Advanced 3D Printed Conductive Polymer Nanocomposites for Electromagnetic Shielding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Herein, we produced carbon nanotube (CNT)-based polymeric filaments for fabrication of electromagnetic interference (EMI) shields with complex geometries. Thanks to the 3D printing technique, enabling us to fabricate EMI shields with complex geometries by computer aided design (CAD). In the first phase, polylactic acid (PLA), a biodegradable polymer, was melt-mixed with CNT at various loadings (0.5, 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0wt.%) using a twin-screw extruder to create conductive polymer nanocomposite filaments. Afterward, we compression molded the developed filaments to evaluate their electrical and EMI shielding properties. Our PLA/CNT3.0wt.% filaments exhibit outstanding EMI shielding as high as 23dB at a thickness of 1mm. In the last phase, we successfully 3D printed our custom-made filaments using fused deposition modeling (FDM) technique. We obtained appreciable EMI shielding results from the 3D printed samples (i.e., 15dB at a thickness of 1mm and 20 dB at a thickness of 3mm). The obtained results well corroborate the performance of our developed conductive polymer nanocomposites as meritorious substitutions for metallic shields.
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".