4.6 Article

Fine patterning of glycerol-doped PEDOT:PSS on hydrophobic PVP dielectric with ink jet for source and drain electrode of OTFTs

期刊

ORGANIC ELECTRONICS
卷 11, 期 5, 页码 854-859

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.orgel.2010.01.028

关键词

Organic thin film transistor; Ink jet printing; PEDOT/PSS; Oxygen plasma; Source drain electrodes; Flexible displays

资金

  1. Ministry of Knowledge Economy of Korean government [F0004020]
  2. Korea Institute of Industrial Technology(KITECH) [F0004020] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This report describes the fabrication and the electrical characteristics of pentacene OTFTs that use the conducting PEDOT:PSS for the source and drain (S/D) electrodes. By adding a controlled amount (10-20 wt.%) of glycerol the conductivity of the PEDOT: PSS ink enhanced to 450 S/cm, and the viscosity of the ink was reduced to <20 cps in order for it to be suitable for ink jet printing. In order to create a patterned PEDOT: PSS layer for the S/D electrode on a hydrophobic polyvinylphenol (PVP) gate dielectric, oxygen plasma was applied to control the surface energy of S/D electrode area on the PVP surface. In addition, by adding a leveling agent, the pattern of PEDOT: PSS droplet was improved enough to be spread up to the corners of S/D electrode area, producing channel length of 10 mu m with a fine shape. Pentacene TFTs with the PEDOT: PSS S/D electrodes exhibited a similar performance to those with Au S/D electrodes in terms of the electrode resistance, corresponding to sum of the electrode series resistance and the contact resistance, being similar to 30 k Omega cm at V-G = similar to 25 V and the field effect mobility being 0.13 cm(2)/V s and the on/off current ratio being 5.6 x 10(6). However, the electrode resistance of the PEDOT: PSS needs to be further reduced for the short channels <20 mu m. (C) 2010 Elsevier B. V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据