Open Access
Table 1
Comparison of different resistive film material systems for FSRs.
| Material system | Core advantages | Main limitations | Application & typical performance | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carbon-based film FSR | Excellent flexibility Tunable conductivity Low-cost fabrication |
Moderate processing accuracy | Ultra-wideband Radar Stealth: Absorption bandwidth up to 135% Flexible/Wearable Devices: Stable performance under bending |
[34–42] |
| ITO film FSR | Optical Transparency Good sheet resistance control Smooth surface for high-frequency patterns |
Brittleness High cost of material and fabrication |
Transparent Radomes: X-Ku band absorption with >76% transmittance Conformal Windows: Flexible ITO/PET for curved surfaces |
[43–49] |
| Specified sheet resistance film FSR | Environmental Robustness Design-specific resistance values Low-cost manufacturing |
Limited intrinsic functionality | High-Temperature Radomes: Stable at >1000 °C with 43.9 MPa strength Cost-Sensitive Mass Production: Screen-printed circuits with <3 dB IL |
[50–54] |
| Dynamically tunable resistive film FSR | Reconfigurable Functionality Adaptive response to stimuli Enables cognitive systems |
Fabrication Complexity High cost and immature processes |
Switchable Stealth Radomes: ATA/ARA mode switching with 42.8% FBW THz Multi-spectral Control: >90% absorption from 3.31–10 THz |
[55,56] |
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.