LED Efficiency

We measure the total power emitted by a selection of LEDs. To measure optical power we use an SD445 photodiode. It's sensitivity to light of various wavelengths, in Ampere per Watt, is given in the figure below. We press the photodiode right up against the package of our LED, so that is roughly 2 mm from the light-emitting surface.



We reverse-biase the photodiode with a 9-V battery and pass the photocurrent through a 100-Ω resistor. We measure the voltage across the 100-Ω resistor with a voltmeter. We convert photocurrent into optical power using the graph above. At 470 nm we use 0.20 A/W. At 527 nm we use 0.25 A/W. We provide power to the LED through a 400-Ω, 1-W resistor. We measure the LED current with an ammeter. We obtain the following plots of output power versus current.



According to the EZ290 data sheet, the minimum power output of the blue C470EZ290-021 at 20 mA forward current should be 21 mA. According to the calibration of our sample diodes, the power should be at least 27 mW for this particular LED. But we measure only 13 mW. According to the same data sheet and calibration, the green EZ290s should produce at least 11 mW at 20 mA. But we measure only 6 mW. The EZ500 data sheet, meanwhile, specifies a minimum of 40 mW of green light at forward current 150 mA. We see 26 mW at 46 mA, which suggesets of order 85 mW at 150 mA.

Our green EZ500 emits twice as much power as we expect, but our blue and green EZ290s appear to be emitting less than half the power we expected from their calibration and specification. The blue EZ290 shown above will emit only 18 mW with a forward current of 30 mA, such as we expect to deliver with our Implantable Lamp (A2024A). Even if we obtain 25% coupling efficiency into our fiber, we will get no more than 4.5 mW out of the fiber tip.

UPDATE: [26-APR-13] We have 25 C460EZ500 (460 nm blue) mounted in 3-mm packages. We measure the light power emitted by one such part with a photodiode. We bias the photodiode with 0 V and with 9 V. The photocurrent is 6% higher with bias. The responsivity of the un-biased photodiode is roughly to 0.182 for 460-nm light and 0.191 mA/mW at 470 nm.

UPDATE: [22-JAN-14] The surface of the SD445 appears to be acrylic glass, which has reflectance with angle of incidence in air as plotted below. We obtained this and the following plot from Refractive Index Info.



The silicon of the photodiode we assume to be crystalline, which has the following reflectance with angle of incidence in air. By reflection alone, we expect to lose around 44% of incident unpolarized blue light by reflection at the acrylic and silicon boundaries for light arriving perpendicular to the surface. We calculate the sensitivity of the ideal photodiode, where one photon becomes one electron, is 0.38 mA/mW for 470 nm. If we lose 44% of incoming photons by reflection, we expect our SD445 to have sensitivity 0.21 mA/mW. The data sheet says 0.20 mA/mW.



At larger angles of incidence, we will lose more light by reflection, so the sensitivity of the photodiode will drop. At 80° we expect to lose around 60% by reflection, compared to 40% at 0°, so sensitivity will drop to 0.13 mA/mW.