Table 3 Performance comparison of the MMA with other metamaterial absorber.
References | Year | Unit cell size (mm × mm) | Operating Frequency | Absorption (%) | EMR | Polarization insensitivity | Application |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2023 | 20 × 20 | 2.4, 3.5, 5.85 | 99.3,95.68, 99.5 | 6.25 | yes | WLAN and 5G applications | |
2019 | 10 × 10 | 5.57, 7.97, 13.44 | 98.9,97.99, 99.28 | 5.38 | yes | Detection, Radar application | |
2019 | 24 × 24 | 8.6,10.2, 11.95 | Above 80% | 1.45 | yes | Not mentioned | |
2022 | 28.3 × 28.3 | 2.4, 5.2, 5.8 | 99, 98, 98 | 4.41 | no | Energy harvesting | |
2023 | 17 × 17 | 20.38, 21.75, 23.1, 24.22 25.12 | 97.8, 92.9, 97.2, 99.3 96.8 | 0.86 | yes | 5G communication | |
2021 | 10.4 × 10.4 | 3.2, 5.32, 11.15, 16.73 | 95.75,95.9, 97.7, 95.64 | 9.01 | yes | S, C, X band applications | |
2022 | 8 × 8 | 24, 28 | 98, 94 | 1.56 | No | 5G communication | |
Proposed | 2025 | 24 × 24 | 1.8. 3.5 | 98.7, 99.7 | 6.94 | Yes | EMI shielding |
