Table 1 Comparison of Ultra-Wideband Electromagnetic Absorbers.

^{23 −,*}

107.6 (16.3–54.3)

1/6.8

1

3D printed conductive plastic

^{24 +,*}

148.7 (3.53–24)

N/A

148.5 (3.53–24) θ ≤ 70°

1/5.5

1

3D printed honeycomb with resistive walls

^{28 +,*}

100 (4.8–14.4)

77.3 (4.6–10.4) θ ≤ 40°

90.5 (4.6–12.2) θ ≤ 60°

1/12

2

soldering

^{29 +,*}

112 (5.1–18.08)

1/12.8

2

soldering

^{30 +,*}

126.8 (N/A)

1/11.4

1

soldering

^{32 +,**}

85.7 (15.6–39)

90.9 (15–40) θ ≤ 30°

80 (15–35) θ ≤ 30°

1/10

1

indium tin oxide

^{35 +,*}

102 (7.8–24)

54 (N/A) θ ≤ 45°

50 (N/A) θ ≤ 45°

1/12.3

1

silk printing technique

^{36 +,*}

132.9 (7.2–35.7)

1/11

3

silk printing technique

This work^+,**

125 (6.9–29.9)

118 (7.7–29.9) θ ≤ 45°

100.5 (9.9–29.9) θ ≤ 45°

126 (6.6–29)

95 (10.5–29.6)

1/11.7

1

printed via conventional inkjet printer