
Scientia et Technica Año XXVIII, Vol. 30, No. 01, enero-marzo de 2025. Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira
Fig.14. Water capture testing of coated mesh materials in the field.
The highest water capture was obtained in the fog-catcher
with the poly-shade mesh, followed by the fog-catcher with
fique mesh coated with epoxy resin, which had an increase of
124.4% in water capture with respect to the fog-catcher with the
uncoated fique mesh.
The coatings on the fog catchers, with polyester resin,
impercryl, asphalt emulsion increased water capture by
105.9%, 41.5%, and 37.2%, respectively, compared to the
uncoated fique fiber.
The increase in water capture, as reported by Rajaram et al.
[23], is due to the fact that increasing the hydrophobicity of the
mesh increases the fog collection efficiency. Despite the
increase in water capture with the applied coatings versus
natural fiber, the amount collected by the fog catchers is below
the common values where these systems are installed which are
0.8 to 10 L/m2d [24].
When the ANOVA test was applied to evaluate significant
differences in the field water capture, the values shown in Table
VII were obtained.
TABLE VII.
ANOVA TEST WATER CAPTURE IN THE FIELD
The post hoc tests reflected the same behavior as the
laboratory tests, where the polyshade mesh showed a
statistically significant difference in water capture versus the
others; between the mesh coated with epoxy resin and polyester
there are no significant differences and additionally between the
meshes coated with asphalt emulsion, Impercryl and the
uncoated fique mesh there are no statistically significant
differences.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
The mechanical, morphological, and water capture properties
of four polymer-coated fique fiber meshes (epoxy, polyester,
Impercyrl, and asphalt emulsion) were evaluated and compared
to an uncoated fique mesh and an additional poly-shade mesh
(Raschel).
An increase in the mechanical properties was evidenced in
all the polymer-coated fique meshes, compared to the natural
fique mesh system. The best performance was obtained in the
epoxy resin coated fique mesh system.
The morphological analysis with scanning electron
microscopy allowed observing low adhesion between the fique
fiber with the asphalt emulsion and with the impercryl coating.
However, with respect to the epoxy and polyester resin, a
medium adhesion was observed.
The use of all the polymeric coatings applied to the natural
fiber mesh increased the amount of water capture in the
laboratory, with the highest increase when using the epoxy
resin, compared to the uncoated natural fiber.
Fog catchers were manufactured and installed in the field
with fique fiber coated with the polymers, which showed an
increase in water capture compared to uncoated natural fique
fiber. The results, as in the laboratory, showed that the increase
was greater with the epoxy coating.
As the mechanical properties of the materials in this study
could be affected by water absorption, further research is
needed to evaluate these materials under operational humidity
conditions. This will provide more relevant information for
practical reuse.
It is important to acknowledge that the application of
polymeric coatings not only modifies the hydrophobic behavior
of the natural fibers but also alters their surface morphology and
increases their mass. This study did not quantify the specific
surface area reduction caused by the coatings, which could have
an impact on the condensation and water harvesting efficiency.
Future studies should address this limitation by evaluating the
relationship between surface area loss, added polymer mass,
and water collection performance in order to optimize the
coating application.
REFERENCES
[1]J. A. Pascual, M. F. Naranjo, R. Payano, y Ojilve Ramon Medrano Perez,
«Tecnología para la recolección de agua de niebla», 2011, doi:
10.13140/RG.2.1.4806.7048.
[2]H. Yue, Q. Zeng, J. Huang, Z. Guo, y W. Liu, «Fog collection behavior of
bionic surface and large fog collector: A review», Adv. Colloid Interface Sci.,
vol. 300, p. 102583, feb. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.cis.2021.102583.
[3]M. Qadir, G. Jiménez, R. Farnum, L. Dodson, y V. Smakhtin, «Fog Water
Collection: Challenges beyond Technology», Water, vol. 10, n.
o
4, p. 372, mar.
2018, doi: 10.3390/w10040372.
[4]D. V. Carrera-Villacrés, I. C. Robalino, F. F. Rodríguez, W. R. Sandoval, D.
L. Hidalgo, y T. Toulkeridis, «An Innovative Fog Catcher System Applied in
the Andean Communities of Ecuador», Trans. ASABE, vol. 60, n.
o
6, pp. 1917-
1923, 2017, doi: 10.13031/trans.12368.
[5]C. A. A. Corredor, V. Buitrago, S. J. D. Ayala, T. Ambiental, K. Y. C.
Almeida, y T. Ambiental, «Propuesta De Un Sistema De “Atrapa-Nieblas”,
Como Fuente De Agua No Convencional En La Vereda La Fuente, Municipio
De Los Santos, Departamento De Santander.», p. 9, 2017.
[6]S. Korkmaz y İ. A. Kariper, «Fog harvesting against water shortage»,
Environ. Chem. Lett., vol. 18, n.
o
2, pp. 361-375, mar. 2020, doi:
10.1007/s10311-019-00950-5.
[7]Y. Cheng et al., «Fog catcher brushes with environmental friendly slippery
alumina micro-needle structured surface for efficient fog-harvesting», J. Clean.
Prod., vol. 315, p. 127862, sep. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127862.
[8]S. Zhang, J. Huang, Z. Chen, y Y. Lai, «Bioinspired Special Wettability
Surfaces: From Fundamental Research to Water Harvesting Applications»,
Small, vol. 13, n.
o
3, p. 1602992, ene. 2017, doi: 10.1002/smll.201602992.
[9]J. Arutchelvi, M. Sudhakar, A. Arkatkar, M. Doble, S. Bhaduri, y P. V.
Uppara, «Biodegradation of polyethylene and polypropylene», Indian j
biotechnol, p. 15, 2008.