Good morning, Hugh and James,
I’ve posed questions before RE: EMP protection, and now I have one or two more.
Survival blog had a recent series of posts about how to EMP-proof steel ammo cans; I found them enlightening. but they sparked some questions.
A Faraday Cage
The purpose of a Faraday cage is to completely enclose the item one wishes to protect with a conductive material. This will not permit passage of electromagnetic energy of certain wavelengths. The usual approach to Faraday cages is to exclude all wavelengths of electromagnetic energy. Different electronic components may also be susceptible to energy of different wavelengths. An EMP event may include myriad wavelengths of electromagnetic energy. This creates the preference for solid material, rather than mesh, EMP protection.
I’m wondering why wrapping electronics in sturdy aluminum foil, completely enclosing them in the foil like a well-wrapped Christmas package, would not work. My local restaurant supply house carries heavy duty aluminum foil in 18 inch and 24 inch widths. This foil is slightly thicker than foil found in consumer packages.
It seems to me that “gift wrapping” an electronic device in foil, particularly the cardboard package it came in, which would prevent the device from contacting the foil, making sure no openings of any size are in the foil wrapping, would provide adequate EMP protection. Given that aluminm foil, especially in commercially-sized packages, is quite cheap, the expense to double-wrap, or even triple-wrap, the box is very minimal.
If a layer (or two) of aluminum foil is adequate, placing the foil-wrapped device in a steel ammo can would provide protection against the foil wrapping being damaged; the ammo can would not have to have exhaustive EMP-protective measures performed on it to ensure EMP protection of devices inside it.
Am I way off base here and missing something important, or is this something that everyone else is ignoring? – NK