4.7 Article

Life cycle energy benefits of carbon nanotubes for electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding applications

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION
卷 142, 期 -, 页码 1971-1978

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.11.087

关键词

Carbon nanotubes; Life cycle assessment; Nanomaterial benefits; EMI shielding; Satellite launch energy; Cumulative energy demand

资金

  1. NSF [SNM-1120329]
  2. Div Of Civil, Mechanical, & Manufact Inn
  3. Directorate For Engineering [1120329] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Carbon nanotube (CNT) composites have been developed for use as electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding in satellites as well as other land-based applications. While CNT composites are costly and energy-intensive to produce relative to existing EMI shielding materials, they may offer both economic and energy benefits when considered on a life cycle basis. CNTs' unique characteristics and enhanced physical and chemical properties have made them preferable as alternatives to conventional material. In comparing nano-enabled products with existing technologies, it is imperative to account for differences not just in production but also in performance and delivery. In this study, we considered CNT polymer composites as a replacement for aluminum (the current dominant EMI shielding material) on the basis of shielding effectiveness (in dB). Results demonstrate that CNT-enabled composites offer opportunities for more than 50% reduction in the mass of EMI shielding, while maintaining performance levels within +/- 10 dB of the shielding effectiveness of aluminum. Reduction in the mass of the EMI component of the satellite subsequently affects the total fuel required to launch it into orbit, reducing it by 6% when using CNT composites. Results show nearly 30% reduction of life cycle cumulative energy demand for the CNT polymer composite shielding compared to aluminum, with concomitant environmental benefits. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.7
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