Kevin Pipe

Find an error

Name:
Organization: University of Michigan
Department:
Title:
Co-reporter:Vahid Rashidi, Eleanor J. Coyle, Katherine Sebeck, John Kieffer, and Kevin P. Pipe
The Journal of Physical Chemistry B May 4, 2017 Volume 121(Issue 17) pp:4600-4600
Publication Date(Web):March 31, 2017
DOI:10.1021/acs.jpcb.7b01377
Weak interchain interactions have been considered to be a bottleneck for heat transfer in polymers, while covalent bonds are believed to give a high thermal conductivity to polymer chains. For this reason, cross-linkers have been explored as a means to enhance polymer thermal conductivity; however, results have been inconsistent. Some studies show an enhancement in the thermal conductivity for polymers upon cross-linking, while others show the opposite trend. In this work we study the mechanisms of heat transfer in cross-linked polymers in order to understand the reasons for these discrepancies, in particular examining the relative contributions of covalent (referred to here as “bonding”) and nonbonding (e.g., van der Waals and electrostatic) interactions. Our results indicate cross-linkers enhance thermal conductivity primarily when they are short in length and thereby bring polymer chains closer to each other, leading to increased interchain heat transfer by enhanced nonbonding interactions between the chains (nonbonding interactions being highly dependent on interchain distance). This suggests that enhanced nonbonding interactions, rather than thermal pathways through cross-linker covalent bonds, are the primary transport mechanism by which thermal conductivity is increased. We further illustrate this by showing that energy from THz acoustic waves travels significantly faster in polymers when nonbonding interactions are included versus when only covalent interactions are present. These results help to explain prior studies that measure differing trends in thermal conductivity for polymers upon cross-linking with various species.
Co-reporter:Vahid Rashidi, Kevin P. Pipe
Computational Materials Science 2015 Volume 107() pp:151-156
Publication Date(Web):September 2015
DOI:10.1016/j.commatsci.2015.04.056
Superlattice structures are widely used in electronic and optoelectronic devices, many of which depend heavily on thermal management for performance and reliability. It has been observed that silicon/germanium superlattices exhibit an enhancement in thermal conductivity at very short period lengths, which has been attributed to the contribution of coherent phonons. Here we investigate additional potential contributions to enhanced thermal conductivity in superlattices as period length is reduced, finding that a reduction in strain relaxation as well as increased contributions of interface modes that have vibrational character intermediate between those of the two constituent materials offer additional mechanisms for increased thermal conductivity.
Co-reporter:Yiying Zhao, Denis Nothern, Abhishek Yadav, Kwang-hyup An, Kevin P. Pipe, Max Shtein
Organic Electronics 2014 Volume 15(Issue 12) pp:3529-3537
Publication Date(Web):December 2014
DOI:10.1016/j.orgel.2014.08.035
•Substrate topography is found to influence the behavior of OLEDs.•OLEDs are made on arrays of micro- and nano-scale pyramids etched in silicon.•Non-uniform electric field forms in the organic layers for high layer curvatures.•Controlled field non-uniformity can enhance electron injection from the “bottom” electrode in inverted devices.•In electron injection-limited devices, charge balance and light output efficiency can be improved via substrate topography.Substrate topography plays a critical role in the function of nano-scale materials and devices. We study small molecular organic light emitting devices (OLEDs) deposited onto non-planar substrates, where the substrate’s radius of curvature in some regions approaches the thickness of the active device layers. As a result, the electric field profile inside the organic charge transport layers is modified, influencing carrier injection, transport, and light emission properties. Experiments and numerical modeling suggest that charge balance and electroluminescence efficiency potentially can be improved in electron injection-limited OLED architectures via substrate geometry. These findings elucidate the optoelectronic behavior (and degradation) of OLEDs on imperfect substrates, and suggest a strategy based on substrate topography for controlling device behavior.Graphical abstract
Co-reporter:Ke Jia Zhang;Abhishek Yadav;Kyu Hun Kim;Youngseok Oh;Mohammad F. Islam;Ctirad Uher;Kevin P. Pipe
Advanced Materials 2013 Volume 25( Issue 21) pp:2926-2931
Publication Date(Web):
DOI:10.1002/adma.201300059
Co-reporter:Kwang Hyup An, Brendan O’Connor, Kevin P. Pipe, Max Shtein
Organic Electronics 2009 Volume 10(Issue 6) pp:1152-1157
Publication Date(Web):September 2009
DOI:10.1016/j.orgel.2009.06.003
We demonstrate an organic photodetector (OPD) structure in which the active layers and a thick optical spacer are sandwiched between two metallic electrodes, forming a Fabry–Perot resonant cavity. The second resonant mode of this cavity can be positioned by means of an optical spacer so that its maximum intensity overlaps with the donor–acceptor interface, leading to a peak in the external quantum efficiency (EQE) of the OPD for this resonant wavelength. The photoresponse can thus be tuned across the visible spectrum by adjusting the spacer thickness, while the full width half maximum remains approximately 50 nm. Because the active layers can be thin in this approach, the EQE is not sacrificed, and the device can achieve a relatively high response frequency that does not suffer from the inclusion of the optical spacer. We simulate the photoresponse of OPD structure using transfer matrix optical calculations and an exciton diffusion model; our simulation also explicitly accounts for interface roughness measured by atomic force microscopy. Angular dependence of the OPD’s response is also measured and discussed.
4-Bromo-2,5-dihydroxybenzaldehyde
2-ethenylbenzenesulfonic acid
Pyrrolidine, 1-(1-oxo-2-propenyl)-
Poly(1,4-phenylene-1,2-ethanediyl)
Ethane, tetrachloro-
1-[6-(2,5-dioxopyrrol-1-yl)hexyl]pyrrole-2,5-dione