Table 1.
EM absorption performance of some representative MOFs-derived magnetic carbon-based composites
| MOF precursors | Modificated strategies | Samples | RL values (dB) [frequency (GHz), thickness (mm)] | EAB (GHz) [range (GHz), thickness (mm)] | Filler loading (wt%) | Refs. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Co-MOFs | Glucose additive | Co/C micropheres | − 71.3 (6.2, 3.8) | 6.6 (11.3–17.9, 2.0) | 60 | [9] |
| CoNi-BTC | rGO additive | CoNi@NC/rGO composite | − 68.0 (10.9, 3.0) | 6.7 (11.3–18.0, 2.5) | 25 | [83] |
| MOF-74 | Magnetic additive | FeCoNi@C microsphere | − 64.8 (15.4, 2.1) | 8.1 (9.9–18.0, 2.5) | 38 | [68] |
| Fe-doped Co-MOFs | rGO additive | FeCo/NC/rGO composite | − 43.3 (11.3, 2.5) | 9.3 (8.7–18.0, 2.6) | 25 | [85] |
| ZIF-67 | MF sponge template | Co/CNTs/CS sponge | − 51.2 (12.0, 2.2) | 4.1 (10.3–14.4, 2.2) | 5 | [149] |
| ZIF-67 | Melamine foam template | MZ800 foam | − 59.8 (12.9, 2.3) | 5.6 (12.4–18.0, 2.1) | 20 | [147] |
| ZIF-67 | Wood aerogel template | FeCo/C@WC aerogel | − 47.6 (15.7, 1.5) | 8.9 (9.1–18.0, 1.9) | 15 | [154] |
| FeCo PBAs | PDA coating | Hollow FeCo@C cage | − 67.8 (5.3, 1.7) | 5.3 (11.0–16.3, 2.0) | 50 | [166] |
| NiCo PBAs | Chemical etching | Hollow NiCo@C microbox | − 68.4 (13.4, 2.1) | 5.8 (12.2–18.0, 2.0) | 40 | [134] |
| ZIF-67 | CoNi-LDH coating | Hollow CoNi/C composite | − 61.0 (13.7, 2.0) | 5.2 (12.8–18.0, 2.0) | 10 | [157] |
| ZIF-67 | Chemical etching | Hollow Co/C cage | − 60.6 (9.8, 2.4) | 5.1 (10.8–15.9, 1.9) | 10 | [129] |
| ZIF-67 | PDA coating | Hollow Co/N/C@MnO2 | − 58.9 (12.0, 3.7) | 5.5 (9.5–15.0, 1.9) | 15 | [100] |
| ZIF-67 | Cobalt sulfide coating | Yolk-shell Co–C/Void/Co9S8 | − 54.0 (3.0, 4.9) | 8.2 (9.8–18.0, 2.2) | 25 | [163] |
| NiCo-MOFs | Gradient carbonization | Yolk-shell NiCo/GC/NPC | − 52.2 (7.2, 2.1) | 7.2 (10.8–18.0, 2.1) | 30 | [182] |