Method for inhibiting oxygen and moisture degradation of a device and the resulting device

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 9050622
  • Patent Number
    9,050,622
  • Date Filed
    Monday, March 24, 2014
    10 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, June 9, 2015
    9 years ago
Abstract
A method for inhibiting oxygen and moisture degradation of a device and the resulting device are described herein. To inhibit the oxygen and moisture degradation of the device, a low liquidus temperature (LLT) material which typically has a low low liquidus temperature (or in specific embodiments a low glass transition temperature) is used to form a barrier layer on the device. The LLT material can be, for example, tin fluorophosphate glass, chalcogenide glass, tellurite glass and borate glass. The LLT material can be deposited onto the device by, for example, sputtering, evaporation, laser-ablation, spraying, pouring, frit-deposition, vapor-deposition, dip-coating, painting or rolling, spin-coating or any combination thereof. Defects in the LLT material from the deposition step can be removed by a consolidation step (heat treatment), to produce a pore-free, gas and moisture impenetrable protective coating on the device. Although many of the deposition methods are possible with common glasses (i.e. high melting temperature glasses like borate silicate, silica, etc.), the consolidation step is only practical with the LLT material where the consolidation temperature is sufficiently low so as to not damage the inner layers in the device.
Description
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

1. Field of the Invention


The present invention relates to a method for inhibiting oxygen and moisture penetration, and subsequent degradation of a device and the resulting device. Examples of this device include a light-emitting device (e.g., organic emitting light diode (OLED) device), a photovoltaic device, a thin-film sensor, an evanescent waveguide sensor, a food container and a medicine container.


2. Description of Related Art


Transport of oxygen or water through laminated or encapsulated materials and subsequent attack of an inner material(s) represent two of the more common degradation mechanisms associated with many devices like for example light-emitting devices (OLED devices), thin-film sensors, and evanescent waveguide sensors. For a detailed discussion about the problems associated with oxygen and water penetration into the inner layers (cathode and electro-luminescent materials) of OLED and other devices, reference is made to the following documents:

  • Aziz, H., Popovic, Z. D., Hu, N. X., Hor, A. H., and Xu, G. “Degradation Mechanism of Small Molecule-Based Organic Light-Emitting Devices”, Science, 283, pp. 1900-1902, (1999).
  • Burrows, P. E., Bulovic., V., Forrest, S. R., Sapochak, L. S., McCarty, D. M., Thompson, M. E. “Reliability and Degradation of Organic Light Emitting Devices”, Applied Physics Letters, 65(23), pp. 2922-2924.
  • Chatham, H., “Review: Oxygen Diffusion Barrier Properties of Transparent Oxide Coatings on Polymeric Substrates”, 78, pp. 1-9, (1996).


Unless something is done to minimize the penetration of oxygen or water into OLED devices, the lifetimes would be severely affected. Much effort has been expended to drive OLED operation towards 40 kilo-hour lifetimes, the levels generally regarded as necessary so OLED devices can overtake older display technologies as discussed in the following document:

  • Forsythe, Eric, W., “Operation of Organic-Based Light-Emitting Devices, in Society for Information Display (SID) 40th anniversary Seminar Lecture Notes, Vol. 1, Seminar M5, Hynes Convention Center, Boston, Mass., May 20 and 24, (2002).


The more prominent efforts to extend the lifetime of OLED devices include gettering, encapsulation and extensive device sealing techniques. Today one common way for sealing an OLED device is to use different types of epoxies, inorganic materials and/or organic materials that form a seal after they are cured by ultra-violet light, or heated by various means. For example, Vitex Systems manufactures and offers for sell a coating under the brand name of Barix™ which is a composite based approach where alternate layers of inorganic materials and organic materials are used to seal the entire surface of the OLED device. Although these types of seals provide some level of hermetic behavior, they can be very expensive and there are many instances in which they have failed to prevent the diffusion of oxygen and water into the OLED device under prolonged operation.


The same sort of oxygen and water penetration problem is common in other types of devices as well like, for example, thin-film sensors, evanescent waveguide sensors, food containers and medicine containers. Accordingly, there is a need to inhibit the penetration of oxygen and water into devices like, for example, OLED devices, thin-film sensors, evanescent waveguide sensors, food containers and medicine containers. This need and other needs are satisfied by the present invention.


BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The present invention utilizes an LLT (low liquidus temperature) material, which typically has a low low liquidus temperature (or in specific embodiments a low glass transition temperature), to form a barrier layer on a device. The LLT material includes, but is not limited to, tin fluorophosphate glass, chalcogenide glass, tellurite glass and borate glass. The LLT material can be deposited onto the device by, for example, sputtering, co-evaporation, laser ablation, flash evaporation, spraying, pouring, frit-deposition, vapor-deposition, dip-coating, painting or rolling, spin-coating, or any combination thereof. Defects in the LLT material from the deposition step can be removed by a consolidation step (for example, heat treatment), to produce a pore-free, gas and moisture impenetrable protective coating on the device. Although many of the deposition methods are possible with common glasses (i.e. those having high melting temperatures), the consolidation step is only practical with the LLT material where the consolidation temperature is sufficiently low so as to not damage the inner layers in the device. In other embodiments, the deposition step and/or heat treatment step take place in a vacuum, or in an inert atmosphere, or in ambient conditions depending upon the LLT's composition.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

A more complete understanding of the present invention may be had by reference to the following detailed description when taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings wherein:



FIG. 1 is a flowchart illustrating the steps of a method for inhibiting oxygen and moisture degradation of a device in accordance with the present invention;



FIG. 2 is a cross-sectional side view of the device that is protected by LLT material applied by the method shown in FIG. 1 in accordance with the present invention; and



FIGS. 3-9B illustrate several different graphs, photos and diagrams that are used to help explain the different experiments and the results of the different experiments which were conducted to demonstrate the capabilities and advantages of the present invention.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Referring to FIGS. 1-2, there are respectively illustrated a flowchart of a method 100 for inhibiting oxygen and moisture degradation of a device 200 and a cross-sectional side view of the protected device 200. As described below, the device 200 includes a heat treated low liquidus temperature (LLT) material 202, one or more inner layers 204 and a support 206. And, the method 100 includes step 102 in which the LLT material 202 is deposited over one or more inner layers 204 located on top of the support 206 (e.g., substrate 206)(see also FIG. 5). The LLT material 202 can be deposited using anyone of variety of processes including, for example, sputtering, flash evaporation, spraying, pouring, frit-deposition, vapor-deposition, dip-coating, painting, rolling (for example a film LLT material 202), spin-coating, a co-evaporation, a laser ablation process, or any combination thereof. Alternatively, more than one type of LLT material 202 can be deposited (e.g., sputtered) at the same time over one or more inner layers 204 located on top of the support 206 (e.g., substrate 206). Moreover, multiple layers of the same or different types of LLT material 202 can be deposited (e.g., sputtered) over one or more inner layers 204 located on top of the support 206 (e.g., substrate 206). The method 100 also includes step 104 in which the device 200 including the deposited LLT material 202 is annealed, consolidated or heat treated. The heat treatment step 104 is performed to remove defects (e.g., pores) within the LLT material 202 which were formed during the deposition step 102. Some examples of different devices 200 that can be protected by the heat treated LLT material 202 include a light-emitting device (e.g., OLED device), a photovoltaic device, a thin-film sensor, an evanescent waveguide sensor, a food container and a medicine container. The deposition step 102 and the heat treatment step 104 can be performed in a vacuum or inert atmosphere. This is done to ensure that the water-less and oxygen-free condition is maintained throughout the sealing process. This is especially important for robust, long-life operation of organic electronics with minimal degradation.


In one embodiment, the device 202 is an OLED device 200 that has multiple inner layers 204 which include a cathode and electro-luminescent materials that are located on the substrate 206. The cathode and electro-luminescent materials 204 can be easily damaged if they are heated above for example 100-125° C. As such, the heat treatment step 104 (so as to minimize or eliminate porosity) would not be possible in this particular application if traditional glass was deposited on the OLED device 200. Because, the temperature (e.g., 600° C.) needed to remove the defects in a traditional glass (soda-lime) would be so high that the OLED device's inner layers 204 would be damaged. However, in the present invention, the heat treatment step 104 can be performed in this particular application because the temperature (e.g., 120° C.) needed to remove the defects in the LLT material 202 can be relatively low such that the OLED device's inner layers 204 would not be damaged.


The use of LLT material 202 makes this all possible because this type of material has a relatively low liquidus temperature ≦1000° C. The low liquidus temperature means that the LLT 202 can be heat treated at a relatively low temperature to obtain a pore-free film which will not thermally damage the OLED device's inner layer(s) 204. Again, it should be appreciated that the heat treated LLT material 202 can also be used as a barrier layer on a wide variety of devices 200 in addition to the OLED device 202 such as a thin-film sensor, a photovoltaic device, an evanescent waveguide sensor, a food container, a medicine container or an electronic device that is sensitive to moisture, oxygen or other gases (for example).


In the preferred embodiment, the LLT material 202 has low liquidus temperature ≦1000° C. (and more preferably ≦600° C. and even more preferably ≦400° C.) and can include, for example, glass such as tin fluorophosphate glass, chalcogenide glass, tellurite glass, borate glass and phosphate glass (e.g., alkali Zn or SnZn pyrophosphates). These LLT materials 202 are desirable for several reasons including (for example):

    • The low liquidus temperature (LLT) materials can be devoid of heavy metals and other environmentally undesirable materials.
    • The LLT materials can be durable and exhibit low dissolution rates when immersed in water at 85° C. (<20 microns per day). See, Tick, P. A., “Water Durable Glasses with Ultra Low Melting Temperatures”, Physics and Chemistry of Glasses, 25(6) pp. 149-154 (1984).
    • The LLT material can contain dye molecules and can be doped to levels as high as 8 mM (4.8×1018 cm−3). See, Tick, P. A., Hall, D. W., “Nonlinear Optical Effects in Organically Doped Low Melting Glasses”, Diffusion and Defect Data, Vol. 53-54, pp. 179-188, (1987).
    • The LLT phosphate glasses have helium permeability coefficients 4 to 5 orders of magnitude less than that of fused silica. See, Peter, K. H., Ho, D., Thomas, S., Friend, R. H., Tessler, N. “All-Polymer Optoelectronic Devices”, Science, 285, pp. 233-236, (199).


The tin fluorophosphate glass 202 is discussed first and the preferred composition ranges of the various constituents (in parts by weight) are indicated in TABLE 1.











TABLE 1







tin fluorophosphate



glass 202*



















Sn
20-85 wt %



P
 2-20 wt %



O
10-36 wt %



F
10-36 wt %



Nb
 0-5 wt %







*at least 75% total of Sn + P + O + F.






For a detailed discussion about tin fluorophosphate glass 202, reference is made to the following documents:

  • U.S. Pat. No. 4,314,031.
  • U.S. Pat. No. 4,379,070.
  • Tick, P. A., Weidman, D. L., “Optical Waveguides from Low Melting Temperature Glasses with Organic Dyes”, in Proceedings of SPIE—The International Society for Optical Engineering—Nonlinear Optical Properties of Organic Materials V, pp. 391-401, (1993).
  • Tick, P. A., “Water Durable Glasses with Ultra Low Melting Temperatures”, Physics and Chemistry of Glasses, 25(6) pp. 149-154 (1984).
  • Tick, P. A., Hall, D. W., “Nonlinear Optical Effects in Organically Doped Low Melting Glasses”, Diffusion and Defect Data, Vol. 53-54, pp. 179-188, (1987).


    The contents of these documents are incorporated by reference herein.


Three different tin fluorophosphate glasses 202 (composition nos. 1-3), one tellurite glass 202 (composition no. 4) and one borate glass 202 (composition no. 5) have been tested. Details about these tested LLT glasses 202 and the results and conclusions from those experiments are described next. TABLES 2A and 2B illustrate the compositions of the tested exemplary LLT glasses 202 with their TG (in this example and other examples herein TG is related to the low liquidus temperature) and various constituents as follows:









TABLE 2A







(atomic (or element) percent)













tin
tin
tin





fluoro-
fluoro-
fluoro-



phosphate
phosphate
phosphate
tellurite
borate



glass
glass
glass
glass
glass



(Comp.
(Comp.
(Comp.
(Comp.
(Comp.



#1)
#2)
#3)
#4)
#5)
















Sn
22.42
18.68
23.6




P
11.48
11.13
11.8




O
42.41
38.08
41.4
66.67
58.8 


Pb

 3.04





F
22.64
28.05
23.3




Nb
 1.05
 1.02





Ta



 3.33



Ga



 3.33



Te



26.67



Bi




25.9 


Zn




5.88


B




9.41


TG
130° C.
131° C.
100° C.
360° C.
340° C.
















TABLE 2B





(mole percent)




















Comp. #1
39.6 SnF2
38.7 SnO
19.9 P2O5
1.8 Nb2O5



Comp. #2
39.5 SnF2
27.7 SnO
20.0 P2O5
1.8 Nb2O5
10.9







PbF2


Comp. #3
39.5 SnF2
40.5 SnO
20.0 P2O5



Comp. #4
5.66 Ta2O5
5.66 Ga2O3
88.9 TeO2



Comp. #5
55 Bi2O3
25 ZnO
20 B2O3










The tested LLT glasses 202 are durable as indicated in FIGS. 3 and 4. FIG. 3 is a graph that illustrates the results of a weight loss experiment that was conducted for 1000 hours in 85° C. water. As can be seen, the tested LLT glasses 202 (composition nos. 1, 2 and 4) have a durability that is comparable to Corning Inc.'s 1737 glass (traditional glass). FIG. 4 is a graph that indicates that the weight loss measurements of the tested LLT glasses 202 (composition nos. 1 and 4-5).


A “calcium patch” experiment was also performed and the resulting experimental data are discussed next to illustrate the low permeability of oxygen and water through one of the aforementioned LLT glass film layers 202 (composition no. 1). FIG. 5 is a cross-sectional side view of an oven 502 which contains a device 200 that includes LLT glass films 202 (composition no. 1), two inner layers 204 (Al and Ca) and a substrate 206 (Corning Inc.'s 1737 glass substrate). The Al and Ca layers 204 were deposited on the thick substrate 206 and then encapsulated with LLT glass films 202 (composition no. 1). During this experiment, several of these devices 200 were placed within the oven 502 and subjected to environmental aging at a fixed temperature and humidity, typically 85° C. and 85% relative humidity (“85/85 testing”). In each tested device 200, the Ca layer 204 was initially a highly reflecting metallic mirror. And, if water and oxygen penetrated the top encapsulation layer of LIT glass films 202, then the metallic Ca 204 reacted and turned into an opaque white flaky crust which could be quantified with an optical measurement (see FIGS. 6 and 7).


More specifically, the “calcium patch” test was performed as follows. A 100 nm Ca film 204 was evaporated onto a Corning Inc.'s 1737 glass substrate 206. Then, a 200 nm Al layer 204 was evaporated on the Ca film 204. The Al layer 204 was used to simulate the conditions of a cathode typically used to produce polymer light emitting diodes (PLEDs). Using a “dual-boat” customized Cressington evaporator, the 1737 glass substrate 206 was maintained at 130° C. and approximately 10−6 Torr during the Ca and Al evaporation steps. After cooling to room temperature, the vacuum was broken and then the calcium patch was extracted and carried in a vacuum dessicator to an RF sputtering vacuum system, and pumped overnight back to 10−6 Torr. The LLT glass 202 (composition no. 1) was then sputtered onto the Al and Ca layers 204 under relatively gentle RF power deposition conditions (30 W forward/1 W reflected RF power) and low argon pressure (˜19 sccm)(see step 102 in FIG. 1). The sputtering was performed for 24 hours to obtain a glass thickness in the range of 2.5 μm (chamber pressure ˜10−3 Torr). It should be noted that the LLT material thickness can be made as thick as one needs depending on one's chosen deposition duration. Then, some of the newly created devices 200 were heated to ˜121° C. by an infrared lamp which was mounted in the vacuum chamber to consolidate the sputtered LLT glass layers 202 (see step 104 in FIG. 1) (see top row of pictures in FIG. 6). Upon cooling, the vacuum was broken and the heat-treated devices 200 and the non-heat-treated devices 200 were placed in a humidity chamber and held at 85° C. and 85% relative humidity. During this period, pictures where taken at regular time intervals to quantify the evolution of the tested devices 202. An illustration of the changes to the calcium film in the tested devices 200, prepared under slightly different conditions is shown in FIG. 6.



FIG. 6 shows the pictures of the tested devices 200 which were taken at regular intervals to follow the rate of calcium oxidation which is an indication of the permeation properties of the LTG glass films 202. The left panel in FIG. 6, labeled “Typical Starting Condition”, shows the initial metallic Ca layers 204 of tested devices 200 before oxidation reactions associated with this test occurred (i.e., Ca+2H2O→Ca(OH)2+H2, and 2Ca+O2→2CaO). The images in the bottom row were taken, at the indicated time intervals, of a sample device 200 prepared without any heating of the LLT glass sputtered glass layer 202. The images in the middle row were taken of a similar device 200 that was heated (at 121° C.) during the first hour of the 24 hour glass deposition time interval. And, the tested device 200 shown in the top row was prepared similarly except that it was heated (at 121° C.) after the 24 hour glass deposition time interval. Clearly, the tested device 200 shown in the top row that had the entire LTG glass thickness subjected to heat-treatment fended off oxygen and water attack best.


The photos of FIG. 6 were quantified by calculating the percentage of area that turned to a “white flaky crust” versus the percentage of area that maintained a “silvery metallic finish” and the calculated values were plotted as a function of time (see FIG. 7). FIG. 7 is a graph that illustrates the percentage of calcium area oxidized due to time spent in the 85° C. and 85% relative humidity oven 502 for the three tested devices 200 (see FIG. 6) and one non-covered device. As shown, data 702 represents the percentage of the calcium patch surface area that was oxidized on a calcium patch that had the 100 nm calcium and 200 nm aluminum layers but was not coated with LLT glass 202. And, data 704 represents the calcium patch surface area that was oxidized in one of the tested devices 200 which had a 2.5 μm sputtered LLT glass layer 202 (composition no. 1) that was not heat treated. Data 706 represents the calcium patch surface area that was oxidized in another tested device 200 which had a 2.5 μm sputtered LLT glass layer 202 (composition no. 1) that was heat treated at 121° C. for the first hour during the 24 hour deposition period. Lastly, data 708 represents the calcium patch surface area that was oxidized in another test device 200 which had a 2.5 μm sputtered LLT glass layer 202 (composition no. 1) that was heat treated at 121° C. for one hour after the 24 hour deposition period. As can be seen, the device 200 that was heat treated after the deposition period performed the best.


To generate this graph, LabView™ code was written to process the successive images shown in FIG. 6 of each tested device 200 during time spent in the 85/85 oven 502. The “first image” on the left side of FIG. 6, before the tested device 200 was placed in the humidity oven, served as the reference baseline from which a threshold was calculated. The threshold was assigned by choosing the first minimum pixel intensity value that occurred after the main peak, or “hump”, in the histogram of the first image. Data pixels, in later images, were deemed “calcium oxidized” if their pixel value exceeded this threshold. The fraction of area, deemed “calcium oxidized”, at any given time in the oven 502, is plotted in FIG. 7. Clearly, the tested device 200 with the LLT glass 202 (composition no. 1) that was heat treated at 121° C. after the 24 hour film deposition step exhibited the best impermeability for moisture and oxygen. As can be seen, this experiment has demonstrated that physically deposited low TG glass thin-film layers 202 can be gently “annealed” to restore the essentially pore-free barrier layer.


Next, we describe how the water permeation rates of the tested devices 200 were estimated with the aid of TABLE 3 and FIG. 8. The water permeation rate in the tested devices 200 were estimated by first calculating the total amount of calcium metal in the 100 nm layer 204. Then, by consulting FIG. 7 and other additional data, we estimated the time it took for half the calcium in the ½″×1″×100 nm patch to become oxidized, the so-called half life. This yields the average number of grams oxidized with water vapor per day, per unit meter2 in an 85/85 environment. To convert to ambient conditions, a scale factor was introduced between the ambient time (ambient half life) and time spent in the 85/85 environment (85/85 half life). To determine this scale factor, we used a calcium patch made with calcium and aluminum layers alone and placed half in the 85/85 oven 502, and the other half was left out in atmosphere. The time (1.2 hours) it took the half of the calcium patch that was placed in the oven to oxidize versus the time (163 hours) it took the half left out in the atmosphere to oxidize enabled us to estimate the scale factor required to convert the measured permeation rates to ambient conditions. These values are shown in the underlined section in TABLE 3.













TABLE 3








85/85
ambient



Half-life time to
permeation
permeation



half coverage
rate (measured)
rate (calculated)




















no glass cover
163
hr
1.1 × 10−2
1.1 × 10−2


no glass cover*
1.2
hr
1.6
1.1 × 10−2


comp. no. 1
16
hr
1.2 × 10−1

8.6 × 10−4



(no heating)*


comp. no. 1
≈320
hr
5.8 × 10−3

4.3 × 10−5



little heating*


comp. no. 1
~1250
hr
1.5 × 10−3

1.1 × 10−5



more heating


of structure*





*Heated in a “85/85” environment.






These values may be illustrated graphically and compared with traditional seals like Vitex system's Barix™ seals as shown in FIGS. 9A and 9B. The data associated with the tested device 200 that had LLT glass 204 (composition no. 1) which was heat treated after the deposition step is shown in FIGS. 9A and 9B. Also, shown is data associated with Vitex system's Barix™ seals. As can be seen, the tested device 200 performed better than the device that used a Barix™ seal. It should be noted that the photograph/graph in FIG. 9B also shows the relative levels of oxygen permeability of typical polymers and coatings and the sensitivity limits of current test equipment.


From the foregoing, it can be readily appreciated by those skilled in the art that the present invention utilizes LLT materials which have low liquidus temperatures to form a barrier layer with permeation properties comparable to the material itself. The LLT materials include, but are not limited to, tin fluorophosphate glass, chalcogenide glass, tellurite glass, phosphate glass and borate glass. These LLT materials are especially suitable for inhibiting oxygen or/and moisture degradation common to electronic devices, food or medicine. In addition, these LLT materials may be used to reduce, for example, photochemical, hydrolytic, and oxidative damage due to chemically active permeants. The LLT materials may be deposited using one or more of the following methods such as sputtering, evaporation, spraying, pouring, frit-deposition, vapor-deposition, dip-coating, painting or rolling, spin-coating (for example). Defects in the LLT materials from the deposition step are removed by a consolidation step (heat treatment) in order to produce a pore-free, gas and moisture impenetrable protective coating on the device. The barrier layer is quite durable, exhibiting low weight loss (0.28%) in standardized 1000 hour, 85° C. water-immersion tests, and enduring over 600 hours in calcium patch tests, in 85° C. and 85% relative humidity chambers. Although many of the deposition methods are possible with common glasses (i.e. high melting temperature), the consolidation step is truly practical with the LLT materials where the consolidation temperature is sufficiently low to inhibit thermal damage to nearby layers.


In recent experiments that have been conducted, it has been shown that with a certain type of LLT material 202 namely the tin fluorophosphates material it can have a higher Tg (and different stoichiometric composition) after it has been deposited (sputtered) as a film and after that sputtered film has been heat-treated. A description is provided next to discuss a theory as to why the Tg (and stoichiometric composition) is different between the starting LLT material and both the sputtered (deposited) film and the heat-treated sputtered film. Basically, in this experiment it has been found the original composition no. 1 glass target has all divalent tin (i.e., Sn2+). While, the sputter-deposited thin film material is composed of 66% Sn4+ and 34% Sn2+. Now when this sputter-deposited thin film material is heated at 120° C. for one hour in vacuum, the tin oxidation state is driven to 100% tetravalent tin (i.e., Sn4+). It is believed these differences in the Sn changes the stoichiometric composition and as a result the Tg of the deposited and heat treated composition no. 1 film.


It should be understood that this change in LT appears to happen with the tin fluorophosphates material and not with the tellurite and borate films which have the same Tg as the starting targets. Moreover, a tin-pyrophosphate glass (Sn2P2O7) was tested to see if the Tg changed between the sputtered (deposited) film and the heat-treated sputtered film. In this test, tin pyrophosphate powder was put it into an evaporative heating boat in a vacuum chamber and pumped down to a 10^-6 Torr vacuum. The boat was then heated to approximately 80 Watts before we started evaporating the material onto a substrate. The deposited material was then heated at 120° C. for one hour in vacuum. Then, a hermeticity experiment was conducted on the resulting film and it was found that the stoichiometric composition of the material was maintained through-out the entire process. This includes the both the deposited film and the heated-deposited-film.


It has also been shown herein that barrier layers containing a subset of durable low liquidus temperature materials provide substantial protection from oxygen and water attack (and transport) beyond traditional physically-deposited oxide barrier layers. For instance, the preferred barrier layers described herein can have a water and oxygen permeance below 10−6 g/m2/day and 10−5 cc/m2/atm/day, respectively. Furthermore, it has been shown that physically-deposited low liquidus temperature thin-film barrier layers can be annealed at temperatures suitable for retaining the integrity of adjoining organic layer material physicochemical properties. This last feature makes durable low liquidus temperature materials unique compared with other physically deposited oxide barrier layers. These low liquidus temperature materials can be annealed at a low temperature so as to remove mesoscopic defects from the physically deposited layers and also retain the physicochemical properties of the adjoining organic under-layers. This is in contrast to the Vitex™ method in which the defects are not removed. Moreover, it has been shown that these low liquidus temperature barrier layers can be used to form an integral part of various devices (e.g., waveguide, grating sensors, photonic crystals etc.) while inhibiting the transport of materials detrimental to high-performance operation.


Even though specific types of tin fluorophosphate glass, borate glass and tellurite glass are discussed and described in detail herein, it should be appreciated that other types of LLT materials may also be used in accordance with the present invention. It should also be appreciated that low liquidus temperature materials can be made which contain small-composite materials or other electro-optic dopants. These dopants can optimize the refractive indices or add additional electro-optic features to a device 200. This can be particularly, useful when the device 200 is a waveguide sensor.


Although several embodiments of the present invention have been illustrated in the accompanying Drawings and described in the foregoing Detailed Description, it should be understood that the invention is not limited to the embodiments disclosed, but is capable of numerous rearrangements, modifications and substitutions without departing from the spirit of the invention as set forth and defined by the following claims.

Claims
  • 1. A method for sealing a device comprising the steps of: depositing a starting low liquidus temperature inorganic material over at least a portion of said device; andheat treating said deposited low liquidus temperature inorganic material that is deposited over said at least a portion of said device in an oxygen and water free environment,wherein said heat treating step is performed in a vacuum or an inert environment and at a temperature which does not damage components in said device.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the deposited low liquidus temperature inorganic material and the heat treated low liquidus temperature inorganic material have a higher low liquidus temperature than the starting low liquidus temperature inorganic material.
  • 3. The method of claim 1, wherein the deposited low liquidus temperature inorganic material and the heat treated low liquidus temperature inorganic material have a same low liquidus temperature as the starting low liquidus temperature inorganic material.
  • 4. The method of claim 1, wherein said low liquidus temperature inorganic material is a tin-fluorophosphate material.
  • 5. The method of claim 4, wherein said tin-fluorophosphate material has the following composition: Sn (20-85 wt %);P (2-20 wt %);O (10-36 wt %);F (10-36 wt %);Nb (0-5 wt %); andat least 75% total of Sn+P+O+F.
  • 6. The method of claim 1, wherein said low liquidus temperature inorganic material is one of the following, or any combination thereof: tin-fluorophosphate material;chalcogenide material;tellurite material;borate material; andphosphate material.
  • 7. The method of claim 1, wherein said low liquidus temperature inorganic material has a liquidus temperature ≦1000° C.
  • 8. The method of claim 1, wherein said low liquidus temperature inorganic material has a liquidus temperature ≦600° C.
  • 9. The method of claim 1, wherein said low liquidus temperature inorganic material has a liquidus temperature ≦400° C.
  • 10. The method of claim 1, wherein said low liquidus temperature inorganic material is one of the following, or any combination thereof: chalcogenide material;tellurite material; andborate material.
  • 11. The method of claim 1, wherein said low liquidus temperature inorganic material is one of the following, or any combination thereof: tellurite material; andborate material.
  • 12. A method for sealing a device comprising the steps of: depositing a starting low liquidus temperature inorganic material over at least a portion of said device; andheat treating said deposited low liquidus temperature inorganic material that is deposited over said at least a portion of said device in an oxygen and water free environment,wherein said heat treating step is performed in a vacuum or an inert environment and at a temperature which does not damage components in said device,wherein said low liquidus temperature inorganic material is a tin-fluorophosphate material having the following composition: Sn (20-85 wt %), P (2-20 wt %), O (10-36 wt %), F (10-36 wt %), Nb (0-5 wt %), and at least 75% total of Sn+P+0+F, andwherein said low liquidus temperature inorganic material has a liquidus temperature ≦1000° C.
RELATED APPLICATIONS

The present application is a continuation application and claims the priority benefit of pending U.S. application Ser. No. 11/207,691, filed Aug. 18, 2005, the entirety of which is incorporated herein by reference.

US Referenced Citations (171)
Number Name Date Kind
3622439 Manne et al. Nov 1971 A
3720097 Kron Mar 1973 A
3795976 Ikeda Mar 1974 A
3916048 Walles Oct 1975 A
3932693 Shaw et al. Jan 1976 A
4040874 Yerman Aug 1977 A
4077588 Hurst Mar 1978 A
4314031 Sanford et al. Feb 1982 A
4374391 Camlibel et al. Feb 1983 A
4379070 Tick Apr 1983 A
4702963 Phillips et al. Oct 1987 A
4740412 Hocker et al. Apr 1988 A
4802742 Ichikawa et al. Feb 1989 A
4859513 Gibbons et al. Aug 1989 A
5084356 Deak et al. Jan 1992 A
5089446 Cornelius et al. Feb 1992 A
5110637 Ando et al. May 1992 A
5110668 Minnick May 1992 A
5180476 Ishibashi et al. Jan 1993 A
5183684 Carpenter Feb 1993 A
5211995 Kuehnle et al. May 1993 A
5324572 Kuechler et al. Jun 1994 A
5407713 Wilfong et al. Apr 1995 A
5462779 Misiano et al. Oct 1995 A
5478618 Rosen Dec 1995 A
5567488 Allen et al. Oct 1996 A
5610742 Hinata et al. Mar 1997 A
5641559 Namiki Jun 1997 A
5645923 Matsuo et al. Jul 1997 A
5736207 Walther et al. Apr 1998 A
5792550 Phillips et al. Aug 1998 A
5900285 Walther et al. May 1999 A
6077928 Suh et al. Jun 2000 A
6083313 Venkatraman et al. Jul 2000 A
6162892 Kobayashi et al. Dec 2000 A
6171663 Hanada et al. Jan 2001 B1
6171703 Haluska Jan 2001 B1
6193379 Tonar et al. Feb 2001 B1
6207488 Hwang et al. Mar 2001 B1
6211560 Jimenez et al. Apr 2001 B1
6235579 Lou May 2001 B1
6244441 Ahlgren Jun 2001 B1
6249014 Bailey Jun 2001 B1
6268695 Affinito Jul 2001 B1
6271150 Croswell et al. Aug 2001 B1
6288415 Leong et al. Sep 2001 B1
6294420 Tsu et al. Sep 2001 B1
6306783 Yamanaka Oct 2001 B1
6321571 Themont et al. Nov 2001 B1
6350529 Germain et al. Feb 2002 B1
6355125 Tahon et al. Mar 2002 B1
6403176 Patouraux et al. Jun 2002 B1
6413645 Graff et al. Jul 2002 B1
6465101 MacGregor et al. Oct 2002 B1
6486549 Chiang Nov 2002 B1
6492026 Graff et al. Dec 2002 B1
6522067 Graff et al. Feb 2003 B1
6524698 Schmoock Feb 2003 B1
6528442 Kuwano et al. Mar 2003 B1
6530477 Martorano et al. Mar 2003 B1
6623861 Martin et al. Sep 2003 B2
6635989 Nilsson et al. Oct 2003 B1
6660409 Komatsu et al. Dec 2003 B1
6664730 Weaver Dec 2003 B2
6720097 Ohkawa et al. Apr 2004 B2
6720203 Carcia et al. Apr 2004 B2
6740394 Jacobsen et al. May 2004 B2
6740430 Ueno et al. May 2004 B2
6866901 Burrows et al. Mar 2005 B2
6873101 Nilsson et al. Mar 2005 B2
6991506 Yamada et al. Jan 2006 B2
7015640 Schaepkens et al. Mar 2006 B2
7034457 Iwase et al. Apr 2006 B2
7045951 Kawase et al. May 2006 B2
7126269 Yamada Oct 2006 B2
7169003 Iwase et al. Jan 2007 B2
7198832 Burrows et al. Apr 2007 B2
1615506 Aitken et al. Nov 2009 A1
7923115 Nagai et al. Apr 2011 B2
20010005585 Ashihara et al. Jun 2001 A1
20010013756 Mori et al. Aug 2001 A1
20010033135 Duggal et al. Oct 2001 A1
20010038894 Komada Nov 2001 A1
20010054436 Mukai et al. Dec 2001 A1
20020013042 Morkoc Jan 2002 A1
20020019303 Yamanaka Feb 2002 A1
20020037418 Peiffer et al. Mar 2002 A1
20020041443 Varaprasad et al. Apr 2002 A1
20020074553 Starikov et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020076154 Maisenhoelder et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020110692 Suzuki et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020114937 Albert et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020122649 Shimizu et al. Sep 2002 A1
20020127341 Li Sep 2002 A1
20020140347 Weaver Oct 2002 A1
20020142116 Jud et al. Oct 2002 A1
20020160137 Varma Oct 2002 A1
20020180924 Sobrinho Dec 2002 A1
20030000826 Krempel-Hesse et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030006697 Weaver Jan 2003 A1
20030019517 McFarland Jan 2003 A1
20030020099 Taylor Jan 2003 A1
20030022919 Ayers et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030032039 Cunningham et al. Feb 2003 A1
20030044552 Komada Mar 2003 A1
20030047353 Yamaguchi et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030049942 Haukka et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030068534 Ohkawa et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030075753 Chu et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030080678 Kim et al. May 2003 A1
20030085652 Weaver May 2003 A1
20030087513 Noguchi et al. May 2003 A1
20030143423 McCormick et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030152803 Acchione Aug 2003 A1
20030155151 Hermanns et al. Aug 2003 A1
20030155860 Choi et al. Aug 2003 A1
20030165696 Namiki et al. Sep 2003 A1
20030183915 Scheifers et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030184219 Duggal et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030192587 Guzman et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030193057 Humbs et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030193286 Ottermann et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030197197 Brown et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030203210 Graff Oct 2003 A1
20030207500 Pichler et al. Nov 2003 A1
20030214612 Freeman Nov 2003 A1
20030219632 Schaepkens Nov 2003 A1
20030234180 Shimizu et al. Dec 2003 A1
20040019596 Taylor et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040021820 Sobrinho Feb 2004 A1
20040033379 Grunlan et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040043138 Jagannathan et al. Mar 2004 A1
20040046497 Schaepkens et al. Mar 2004 A1
20040046500 Stegamat Mar 2004 A1
20040051449 Klausmann et al. Mar 2004 A1
20040067604 Ouellet et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040075382 Stegamat et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040092095 Nguyen et al. May 2004 A1
20040097005 Daniels May 2004 A1
20040100176 Pichler May 2004 A1
20040113542 Hsiao et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040113543 Daniels Jun 2004 A1
20040115361 Aegerter et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040119403 McCormick et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040121586 Abell Jun 2004 A1
20040132606 Wolf et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040135268 Frischknecht Jul 2004 A1
20040135503 Handa et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040140766 Nilsson et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040151934 Schwark et al. Aug 2004 A1
20040157426 Ouellet et al. Aug 2004 A1
20040166239 Ohkawa et al. Aug 2004 A1
20040174115 Czeremuszkin et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040195960 Czeremuszkin et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040197489 Heuser et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040201027 Ghosh Oct 2004 A1
20040201348 Anandan Oct 2004 A1
20040206953 Morena et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040207314 Aitken et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040209126 Ziegler et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040229051 Schaepkens et al. Nov 2004 A1
20040234797 Schwark et al. Nov 2004 A1
20040239241 Wittmann et al. Dec 2004 A1
20040258893 Penttinen et al. Dec 2004 A1
20050012448 Ke et al. Jan 2005 A1
20050045223 Jenson et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050051763 Affinito et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050241815 Caze et al. Nov 2005 A1
20050248272 Koike et al. Nov 2005 A1
20060087230 Ghosh et al. Apr 2006 A1
20070252526 Aitken et al. Nov 2007 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (45)
Number Date Country
2431917 Jan 1976 DE
0225164 Jun 1987 EP
0135924 Sep 1987 EP
0151462 Aug 1990 EP
0288972 Sep 1993 EP
0394519 Feb 1994 EP
0588667 Mar 1994 EP
0638939 Feb 1995 EP
0494594 Oct 1995 EP
0705757 Apr 1996 EP
0744285 Dec 1999 EP
0701897 Apr 2001 EP
1118459 Jul 2001 EP
1207572 May 2002 EP
1278244 Jan 2003 EP
0895013 Aug 2003 EP
0977469 Sep 2003 EP
0726579 Nov 2003 EP
0775328 Mar 2004 EP
1420041 May 2004 EP
1442067 Aug 2004 EP
0787824 Sep 2004 EP
1410902 Apr 2006 EP
1965453 Sep 2008 EP
2004010843 Jan 2001 JP
2003020235 Jan 2003 JP
2003275575 Sep 2003 JP
2004018335 Jan 2004 JP
2005306010 Nov 2005 JP
200607352 Mar 2006 JP
WO 9322131 Nov 1993 WO
WO 9722536 Jun 1997 WO
WO 9919229 Apr 1999 WO
WO 0020536 Apr 2000 WO
WO 0066794 Nov 2000 WO
WO 0105205 Jan 2001 WO
WO 0165167 Sep 2001 WO
WO 0183067 Nov 2001 WO
WO 0236647 May 2002 WO
WO 03-087427 Oct 2003 WO
WO 2004046767 Jun 2004 WO
WO 2004079781 Sep 2004 WO
WO 2004094321 Nov 2004 WO
WO 2004095597 Nov 2004 WO
WO 2004105149 Dec 2004 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (30)
Entry
N. Regnier et al., “Solid-State 13C-NMR Study on Bismalcimide/Diamine Polymerization: Structure, Control of Particle Size, and Mechanical Properties”, Journal of Applied Polymer Science, vol. 78, 2000, pp. 23792388.
MIT Internet Class 6.976, Lecture #7, “Special Topics in Flat Panel Display”, Spring 2001, http://hackman.mit.edu\6976\LIIandouts\Lecture%207.pdf\.
J.E. White et al., “Polymerization of N,N'-bismaleimido-4,4'-diphenylmethane with arenedithiols. Synthesis of some new polyimidosulphides”, Polymer, 1984, vol. 25, pp. 850-854.
Giefers, H. et al; (2005), Kinetics of the disproportionation of SnO1 Solid State Ionics 176, pp. 199207, Elsevier.
A. Köhler et al., “Fluorescence and Phosphorescence in Organic Materials”, Advanced Engineering Materials, 2002, vol. 4, No. 7, pp. 453-459.
R.A. Mathies et al., “Optimization of High-Sensitivity Fluorescence Detection”, Anal. Chem., 1990, vol. 62, pp. 17861791.
P.K.H. Ho et al., “All-Polymer Optoelectronic Devices”, Science, vol. 285, Jul. 9, 1999, pp. 233236.
H. Aziz et al., “Degradation Mechanism of Small MoleculeBased Organic Light-Emitting Devices”, Science, Mar. 19, 1999, vol. 283, pp. 1900-1902.
P.E. Burrows et al., “Reliability and degradation of organic light emitting devices”, Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 65, No. 23, Dec. 5, 1994, pp. 2922-2924.
P.A. Tick et al., “Optical Waveguides from Low Melting Temperature Glasses with Organic Dyes”, SPIE, vol. 1775, Nonlinear Optical Properties of Organic Materials V, 1992, pp. 391-401.
Hood Chatham, “Oxygen Diffusion Barrier Properties of Transparent Oxide Coatings on Polymeric Substrates”, Surface and Coatings Technology, vol. 78, 1996, pp. 1-9.
D.B. Curliss et al., “Cure Reaction Pathways of Bismaleimide Polymers: A Solid-State 15N NMR Investigation”, Macromolecules, 1998, vol. 31, pp. 6776-6782.
A. Ashok Kumar et al., “Synthesis and Characterization of Siliconized Epoxy-1, 3-bis(maleimido)benzene Intercrosslinked Matrix Materials”, Polymer, vol. 43, 2002, pp. 693-702.
M. Sava, “Synthesis of Bismaleimides with Ester Units and Their Polymerization with Diamines”, Journal of Applied Polymer Science, vol. 84, 2002, pp. 750-757.
A.C. Misra et al., “Synthesis and properties of octafluoro-benzidine bis-maleimide and of it reaction products with fluorinated diamines”, Polymer, 1992, vol. 33, No. 5, pp. 1083-1089.
A.C. Misra et al., “Synthesis and properties of some new fluorine-containing polyimides”, Polymer, 1992, vol. 33, No. 5, pp. 1078-1082.
Liew, F.Y., et al., Investigation of the sites of dark spots in organic lightemitting devices. Applied Physics Letters, 1000. 77(17).
Forsythe, Eric, W., Operation of Organic-Based Light-Emitting Devices, in Society for Information Device (SID) 40th anniversary Seminar Lecture Notes, vol. 1, Seminar M5, Hynes Convention Center, Boston, MA, May 20 and 24, (1002).
PCT International Search Report for International Application No. PCT/US2006/030670 dated Dec. 19, 2006.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/509,445, filed Aug. 24, 2006 titled “Tin Phosphate Barrier Film, Method, and Apparatus”.
Young, R., Flat panel display market outlook: From cyclicality to maturity, in NPD Breakfast with the Experts, D. Ross Young—President, ditor. 2006, DisplaySearch, www.displaysearch.com.
Nisato, G., et al., Evaluating high performance diffusion barriers: the calcium test. In 8th International Display Workshop. 2001. Nagoya, Japan.
Burrows, P.E., et al., Gas Permeation and Lifetime Tests on Polymer-Based Barrier Coatings, in SPIE Annual Meeting. 2000, SPIE.
Walther et al; “Multilayer Barrier Coating System Produced by Plasma-Impulse Chemical Vapor Deposition (PICVD)”; Surface and Coatings Technology, vo. 80, pp. 200-202, 1996.
Titova, Z.P. et al; 1964; Journal of Applied Chemistry USSR, 37 (10-12), pp. 2129.
N. Sakamoto, et al., “Properties and structure of glasses in the System SnF2-P2O5”, Journal of the Japan Institute of Metals, 1990, vol. 54, No. 12, pp. 1363-1368.
G.L. Graff, et al., “Barrier Layer Technology for Flexible Displays,” Flexible Flat Panel Displays, 2005, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., pp. 58-77.
X.J. Xu, et al., “Properties and structure of Sn-P-O-F glasses,” Physics and Chemistry of Glasses, Oct. 1990, vol. 31, No. 5, pp. 183-187.
C.M. Shaw, et al., “Preparation and properties of stannous fluorophosphates glasses,” Physics and Chemistry of Glasses, Apr. 1988, vol. 29, No. 2, pp. 49-53.
P.A. Tick, “Water durable glasses with ultra low melting temperatures,” Physics and Chemistry of Glasses, Dec. 1984, vol. 25, No. 6, pp. 149-154.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20140234542 A1 Aug 2014 US
Divisions (1)
Number Date Country
Parent 11207691 Aug 2005 US
Child 14223380 US