. If only one insulating layer is
used in each SOLED e.g., between the middle and top subpixels as discussed in Sec. III, the polarity of I M must be
inverted, complicating the drive circuits to some extent. In
the case of AM addressing, two insulating layers are required
to achieve simple, practical pixel designs using only one type
p or n of transistor.3
OLED leakage currents ultimately limit the scale of a
PM addressed array. The maximum total leakage current
max
, occurs when only one OLED is addressed to
density, J leak
full brightness and all the others are turned off. In this case
the PM array can be represented by the equivalent circuit
shown in Fig. 13b. Now, for a display with N g gray levels,
max
J max /Ng should be satisfied, where J max
the condition J leak
is the drive current density corresponding to the full brightness at drive voltage, V max . In the equivalent circuit shown
in Fig. 13b, the voltages across the column- and rowselected OLEDs are clamped at V on , with the extra voltage,
V maxVon , dropped across the nonselected OLEDs.3 The
leakage current density J for M ,N1 is cf. Eq. 16, Ref.
3
J V max /J rev V max2V on 3M NN g .

We apply this criterion to examine the limits of a PM

MF-SOLED display based on the device characteristics discussed in Sec. III. Although the currentvoltage (I V) characteristics differ from subpixel to subpixel, we use those of
the top, green subpixel which exhibits the highest forward
and reverse leakage current see Fig. 8. Assuming the current density required to achieve video display brightness,
L d 100 cd/m2, is J 0 , the addressed subpixel must be driven
to an instantaneous luminance of M L d , corresponding to a
drive current density of M J 0 . Inequality 1 therefore becomes
J 0 /J rev V max2V on 3NN g .
2

Now, J480 mA/cm is required to achieve M L d

4800 cd/m2 for for a 48-row PM array if J 0 10 mA/cm2
see Table IV. Figure 8a shows that V max20 V is re-

C. Optical losses in SOLED displays

For metal-containing SOLEDs, optical losses are primarily due to the absorption of the thin metal films. In the case
of MF-SOLEDs, the residual absorption of the metal-free
contacts contributes to the optical loss, especially when absorptive materials such as CuPc are employed to form the
EIL of the transparent contact. In both metal-containing and
metal-free SOLEDs, absorptive hole injection layers HILs
may be employed to assist injection from the room
temperature-sputtered ITO anodes into the overlying organic
layers. Here, we study the optical loss in semitransparent
SOLEDs by assuming that each subpixel is an isotropic emitter, and ignore reflections by the contacts.
Define the relative efficiency, r , as the ratio of the
optical power of an element in a full color pixel to that emitted by a discrete, monochromatic OLED. The transmission
of the contact, including absorption from the HIL, is T. For
substrate viewed transparent SOLEDs, the relative efficiencies for the bottom B, middle M, and top T subpixels
are obtained by summing the light emitted in the downward
direction from each element, viz.: rB 1/2, rM T/2, and
rT T 2 /2. Similarly, the relative efficiencies for a top
viewed SOLED are: rB T 3 /2, rM T 2 /2, and rT T/2.
Substrate viewing is usually preferred for metal-containing,
semitransparent SOLEDs to minimize color distortion
caused by microcavity effects. Assuming T50%, typical
for metal-containing compound electrodes using Mg:Ag thin
films, we obtain: rB 50%, rM 25%, and rT 13%. If
Ca is used,20 T75%, giving rB 50%, rM 38%, and
rT 28%. In the case of MF-SOLEDs, top viewing is usually preferred. Assuming T90% for metal-free contacts,
then rB 36%, rM 41%, and rT 45%.
While the efficiencies of transparent SOLEDs as measured from the viewing side are lower than those of conventional OLEDs due to the two-sided emission of the former
device, the total external quantum efficiencies of the MFSOLED subpixels are comparable with those of conventional
OLEDs. Conventional OLEDs use reflecting metal cathodes,
resulting in low contrast5 under the ambient illuminance
specified by ANSI standards for video displays.18 A circular
polarizer, therefore, is often placed in front of the display to
achieve high contrast, leading to an optical power loss of
50%. On the other hand, high contrast can be achieved for
transparent SOLEDs by placing an absorbing background
behind the display. By this means, both back-propagating
emission and transmitted ambient light are absorbed. For the
high-transparency MF-SOLED presented here, the viewing
side efficiency is greater than half of the total efficiency.
Assuming equal forward and backward emission and a 40%

Downloaded 04 Jul 2011 to 139.82.146.123. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions

4084

Gu et al.

J. Appl. Phys., Vol. 86, No. 8, 15 October 1999

polarizer efficiency, the metal-containing SOLED subpixel

relative efficiencies of 12.5%50% are equivalent to 31%
100% for strategies using nontransparent devices. Similarly
for MF-SOLEDs, relative efficiencies of 36%45% are
equivalent to 90%100% for methods employing nontransparent OLEDs. Hence, the use of transparent SOLEDs does
not introduce significant power losses as compared to other
strategies using conventional OLEDs in conjunction with circular polarizers.
V. SUMMARY

Vertical stacking of transparent OLEDs is a promising

scheme to achieve high-resolution full-color displays. We
have demonstrated both metal-containing and metal-free
SOLEDs with adequate performance for many display applications. Subpixel operating voltages required to achieve
video display brightnesses have been dramatically reduced
compared to earlier reports by modifying the ITO surfaces of
the intermediate contacts during deposition. Microcavity effects that distort emission colors have been thoroughly studied and quantitatively modeled in Paper I. The model is employed to determine constituent layer thicknesses and
subpixel ordering that minimize microcavity effects. Furthermore, microcavity effects are suppressed by replacing reflective metallic contacts with metal-free contacts. Using such
highly transparent contacts, a device transparency of 60%
80% has been achieved, resulting in negligible optical power
loss of the subpixel emission. A MF-SOLED with all subpixels biased relative to a common ground has been demonstrated by inserting an insulating layer between two subpixels, eliminating the requirement for complex differential
drive schemes.
By examining SOLED performance in the context of
display addressing, we found that a full-color SOLED-based
PM display is currently limited by the reverse leakage currents of the subpixels to relatively small pixel counts
48 rows96 columns for a display with only 16 gray
levels, while larger AM displays can be achieved. MFSOLEDs are found to have very low absorption and reflection, leading to high external efficiencies and weak microcavity effects. The electron injection properties of metal-free
transparent contacts, however, lead to relatively high operating voltages.
The SOLED scheme involves no inherent sacrifice in
display performance such as high power loss or small view-

ing angle encountered in side-by-side pixel configurations.

Furthermore, the SOLED architecture provides for compact
pixel size, high-resolution, and high fill factor when compared to other full-color strategies. Hence, the SOLEDs can
provide a practical approach to achieving high-resolution,
full-color flat panel displays.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors thank Dr. T. X. Zhou and S. Y. Mao of

Universal Display Corporation UDC for technical assistance. We also acknowledge UDC and DARPA for their support of this work.
C. W. Tang and S. A. VanSlyke, Appl. Phys. Lett. 51, 913 1987.
C. W. Tang, Society for Information Display, International Symposium
Digest of Technical Papers, Vol. 27, 181 1996
3
G. Gu and S. R. Forrest, IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron. 4, 83
1998.
4
S. A. VanSlyke, C. H. Chen, and C. W. Tang, Appl. Phys. Lett. 69, 2160
1996.
5
P. E. Burrows, G. Gu, V. Bulovic, S. R. Forrest, and M. E. Thompson,
IEEE Trans. Electron Devices 44, 1188 1997.
6
G. Gu, V. Bulovic, P. E. Burrows, S. R. Forrest, and M. E. Thompson,
Appl. Phys. Lett. 68, 2606 1996.
7
V. Bulovic, G. Gu, P. E. Burrows, S. R. Forrest, and M. E. Thompson,
Nature London 380, 29 1996.
8
G. Parthasarathy, P. E. Burrows, V. Khalfin, V. G. Kozlov, and S. R.
Forrest, Appl. Phys. Lett. 72, 2138 1998.
9
G. Gu, G. Parthasarathy, P. E. Burrows, P. Tian, I. Hill, A. Kahn, and S.
R. Forrest, J. Appl. Phys. 86, 4067 1999, preceding paper.
10
Donnelley Applied Films Corp., 6797-T Winchester Circle, Boulder, CO
80301.
11
M. Baldo, D. F. OBrien, Y. You, A. Shoustikov, S. Sibley, M. E.
Thompson, and S. R. Forrest, Nature London 395, 151 1998.
12
P. E. Burrows, V. Khalfin, G. Gu, and S. R. Forrest, Appl. Phys. Lett. 73,
142 1998.
13
Z. Shen, P. E. Burrows, V. Bulovic, S. R. Forrest, and M. E. Thompson,
Science 276, 2009 1997.
14
J. Shi and C. W. Tang, US Patent No. 5,593,788 1997.
15
G. Gu, G. Parthasarathy, and S. R. Forrest, Appl. Phys. Lett. 73, 2399
1998.
16
G. Parthasarathy, G. Gu, and S. R. Forrest, Adv. Mater. 11, 907 1999.
17
V. Bulovic, R. Deshpande, M. Thompson, and S. R. Forrest, Chem. Phys.
Lett. 308, 317 1999.
18
Human Factors Engineering of Visual Display Terminal Workstation,
ANSI/HFS-100: 1988, Human Factors Soc. unpublished.
19
P. E. Burrows, Z. Shen, V. Bulovic, D. M. McCarty, S. R. Forrest, J. A.
Cronin, and M. E. Thompson, J. Appl. Phys. 79, 7991 1996.
20
P. E. Burrows, S. R. Forrest, T. X. Zhou, and J. J. Brown, 2nd International Conference on Electroluminescence from Molecular Material and
Related Phenomena, Abstracts Paper Fr-6, Sheffield, 1999.
1
2

Downloaded 04 Jul 2011 to 139.82.146.123. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions