Foam injection molding of polypropylene/stainless steel fiber composites for efficient EMI shielding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lightweight polypropylene/stainless-steel fiber (PP-SSF) composites with 15-35% density reduction were fabricated using foam injection molding and supercritical carbon dioxide (CO2). The electrical percolation threshold, through-plane electrical conductivity, and electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding effectiveness (SE) of the PP-SSF composite foams were characterized and compared against the solid samples. The effects of the plasticizing gas and the void fraction on fiber breakage and orientation were also investigated. Microstructure characterization showed that the presence of dissolved CO2 decreased fiber breakage by about 30%, and together with foaming action, contributed to less preferential orientation of fibers. Consequently, the percolation threshold decreased up to four folds from 0.85 to 0.21 vol.% as the void fraction increased from 0 to 35%. The specific EMI SE was also significantly enhanced. A maximum specific EMI SE of 75 dB.g-1cm3 was achieved in PP-1.1 vol.% SSF composite foams, which was highly superior to 38 dB.g-1cm3 of the solid PP-1.0 vol.% SSF composites. The results reveal that light and efficient products with a lower fiber content can be developed by foam for EMI shielding applications.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".