新型发光体来到 fipel聚合物发光灯朔料灯泡
FIPEL是一种朔料灯泡，学名叫聚合物发光灯，是由美国维克森林大学的科学家们近期研制出了一种全新的塑料灯泡
这种塑料层是利用纳米技术研制而成的当电流有经过这种新型灯泡的特制塑料层时就会发光
它拥有LED灯的所有优点，让人感到惊讶的是这种塑料灯泡没有LED的任何缺点
具有非常好的伸展性，可以设计成各种形状，比如现在常用的灯棍状。使用者不用担心这种灯泡会被摔碎，而且使用时也不会产生任何的杂音
但是现在这种塑料灯泡还不是特别完美，当电流过高时塑料就可能融化，这也就意味着这款塑料的亮度还是受限制的。
“FIPEL”发出的光线跟自然光非常接近，但和LED灯发出的蓝色光线差别很大。或许会有人担心塑料灯泡的使用寿命问题。卡罗尔博士表示，他实验室里面的塑料灯泡模型使用时间已经接近10年了。
当被问及这款塑料灯泡什么时候能够进入市场时，卡罗尔博士表示现在有一家公司对这款产品非常感兴趣，并准备大规模生产，预计在2013年第一批塑料灯泡会进入市场。
What is FIPEL?
What is FIPEL?Field-induced polymer electroluminescent (FIPEL) technology blends three layers of light-emitting polymer with nanomaterials that glow when an alternating electrical current is passed through them.
Benefits of FIPEL
FIPEL technology offers many benefits over current lighting products. FIPELs...
are at least twice as efficient as CFLs, and on par with LEDs
don't shatter like glass
don't contain mercury or other harmful toxins
give off a more natural white light than current lighting
can be made in any color
are malleable and can be used in various forms such as bulbs, sheets or panels
are long-lasting
are cheap to manufacture
淘汰 LED和荧光新技术上线
Watchers of the wires have surely seen last week's news of an "entirely new light bulb" that threatens to knock out current LED and fluorescent technology.According to the press release put out by Wake Forest University, the new lights are an experimental type of field-induced polymer electroluminescent (or FIPEL). They're said to match the efficiency of LEDs and avoid the "annoying buzz," flicker, and possibility of mercury spill posed by fluorescent lighting, all while surpassing the visual quality of both. In a video accompanying the press release, lead researcher David Carroll of Wake Forest University suggests all this will be available from a $25 light source due to hit the market in 2013.
Though the press release is careful to paint the new technology as being "based on" FIPEL technology, all the talk of new light bulbs seems to have created the impression that FIPEL itself is the breakthrough. "The new light source is called field-induced polymer electroluminescent (FIPEL) technology," the BBC reports.
However, consult a copy of Carroll's research paper, entitled "Effect of multi-walled carbon nanotubes on electron injection and charge generation in AC field-induced polymer electroluminescence," and it's clear this isn't the case. What Carroll and his research team have done is increased the brightness of a FIPEL light source by adding multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWNTs).
If anything has been invented, it appears to be an acronym. Research into field-induced polymer electroluminescence out of Seoul's Yonsei University in 2011 instead refers to the technology as FPEL. And that study also investigated the effect of applying carbon nanotubes to the technology. Given the researchers' claims of impressive lifespans hinge on having had one remain in operation for a decade, it's clear that FIPEL has been around for some time.
Fundamentally, though, FIPEL is really a particular example of AC electroluminescence. An electroluminescent material is one that emits light either when transmitting an electric current, or when exposed to an electric field. In FIPEL, a field induced by alternating current causes the electroluminescing material (poly (N-vinylcarbazole) (PVK):fac-tris(2-pheny;pri-dine)iridium(III) ) to emit light. It's by compositing this material with multi-walled carbon nanotubes that the team claims to have made progress.
Old or new, the researchers make bold claims about the performance of their lights, so Ars asked for the numbers. Unfortunately, Wake Forest declined to provide lumen output or power consumption (from which the efficiency could also be established) of their technology due to "pending publications." They did reveal their lifetimes average 20,000–50,000 hours, which suggests the decade-old FIPEL is either exceptional or turned off from time to time.
Dr. Carroll also revealed that "color rendering index can be customized to any color on the CIE scale desired," rather conflating the color appearance of a light source with its ability to accurately render the color of an object beneath it: related but distinct properties. However, next to light output and efficiency, these characteristics are footnotes.
Though the researchers were coy, the paper itself does provide some clues about FIPEL's performance: "A maximum luminance close to 20 cd/m2 was achieved for Device A without MWNTs in the PVK:Ir(ppy)3 emissive layer. The addition of MWNTs, however, greatly enhanced the luminance of Device A. A maximum luminance of approximately 100 cd/m2 was obtained in the AC FIPEL device with 0.04 wt% MWNTs in the PVK:Ir(ppy)3 emisive layer."
Let's talk units for a moment. Casual watchers of lighting technology may be familiar with the SI unit of luminous flux, the lumen. The lumen output of a light source tells you how much useful light it emits; it's the main performance benchmark. Just as you wouldn't buy a USB hard disk without knowing its storage capacity, you shouldn't buy a light bulb without knowing its lumen output. The term is sometimes expressed as "brightness," though technically this is misleading. Two light sources may emit equal amounts of light, but if one is bigger than the other it will appear less bright because it's emitting less light per unit area.
Enter the cd/m2: a measure of luminance, which is effectively brightness. The candela is the SI unit for luminous intensity: the amount of light emitted by a source in a particular direction. The direction is important because, so far as brightness goes, it doesn't matter how much light is being emitted, just how much of that light is directly entering your eye. The cd/m2 count effectively tells you how much light is coming your way, per unit area of the source.
What the research paper reports is that, by adding just the right proportion of multi-walled carbon nanotubes to a FIPEL light source, its brightness can be boosted by a factor of five to 100 cd/m2.
However, 100 cd/m2 is next to useless. The performance of OLED technology may have some way yet to go, but it has at least breached four figures. A modern, narrow fluorescent tube has a brightness of around 27,000 cd/m2, a 60W light bulb (frosted, at that) 120,000. Even the moon, when full, can boast about 2500 cd/m2. The luminance isn't the whole story, of course: size has to be factored in. Even so, 100 cd/m2 falls way short of the mark. "Not lighting," was how one lighting scientist unaffiliated with this research characterized the luminance to Ars. The 2011 research out of Seoul achieved 350 cd/m2, by the way.
In its favor, nanotube-flavor FIPEL may not be yellow-tinged, buzz, or flicker, but such claims present something of a technological straw man. Thanks to the emergence of triposphor tubes and electronic control gear, fluorescent lighting hasn't suffered from such afflictions for years (or, if it has, it's because something isn't working as it should).
The presence of mercury (albeit in minuscule amounts) is a problem with fluorescent lighting. But if there's an epidemic of CFL light bulb breakages sweeping the nation, Ars has yet to hear of it. In any case, none of these shortcomings can be leveled at the LED, and neither can its dismissal as having a blueish tint. Warm white LEDs have been available for some time.
It isn't news that these problems have been beaten. They've been beaten time and time again over the course of years. If FIPEL does have an advantage over LED, it's the malleability it shares with OLED (though how problematic the lack of malleability of a point source like an LED is up for debate). If it has an advantage over OLED, it may be its long life. None of which has stopped the media from seizing upon the claims of the "advantages" of FIPEL lighting, while neatly overlooking the lack of numbers in the press release.
Ultimately, there may be a very straightforward explanation to the apparent gap in the performance reported in the research paper from hyperbole of the release.
"This is the first in a series of papers. The numbers in paper no. 1 show that the nanotube concept works—which is quite important. However the devices we produce now—reviewed paper is coming out shortly—have achieved 20,000 cd/m2," Carroll told Ars. "We just got in front of publication date of the next three papers (not our fault, it was meant to coincide). They are coming though."
It may be that Wake Forest has cooked up a light every bit as amazing as the reports have led us to believe. For now, though, none of the information released, be it via press release or research paper, contains any specific data to show it. We eagerly await developments, preferably of the specific variety. 淘汰LED 节能灯，速度好快啊，LED刚开始玩啊。 这个是好东西，国内可能知道的人还比较少。 要想淘汰LED,节能灯还早呢。我有生之年LED，节能灯应该不会全部淘汰的。 杨浩封 发表于 2013-4-9 12:20 static/image/common/back.gif
要想淘汰LED,节能灯还早呢。我有生之年LED，节能灯应该不会全部淘汰的。
;P 2019年就禁止节能灯了， fipe一旦稳定，LED就打水漂去了。 lds 发表于 2013-4-9 12:31 static/image/common/back.gif
2019年就禁止节能灯了， fipe一旦稳定，LED就打水漂去了。
禁止不可能全部淘汰的，至少节能灯还有存在的。我相信不可能全部淘汰的。 这东西确实不好讲 全世界不是老早前就要把白炽灯给灭了现在……其实这事也没有一个唯一的时间表 经济上是行不通的至少我是这样认为 虾米皈依 发表于 2013-4-10 22:01 static/image/common/back.gif
这东西确实不好讲 全世界不是老早前就要把白炽灯给灭了现在……其实这事也没有一个唯一的时间表 经济 ...
白炽灯不是已经灭掉了？现在国内可能买不到FIPEL光源。
页:
[1]
2