4.7 Article

A quantitative permittivity model for designing electromagnetic wave absorption materials with conduction loss: A case study with microwave-reduced graphene oxide

Journal

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL
Volume 439, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2022.135672

Keywords

Electromagnetic wave absorption; Materials genome; Reduced graphene oxide; Conduction loss; Volume fraction

Funding

  1. Sichuan Science and Technology Pro-gram [2020YFG0372]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigated the factors affecting the performance of electromagnetic wave absorption materials and proposed a new quantitative model using the materials genome methodology. The results provide insights for the design of conduction-type EM wave absorption materials.
Non-magnetic electromagnetic (EM) wave absorption materials are receiving research interest for their low weight, chemical stability, and outstanding absorption performance, but the understanding on how conductivity and absorber content affect the EM wave absorption performance is still empirical and qualitative. Here, the materials genome methodology was applied to EM wave absorption materials. A quantitative random network model was proposed for conduction-loss absorbers, which suggested that the complex permittivity of an EM wave absorption mixture was determined by two parameters related with volume fraction and conductivity respectively. The optimal values of these parameters were then screened. To verify the model and screening results, a microwave-reduced graphene oxide was synthesized, and an effective absorption bandwidth of 6.5 GHz at 2.3 mm and 5.7 GHz at 2.0 mm was achieved. It is concluded that materials with high porosity, high dispersivity, and semiconductor-level conductivity are favored for EM wave absorption. This study paves a new way to design conduction-type EM wave absorption materials.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available