Quantum Film TV Backlight, Looking At The Commercial Application Of Quantum Dots

Quantum dots have made many attempts when looking for commercial applications, including biomedicine, solar energy, lasers, semiconductors, and lighting. The result is just like other nanomaterials, giving people infinite space for imagination, but they are far from practical. The safety, stability and cost-effectiveness of the company are always missing, and in the end they can only stay in the laboratory. Ever since, quantum dots have been exhausted for thirty years and have been searching for them, waiting eagerly for the key killer application-until one day it meets the "display".

Stop for a while, have a cup of tea, let us sit on the time machine-

The debut of quantum dots

Quantum dots were used by Soviet scientists St. Petersburg in 1981. Petersburg’s Dr Alexey Ekimov discovered it, and then in 1983, Bell Labs scientists discovered the relationship between the particle size of quantum dots and the excitation wavelength, which started the early research boom of quantum dots. However, this important characteristic of size and color has waited. It took 30 years to take the first step towards commercialization of display applications.

Commercial setbacks for quantum dots

Before quantum dots met first love, there were several entangled romances, including their application in biomedicine in 1998. At that time, scientists thought biomedicine was a beautiful encounter with quantum dots. By combining specific drugs into the human body, quantum dots can be used in biomedicine. Used as a fluorescent label to track the movement of drugs in the human body. However, the problem of cadmium in quantum dots has existed for a long time. The injection of cadmium-containing substances into the human body, regardless of the safety of the practice, is intuitively resisting, not to mention the history of cadmium poisoning:

A strange disease that occurred in the Jintong River Basin in Toyama Prefecture, Japan in 1931-"Tai Pai Disease", has been confirmed in the 1950s that the culprit is cadmium. Perhaps critically ill patients are willing to take the risk, and quantum dots can also be used in the field of cancer treatment. , Otherwise, even if it is replaced with non-cadmium quantum dots, heavy metals are still inevitable at this stage, so the problem arises, unless the quantum dots are made of elements that exist in the human body (such as iron), otherwise it will only be replaced from toxin in the end. It's just a poison, this is a very embarrassing and temporarily unsolvable problem. In summary, biomedical applications have scientific value, but they have not been transformed into commercial nutrients for feeding quantum dots.

After biomedicine, quantum dots have also tried to knock on several doors, including solar energy, which has been smashed in the market, and the first commercialized quantum dot light bulb that Nexxus Lighting and QDVision of the United States cooperated in 1993. These issues are all in After reading a few media pages, they gradually disappeared from the hearts of the people. The core issues are nothing more than cost-effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness. Quantum dots have indeed improved the efficiency of solar energy, but cheap modules of monocrystalline silicon and polycrystalline silicon are flying all over the sky, and it is cost-effective to use the area to exchange it. If it is not for aerospace or national defense needs, it is necessary to talk to the wallet for the extraordinary conversion efficiency. Sorry to go?

QD bulbs are even more embarrassing. Put a layer of quantum dot film on the bulbs. It is said that CRI performs better (the official data is CRI 90 or more), but is this really the core requirement of mainstream lighting? Or from another perspective, what is the benefit of switching to quantum dots compared to RG phosphor tuning? If you think of this and still feel that there is a selling point, let's make up the last blow. Can the quantum dots catch up with the life expectancy of the lighting? Although Snow has never used this lamp, he can boldly predict that the white light will now be blue.

Viewing the development of display applications from the perspective of the Three Musketeers of Quantum Dots

When many people talk about quantum dots, they always mention the three most high-profile companies: "Nanosys", "QD Vision", and "Nanoco" in the United Kingdom.

1. Nanoco

Nanoco first talked about it because he was very special, special...well, anyway, it was very special. Nanoco publicly declared that it is based on cadmium-free technology (CFQD?) very early on. It is bold, forward-looking, and very individual, but Under this positioning, I am a little anxious. It turns out that the material that can achieve the most commercial level is still cadmium selenide (CdSe). No matter the half-height width, conversion efficiency or stability of cadmium-free materials, it will take time to catch up with CdSe. Nanoco This magnificent declaration forced himself into a corner and gave up the opportunity to first use cadmium-containing materials to get stuck in the market. As a result, he became a company whose commercial achievements are still close to blank among the three Western Musketeers of Quantum Dot.

Nanoco has burned money for almost 15 years since its establishment in 2001. At the beginning of 2016, the half-year loss of the settlement was 5.24 million pounds. How much income? That... £290,000 (local sales in the UK accounted for three-quarters). So in a brief comment on Nanoco, a very special company, I will say:

"The product does not contain cadmium, and shareholders are not short of money."

If Nanoco hasn't done anything in the past 15 years, how can it keep showing up in the media? Nanoco has been busy over the years. It is generally about alliances, authorizations, defendants, and advocating the EU's ban on cadmium-containing quantum dots. In summary, they are all political and diplomatic. Nanoco has followed DOWS, Merck, Osram, and Taiwan’s China. Macro cooperates, occasionally fights with Nanosys, and then reconciles... This is the most rewarding and fulfilling unit within Nanoco. I think it should be "public relations" and "legal affairs".

Yes, with such a chic CEO and shareholders, it is no wonder that the UK will leave the European Union.

2. QD Vision

QD Vision is more familiar to many people. After all, it is the first company to open up the quantum dot display market. After the Color IQ? technology was released in 2013, Sony, Samsung, Philips, Nokia and other major manufacturers have followed up and launched TV and Monitor. With mobile phones, China's Hisense, Konka and Changhong have not missed this trend. Quantum dots have become the focus of the media for a while, as if a new generation of display technology was born.

First, let’s take a look at the well-known dot, line, and area diagrams (the three types of quantum dots used in TV):

When quantum dots entered the display market in the early stage, the application form was divided into three parts. The above picture (a) is on-chip, quantum dots directly replace phosphors, and (b) is on-edge. Quantum dots are sealed in a glass tube and placed The side of the panel, (c) on-surface, is made into a thin film to replace the diffuser in the backlight module. From (a) to (c) the consumption of quantum dots is increasing, and the distance from the light source is also increasing. The further away, the pros and cons of these three will be discussed later with Nanosys.

QD Vision adopts the form of Tube, and the foundry is Taiwanese packaging factory Longda (originally Weilimo, but Weilimo was merged into Longda in early 2013). This form claims to reduce the consumption of quantum dots. It can maintain a proper distance from the chip (quantum dots are afraid of heat and water and oxygen, just like OLED), but the initial test of QDV did not achieve great success, except for difficult packaging, troublesome recycling (especially in Europe), and EU exemptions In addition to the unclear deadline attitude, the glass tube quantum dot TV needs to have another fixture, and it is not compatible with the narrow bezel design. These all increase the conversion cost. QD Vision still has no policy turn at this time, and just sticks to the QD Tube form. In addition, the failure to take advantage of the layout of non-cadmium materials has led to the failure of the initial success energy to continue.

From 2015 to 2016, Samsung, Hisense, and TCL announced their reversals and abandoned Tube to Film. Then Ronda stopped Tube OEM and sold equipment in early 2016. In April 2016, Nanosys took advantage of the victory and went to sue Nanoco and Nanoco by ringing the bell. With patent infringements of Sony, Philips, TCL and other customers, QDV faded out of the display stage sadly and gave up its halo to its rival Nanosys.

It's time to talk about Nanosys, today's biggest winner.

3. Nanosys

Nanosys and QD Vision can be said to go out of the same field. The core team is the MIT quantum dot authority Bawendi. Nanosys can be called the patented god of war among the three swordsmen in the West. It has told Nanoco and QD Vision before and after, picking two each, it is so fierce that there are no friends. , Is the thorn in the eye and number one competitor of the other two.

In terms of commercialization strategy, Nanosys not only has an early layout, but is also more flexible than Nanoco and QDV. Although QD on Chip saves materials, because it is too close to the heat source (LED), it will lead to poor life and efficiency. Nanosys turned on －Chip is positioned as a long-term goal, point is not good, line is always good, right?

In 2008, Nanosys tried to use QD Tube on mobile phones. The product name was Quantum Rail at the time (the partner was LG), and it was five years earlier than QDV. At that time, it was found that Tube was too difficult and good to block water and oxygen. Due to the poor rate and insufficient mass production, Nanosys took an elegant turn and launched QDEF (Quantum Dot Enhancement Film) co-developed with 3M in early 2010.