Evaluates mechanical and electromagnetic properties of composite materials for portable electronics, suggesting new design strategies.
Lightweight housings for portable and aerospace electronics require materials that combine low density, high tensile strength and reliable electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding. Here, basalt fiber-reinforced polymer (BFRP) laminates incorporating conductive networks formed by carbon nanotubes (CNTs), copper powder and copper mesh were developed and their mechanical and shielding properties were evaluated. X-band (8–12[Formula: see text]GHz) shielding effectiveness (SE) was measured using a coaxial transmission-line cell, and tensile behavior was characterized on the same laminates. The neat basalt composite showed very low SE ([Formula: see text]5[Formula: see text]dB) but the highest tensile strength. Adding 3[Formula: see text]wt.% CNTs increased SE to [Formula: see text]30[Formula: see text]dB while maintaining strength above that of typical aluminum alloys. A laminate with 15 wt.% copper powder reached [Formula: see text]20[Formula: see text]dB SE but exhibited substantial strength loss due to particle agglomeration and weak interfaces. Copper mesh laminates offered the best balance; two mesh plies achieved [Formula: see text]40[Formula: see text]dB SE while retaining tensile strength within the range of aluminum housing alloys. An Ashby-type [Formula: see text]–SE map using aluminum alloy 5052 as a reference showed a strength-dominated region with insufficient shielding and a high [Formula: see text]-SE region occupied by the 3[Formula: see text]wt.% CNT and symmetric two-ply copper-mesh laminates. These results indicate that effective EMI-shielding BFRP laminates require co-optimization of conductive-network geometry, continuity, stacking symmetry and metal fraction rather than simply increasing the amount of conductive material.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jung et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: