US20210144932A1

US20210144932A1 - Netting, crop cover, and ground cover materials

Info

Publication number: US20210144932A1
Application number: US17/003,877
Authority: US
Inventors: Jonathan Dallas Toye; Suzanne Elizabeth Foy
Original assignee: Nine IP Ltd
Current assignee: Nine IP Ltd
Priority date: 2012-09-12
Filing date: 2020-08-26
Publication date: 2021-05-20
Also published as: AU2020200930A1; NZ746230A; NZ729749A; AU2013316703B2; WO2014041499A1; US10791680B2; EP2894966A1; US20150223411A1; NZ629105A; CA2884418C; CA2884418A1; AU2017276324A1; CL2015000604A1; AU2013316703A1; AU2017276324B2

Abstract

The invention relates to crop netting materials, crop cover materials, and ground cover materials that transmit solar radiation in the visible wavelength range of about 420 to 720 nm at a level similar to the level that the materials transmit solar radiation in the infra red wavelength ranges of about 700 to about 1000 nm and 1500 to about 1600 nm. The materials also absorb solar radiation in the UV wavelength range of about 300 to about 380 nm.

Description

PRIORITY CLAIM

This invention claims priority from PCT Application No. PCT/IB2013/058488 filed Sep. 12, 2013, which claims priority to New Zealand Application Serial Nos. 614071, 614074 and 614075 filed Aug. 8, 2013 and U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61/700,203 filed Sep. 12, 2012, which are hereby incorporated by reference.

FIELD OF INVENTION

The invention relates to netting materials, particularly but not exclusively to netting materials for use as bird netting, insect netting, shadecloth netting, windbreak netting, or hail protection netting for example or in other agricultural applications, and also to crop cover materials and ground cover materials.

BACKGROUND

Bird netting, insect netting, shadecloth netting, windbreak netting, or hail protection netting may be placed near plants to protect for example annual plants, perennial plants, fruit trees, or grape vines, from birds, insects, excessive sun, wind, or hail. Typically the netting is supported over the plant(s) and/or as a vertical and/or angled wall or walls near the plant(s), by for example cables or wires between posts positioned along the rows of plants in a garden, field crop, orchard or vineyard, or is draped over the plant(s) or is laid on the ground.
A crop cover material such as film, or a woven material optionally coated with a film layer on one or both sides is placed above the plant crop to protected it from birds, insects, rain, hail, wind and excessive sun. The addition of materials to the cover may occur to add in its properties, such as sun protection by increasing the level of shade.
Woven or film ground cover materials are used in agriculture for a number of purposes including weed suppression and/or soil warmth retention and/or moisture retention and/or for light reflecting and/or for soil cooling.
Typically where a material is used primarily as a reflective ground cover for light enhancement, the material is rolled out in lengths onto the ground, and secured in place, beneath or between rows of trees, vines, or plants, to increase the amount of light to which the plants and in particular fruit are exposed by reflection of light from the material towards the fruit above. The material may also aid soil warmth retention and moisture retention. The material may also be used for reducing or control soil temperature to an optimum range for plant growth.
It is an object of the present invention to provide improved netting, crop cover, and ground cover materials; and/or to at least provide the public with a useful choice.

SUMMARY OF INVENTION

In broad terms in one aspect the invention comprises a crop netting material which is knitted, woven, or non-woven, from a synthetic monofilament, multifilament yarn, or tape or combination thereof, formed from a resin comprising at least one pigment such that the monofilament, multifilament yarn, or tape:

- across a UV wavelength range about 300 to about 380 nm:
  - absorbs at least about 55% solar radiation on average, and
  - transmits less than about 30% solar radiation on average;
- across a visible wavelength range about 420 to about 700 nm:
  - transmits at least about 10% solar radiation on average, and
  - reflects at least about 10% of solar radiation on average;
- across an infrared wavelength range about 700 to about 1000 nm: transmits between about 15% and about 80% of solar radiation on average;
- across an infrared wavelength range of 1500 to 1600 nm: transmits at least about 15% to about 90% solar radiation on average; and
- across an infrared wavelength range about 700 to about 1000 nm:
  - transmits not more than about 9 percentage points on average more than, and
  - transmits not less than about 9 percentage points on average less than, the solar radiation transmission across said visible wavelength range about 420 to about 700 nm; and
- across an infrared wavelength range about 1500 to about 1600 nm:
  - transmits not more than about 9 percentage points on average more than, and
  - transmits not less than about 9 percentage points on average less than,
- the solar radiation transmission across said infrared wavelength range about 700 to about 1000 nm.

Netting of the invention may be suitable for use in relation to plants which in the environment in which they are growing, without the netting of the invention, may suffer overheating (and reduced photosynthesis plus excessive plant respiration) and fruit sunburn. Netting of the invention also or alternatively may be suitable for use in providing an improved or controlled growing and/or fruit development environment.
The netting across a UV wavelength range about 300 to about 380 nm absorbs at least about 55% solar radiation on average. This may reduce fruit sunburn.
The netting across this UV wavelength range transmits less than about 30% solar radiation on average. This reduction in UV this assists in reducing sunburn effects on fruit. It also reduces the UV stress effects on the plant itself and aids in supporting lower temperatures.
In some embodiments, the crop netting material across a UV wavelength range about 300 to about 380 nm:

- absorbs at least about 60% solar radiation on average, and
- transmits less than about 30% solar radiation on average.

The netting across a visible wavelength range about 420 to about 700 nm transmits at least about 10% solar radiation on average. Visible light is required for plant photosynthesis.
In some embodiments, the crop netting material across a visible wavelength range about 420 to about 700 nm: transmits at least about 20% solar radiation on average.
The netting across the infrared wavelength ranges about 700 to about 1000 nm transmits between about 15% to about 80% of solar radiation on average; and 1500 to about 1600 nm transmits between about 15% and about 90% of solar radiation on average. And the netting in the range of about 700 to about 1000 transmits not more than about 9% on average, and transmits not less than about 9% on average, of transmission across said visible wavelength range about 420 to about 700 nm. And the netting in the range of about across an infrared wavelength range of about 1500 to about 1600 nm transmits not more than about 9% on average, and transmits not less than about 9% on average, of transmits not less than about 9% on average, of transmission across said infrared wavelength range about 700 to about 1000 nm. The netting therefore may reduce heating beneath the netting relative to certain prior art netting.
In at least some embodiments the netting material transmits at least about 15%, or at least about 20%, or about 25%, or at least about 30%, or at least about 35% of solar radiation on average across said infrared wavelength range about 700 to about 1000 nm.
In at least some embodiments the netting material transmits between about 15% and about 85%, or between about 20% and about 80%, or between about 20% and about 70%, or between 15% and about 45% or between about 10 and about 45%, or between about 10% and about 40% or between about 35% and about 80% or between about 40% and about 75% of solar radiation on average across the infrared wavelength range about 700 to about 1000 nm.
In at least some embodiments the netting material transmits not more than about 90%, or not more than about 85%, or not more than about 80%, or not more than about 75% or not more than about 70% or not more than about 65% or not more than about 60% or not more than about 55% or not more than about 50% or not more than about 45% of solar radiation on average across said infrared wavelength range about 1500 to about 1600 nm.
In at least some embodiments the netting material transmits between about 15% and about 90%, or between about 15% and about 85%, or between about 20% and about 80%, or between 20% and about 70% or between 20% and about 75% or between about 20% to about 90% or between about 30% to about 85% or between about 35% to about 80% or between about 40% to about 75% or between about 10% to about 60% or between about 10% to 55% or between about 15% to about 50% or between about 15% to 45% of solar radiation on average across said infrared wavelength range about 1500 to about 1600 nm.
In at least some embodiments the netting material reflects substantially all of said solar radiation from about 700 to about 1000 nm and/or from about 1500 nm to about 1600 nm it does not transmit, across said infrared wavelength ranges.
In at least some embodiments the netting material across said infrared wavelength range about 700 to about 1000 nm:

- transmits not more than about 9% or not more than about 8% on average or not more than about 7% and
- transmits not less than about 9% or not more than about 8% on average or not more than about 7%,
- of transmission across said visible wavelength range about 420 to about 700 nm.

In at least some embodiments the netting material across said infrared wavelength range about 1500 to about 1600 nm:

- transmits not more than about 9% or not more than about 8% on average or not more than about 7% and
- transmits not less than about 9% or not more than about 8% on average or not more than about 7%,
- of transmission across said infrared wavelength range about 700 to about 1000 nm.

In at least some embodiments the netting material absorbs at least about 55%, or at least about 60%, or at least about 65%, or at least about 70%, or at least about 75%, or at least about 80%, or at least about 85%, or at least about 90%, or at least about 95%, on average of solar radiation on average across said UV wavelength range about 280 to about 380 nm.
In at least some embodiments the netting material transmits at least about 10%, or at least about 15%, or at least about 20%, or at least about 25%, or at least about 30%, or at least about 35%, or at least about 40%, or at least about 45%, or at least about 50%, of solar radiation on average across said visible wavelength range about 420 to about 700 nm.
In at least some embodiments the netting material reflects at least about 20%, or at least about 25%, or at least about 30%, or at least about 35%, or at least about 40%, or at least about 45%, or at least about 50%, of solar radiation on average across said visible wavelength range about 420 to about 700 nm.
In another aspect the invention comprises a crop cover material which is knitted, woven, or non-woven, from a synthetic monofilament, multifilament yarn, or tape or combination thereof, formed from a resin comprising at least one pigment such that the monofilament, multifilament yarn, or tape:

- across a UV wavelength range about 300 to about 380 nm:
  - absorbs at least about 55% solar radiation on average, and
  - transmits less than about 30% solar radiation on average;
- across a visible wavelength range about 420 to about 700 nm:
  - transmits at least about 20% solar radiation on average, and
  - reflects at least about 10% solar radiation on average;
- across an infrared wavelength range about 700 to about 1000 nm: transmits between about 20% and about 90% of solar radiation on average;
- across an infrared wavelength range of 1500 to 1600 nm: transmits at least about 20% to about 90% solar radiation on average; and
- across an infrared wavelength range about 700 to about 1000 nm:
  - transmits not more than about 9 percentage points on average more than, and
  - transmits not less than about 9 percentage points on average less than,
- the solar radiation transmission across said visible wavelength range about 420 to about 700 nm; and
- across an infrared wavelength range about 1500 to about 1600 nm:
  - transmits not more than about 9 percentage points on average more than, and
  - transmits not less than about 9 percentage points on average less than,
- the solar radiation transmission across said infrared wavelength range about 700 to about 1000 nm.

In some embodiments, the crop cover material across a UV wavelength range about 300 to about 380 nm:

In some embodiments, the crop cover material across a UV wavelength range about 300 to about 380 nm absorbs at least about 60%, at least about 65%, at least about 70%, or at least about 75% solar radiation on average.
In some embodiments, the crop cover material across a UV wavelength range about 300 to about 380 nm transmits less than about 30%, less than about 25%, less than about 20%, or less than about 15% solar radiation on average.
In some embodiments, the crop cover material across a visible wavelength range about 420 to about 700 nm transmits at least about 30%, at least about 35%, at least about 40%, or at least about 50% solar radiation on average.
In at least some embodiments the crop cover material reflects at least about 20%, or at least about 25%, or at least about 30%, or at least about 35%, or at least about 40%, or at least about 45%, or at least about 50%, of solar radiation on average across said visible wavelength range about 420 to about 700 nm.
In some embodiments, the crop cover material across an infrared wavelength range about 700 to about 1000 nm transmits between about 30% and about 85%, between about 35% and about 85%, between about 40% and about 85%, between about 30% and about 80%, between about 30% and about 75%, between about 35% and about 80%, between about 40% and about 75%, or between about 45% and about 70% of solar radiation on average.
In some embodiments, the crop cover material across an infrared wavelength range of 1500 to 1600 nm transmits at least about 30% to about 85%, at least about 35% to about 80%, at least about 40% to about 75%, at least about 35% to about 85%, at least about 40% to about 85%, at least about 45% to about 85%, at least about 30% to about 80%, at least about 30% to about 75%, or at least about 30% to about 70% solar radiation on average.
In some embodiments, the crop cover material across an infrared wavelength range about 700 to about 1000 nm:

- transmits not more than about 8% on average or not more than about 7% on average, and
- transmits not less than about 8% on average or not more than about 7% on average, of transmission across said visible wavelength range about 420 to about 700 nm.

In some embodiments, the crop cover material across an infrared wavelength range about 1500 to about 1600 nm:

- transmits not more than about 8% on average or not more than about 7% on average, and
- transmits not less than about 8% on average or not more than about 7% on average,
- of transmission across said infrared wavelength range about 700 to about 1000 nm.

In some embodiments the crop cover material includes a plastic coating on the surface of at least one on one side of the cover material. In some embodiments the crop cover material includes a plastic coating on the surface of both sides of the cover material. In some embodiments the plastic coating comprises at least one pigment. In some embodiments the pigment is an inorganic pigment. In some embodiments, the pigment is a white pigment in accordance with any of the embodiments described herein. In certain exemplary embodiments, the pigment comprises non-conventional titanium dioxide in accordance with any of the embodiments described herein.
In another aspect the invention comprises a ground cover material which is woven, or non-woven, from a synthetic monofilament, multifilament yarn, or tape or combination thereof, formed from a resin comprising at least one pigment such that the monofilament, multifilament yarn, or tape:

- across a UV wavelength range about 300 to about 380 nm:
  - absorbs at least about 55% solar radiation on average, and
  - transmits less than about 20% solar radiation on average;
- across a visible wavelength range about 420 to about 700 nm:
  - transmits less than about 40% solar radiation on average, and
  - reflects at least about 10% of solar radiation on average;
- across an infrared wavelength range about 700 to about 1000 nm: transmits between about 10% and about 50% of solar radiation on average;
- across an infrared wavelength range of 1500 to 1600 nm: transmits at least about 10% to about 60% solar radiation on average; and
- across an infrared wavelength range about 700 to about 1000 nm:
  - transmits not more than about 9 percentage points on average more than, and
  - transmits not less than about 9 percentage points on average less than,
- the solar radiation transmission across said visible wavelength range about 420 to about 700 nm; and
- across an infrared wavelength range about 1500 to about 1600 nm:
  - transmits not more than about 9 percentage points on average more than, and
  - transmits not less than about 9 percentage points on average less than,
- the solar radiation transmission across said infrared wavelength range about 700 to about 1000 nm.

In some embodiments the ground cover across a UV wavelength range about 300 to about 380 nm:

- absorbs at least about 60% solar radiation on average, and
- transmits less than about 20% solar radiation on average.

In some embodiments the ground cover across a UV wavelength range about 300 to about 380 nm absorbs at least about 65%, at least about 70%, or at least about 75% solar radiation on average.
In some embodiments the ground cover across a UV wavelength range about 300 to about 380 nm transmits less than about 25%, less than about 30%, or less than about 35% solar radiation on average.
In some embodiments the ground cover across a visible wavelength range about 420 to about 700 nm transmits less than about 35%, less than about 40%, less than about 45%, or less than about 50% solar radiation on average.
In at least some embodiments the ground cover material reflects at least about 20%, or at least about 25%, or at least about 30%, or at least about 35%, or at least about 40%, or at least about 45%, or at least about 50%, of solar radiation on average across said visible wavelength range about 420 to about 700 nm.
In some embodiments the ground cover across an infrared wavelength range about 700 to about 1000 nm transmits between about 15% and about 45%, 10% and about 45%, 10% and about 40%, between about 20% and about 45%, between about 25% and about 45%, between about 30% and about 45%, between about 15% and about 40%, between about 15% and about 35%, or between about 15% and about 30% of solar radiation on average.
In some embodiments the ground cover across an infrared wavelength range of 1500 to 1600 nm: transmits at least about 10% to about 55%, at least about 15% to about 50%, at least about 15% to about 45%, at least about 15% to about 55%, at least about 20% to about 55%, at least about 25% to about 55%, at least about 10% to about 50%, at least about 10% to about 45%, or at least about 10% to about 40% solar radiation on average.
In some embodiments the ground cover across an infrared wavelength range about 700 to about 1000 nm:

- transmits not more than about 8% on average or not less than about 7% on average, and
- transmits not less than about 8% on average or not less than about 7% on average,
- of transmission across said visible wavelength range about 420 to about 700 nm.

In some embodiments the ground cover across an infrared wavelength range about 1500 to about 1600 nm:

- transmits not more than about 8% on average or not less than about 7% on average, and
- transmits not less than about 8% on average or not less than about 7% on average,
- of transmission across said infrared wavelength range about 700 to about 1000 nm.

The netting and crop cover material across the UV wavelength range indicated transmits less than about 30% solar radiation on average. This reduction in UV assists in reducing sunburn effects on fruit. It also reduces the UV stress effects on the plant itself and aids in lower support lower temperatures.
The ground cover material in the UV wavelength range indicated transmits less than about 20% solar radiation on average. This reduction in the UV assists in reducing the damage effects high UV transmission has in the plastic polymers plus reduce any soil warming effects it may have.
In some embodiments, the monofilament, yarn, or tape has a total solar absorption of greater than about 55%, about 60%, about 65%, about 70%, or about 75% or about 80% or about 85%.
In some embodiments, the monofilament, yarn, or tape has a total solar reflectance of greater than about 45%, about 40%, about 35%, about 30%, or about 25% or about 20% or about 15%.
Typically the netting is supported over the plant(s) and/or as a vertical and/or angled wall or walls near the plant(s), or on the ground itself, by for example cables or wires between posts positioned along the rows of plants in a garden, fieldcrop, orchard or vineyard, or is draped over the plant(s), as bird netting, insect netting (for repelling for example mosquitoes, or as for example bee exclusion netting), shadecloth netting, windbreak netting, or hail protection. Netting may be placed near plants to protect for example annual plants, perennial plants, fruit trees, or grape vines, vegetable plants, from birds, insects, excessive sun, wind, or hail. The netting has some reflective due to the white pigment(s) referred to above, visible light incident on the netting i.e. on the monofilament, yarn, or tapes thereof, is reflected. A portion of incident light hits the netting such that it is reflected away but some light although undergoing a change in direction due to reflection from the netting nonetheless enters the plants but is diffused and hence more favourable for more even light distribution of the plant, and hits the plants and particularly fruit or vegetables below or adjacent the netting canopy and creates an environment that is favourable for plant growth and/or fruit or vegetable development, and an environment suited to beneficial organisms (insects, bacteria and fungi etc) and less favoured by some non beneficial organisms of the plant or fruits or vegetables. Light not hitting the netting passes directly through the netting air space to the plants and fruit. Light hitting the sides of the net yarn will be reflected in part to the space above the net and in part to the plants below the net which will contribute to the light diffusion properties of the net.
As described above, the netting material of the present invention has increased reflectivity in the infrared wavelength range in proportion to the visible or photosynthetic active solar radiation. In nets placed over plants to give some heat reduction typical involves also reduction in visible light as well. In some cases the amount of the visible light reduction is excessive just to obtain a certain amount of heat reduction. The advantage of the heat reduction comes at a cost of reduced photosynthetic active light. Hence is a net that reduces more heat with less reduction of photosynthetic active light then this is an advantage. Accordingly, heating of the surface of the netting material and heat transfer through the netting material is reduced. This can be advantageous, for example, where it is desirable to provide lower temperature environments for the growth of certain plants under canopies of the netting material or for soil covered by the netting material or with ground covers material of the present invention. The reflection of the heat is preferable to heat absorption in the case of heat absorbing pigments such as carbon black or others as it places the heat away from the plant zone, as absorbing material gives the unfavourable opportunity for the heat to be transferred to the plant environment by conduction or convention.
Also as described above, the netting material has increased transmittance of light in the visible wavelength region, due to reduced scattering. In some cases with direct unfiltered light the parts of the plant in the top part of the tree received visible light such that the leaves are light saturated and the parts of the plant in the lower part are not working optimal due to insufficient visible light. The creation or the increasing the amount of diffuse light enables the light to be used more efficiently by the plant. Hence by providing a plant with a net that gives heat reduction but also increased diffuse light then this gives an advantage over a net that gives the same heat reduction but with less diffused visible light. Accordingly, increased amounts of light in the visible wavelength region can pass through, for example, canopies of the netting material to plants and fruit beneath. This may assist in growth of the plants and the growth and/or ripening of fruit.
The transmission, absorbance, and reflection properties of the netting, crop cover, and ground cover materials of the invention may achieved by the inclusion of at least one pigment in the resin from which monofilament, multifilament yarn, or tape from which the netting, crop cover, or ground material are formed. The pigment or combination of pigments selected will depend on the end use of the material. As described herein the at least one pigment may be a single pigment or a combination of two or more pigments that together provide the desired transmission, absorbance, and reflection properties.
In some embodiments the at least one pigment comprises at least one white pigment. In some embodiments said pigment comprises at least one inorganic pigment. In some embodiments said pigment comprises a white zirconium, strontium, barium, magnesium, zinc, calcium, titanium, or potassium pigment or a combination thereof.
In some embodiments said pigment comprises zirconium dioxide, magnesium zirconate, calcium zirconate, strontium zirconate, barium zirconate, zirconium silicate, zinc sulphide, calcium carbonate, barium sulphate, magnesium oxide, strontium carbonate, barium carbonate, potassium tintanate, barium titanate, magnesium titanate, strontium titanate, neodymium titanate, tin oxide, titanium dioxide, titanium oxide, zinc oxide, zinc sulphide, zinc sulphate, dipotassium titanium trioxide, potassium oxide, potassium titanate, magnesium carbonate, aluminium oxide, aluminium hydroxide, or a combination thereof.
In some exemplary embodiments, said pigment comprises a zirconium dioxide, barium sulphate, calcium carbonate, and titanium dioxide. In some exemplary embodiments, said pigment comprises titanium dioxide, calcium carbonate, or a combination thereof. In some exemplary embodiments, said pigment is titanium dioxide. In some exemplary embodiments, said pigment is calcium carbonate.
In one embodiment, the resin comprises a titanium pigment. In one embodiment, the titanium pigment is white.
In some embodiments, the at least one pigment comprises a particulate material. In certain embodiments, the pigment comprises a particulate material having a large average particle size.
In one embodiment, the average particle size is greater than or equal to 0.4 μm. In certain embodiments, the average particle size is greater than or equal to 0.5 μm. In other embodiments, the average particle size is greater than or equal to 0.7 μm, greater than or equal to about 1.0 μm, greater than or equal to about 1.5 μm, or greater than or equal to about 1.8 μm.
In some embodiments, the average particle size is from about 0.5 μm to about 2.0 μm. In certain embodiments, the average particle size is from about 0.7 μm to about 1.8 μm, from about 0.7 μm to about 1.4 μm, from about 0.6 μm to about 1.7 μm, from about 1.0 μm to about 1.6 μm, from about 1.0 μm to about 1.5 μm, or from about 1.2 μm to about 1.4 μm. In other embodiments, the average particle size is from about 0.55 μm and about 0.95 μm, from about 0.6 μm to about 0.9 μm, and from about 0.7 μm to about 0.8 μm.
In some embodiments, the average particle size is about 1.1 μm±0.3 μm. In other embodiments, the average particle size is about 1 μm.
In some embodiments, the particulate material has a substantially rutile crystal form.
In some embodiments, the at least one pigment comprises non-conventional titanium dioxide. As described herein, non-conventional titanium dioxide is distinct from conventional titanium dioxide. Non-conventional titanium dioxide transmits comparatively less infrared light and more visible light than conventional titanium dioxide. In addition, non-conventional titanium dioxide also absorbs UV light in useful amounts.
In some embodiments, the particulate material comprises titanium dioxide in substantially rutile crystal form. In some embodiments, the particulate material comprises greater than 70% by weight of titanium dioxide in rutile crystal form, based on the total weight of the particulate material. In other embodiments, the particulate material comprises greater than 80% by weight, greater than 90% by weight, greater than 95% by weight, or greater than 99.5% by weight of titanium dioxide in rutile crystal form, based on the total weight of the particulate material.
In certain embodiments, the particulate material is titanium dioxide in substantially rutile crystal form. In one embodiment, the titanium dioxide comprises doped titanium dioxide in substantially rutile crystal form.
In some embodiments, said pigment comprises titanium dioxide having an average particle size of at least 0.5 μm or at least 0.7 μm. In some embodiments said pigment comprises a titanium dioxide having an average particle size from about 0.7 μm to about 1.8 μm.
In certain embodiments said titanium dioxide comprises titanium dioxide in the rutile crystal form. In certain embodiments said titanium dioxide is substantially in the rutile crystal form. That is, the majority of said titanium dioxide in the rutile crystal form. In some embodiments, greater than greater than 80% by weight, greater than 90% by weight, greater than 95% by weight, or greater than 99.5% by weight of the titanium dioxide is in the rutile crystal form.
In certain embodiments, the titanium dioxide comprises doped titanium dioxide. In some embodiments, the doped titanium dioxide comprises nickel antimony titanate or chromium antimony titanate.
In certain embodiments, said titanium dioxide comprises coated titanium dioxide. In certain embodiments, said titanium dioxide is coated with a coating comprising silica, alumina, or a combination thereof.
In one embodiment, the pigment is selected from Altiris® 550 or Altiris® 800, which are commercially available from Huntsman Corporation.
In another embodiment, the pigment is JR-1000, which is commercially available from Tayca Corporation.
Numerous other non-conventional titanium dioxide pigments with high infrared reflectivity relative to the visible light spectrum, compared to conventional titanium dioxide, are commercially available.
In some embodiments, the pigment comprises conventional pigmentary titanium dioxide. Conventional titanium dioxide may be useful in the materials of the present invention in combination with other pigments described herein, for example, microvoiding pigments.
The netting, crop cover, and ground cover materials of the present invention has useful UV absorbance. Accordingly, in some embodiments, said pigment comprises at least one UV absorbing substance. In some embodiments, said UV absorbing substance is an inorganic pigment or an organic pigment.
In some embodiments, the organic UV absorbing pigment is selected from the group consisting organic UV absorbing pigment is chosen from the group consisting of benzotriazole, cyanoacrylates, phenylacrylate, oxanilides, benzophenones, hydroxyphenyltriazines, hyrdoxyphenylbenzotriazole, tri and octyl methoxycinnamate, aminobenzoic acid, aminobenzoate, oxybenzone, and combinations thereof.
In some embodiments, the inorganic UV absorbing pigment is selected from the group consisting of barium titanate, magnesium titanate, strontium titanate, neodymium titanate, tin oxide, titanium oxide, titanium dioxide, silica, alumina, zinc oxide, zinc sulphide, zinc sulphate, zirconium silicate, magnesium oxide, and combinations thereof.
In certain exemplary embodiments, the inorganic UV absorbing pigment is titanium dioxide or zinc oxide. In certain embodiments, the inorganic pigment is non conventional titanium dioxide as defined in any of the embodiments described herein. In certain embodiments, the inorganic pigment is conventional pigmentary titanium dioxide. In certain embodiments, the inorganic pigment is zinc oxide. In certain embodiments, the zinc oxide is nano zinc oxide.
In some embodiments, the netting, crop cover, or ground cover material comprises microvoids in the material. Microvoids can provide useful reflectance properties. In some embodiments microvoids have been formed by stretching said synthetic monofilament, yarn, or tape from which the netting material is formed or stretching a film material from which said tape has been cut.
In certain embodiments, the at least one pigment comprises a particulate material that forms microvoids when monofilament, yarn, or tape from which the netting material is formed or a film material from which tape is cut is stretched. In some embodiments, the microvoid forming particulate material is a white pigment. In some embodiments, the microvoid forming white pigment comprises barium sulphate, calcium carbonate, magnesium zirconate, calcium zirconate, strontium zirconate, barium zirconate, zirconium silicate, or a combination thereof.
In certain embodiments, the microvoiding white pigment is barium sulphate and/or calcium carbonate. In some embodiments, the barium sulphate and/or calcium carbonate are in the form of particles of size in the range 0.05 to 10 microns, 0.1 to 7 microns, 0.25 to 5 microns, or 0.5 to 3 microns.
The combination of a microvoiding pigment and a UV absorbing substances is useful in providing the materials of the present invention.
In some embodiments, the material comprises microvoids and is formed from a resin, wherein the at least one pigment comprises a microvoiding pigment and a UV absorbing substance as defined in any of the embodiments described herein.
In some embodiments the material comprises microvoids and is formed from a resin, wherein the at least one pigment comprises a microvoiding pigment and a white pigment as defined in any of the embodiments described herein.
In some embodiments the material comprises microvoids and is formed from a resin, wherein the at least one pigment comprises a microvoiding pigment, a white pigment as defined in any of the embodiments described herein, and UV absorbing substance as defined in any of the embodiments described herein.
The amount the at least one pigment present in the materials depends on the nature of the pigment(s) used. Some pigments may need to be used in higher amounts than others to achieve the desired transmission, absorption, and reflectance levels. In some embodiments the material is formed from a resin comprising at least 1%, at least 2%, at least 3%, at least 5%, at least 10%, or at least 15% by weight of said pigment.
In some embodiments the netting material of the invention has a cover factor (as herein defined) of less than 95%, less than 90%, less than 80%, or less than 70%.
In some embodiments the netting, crop cover, or ground cover material is of denier 50 to 2000, 100 to 1000, 300 to 800, or 400 to 600.
In some embodiments the netting material comprises air space apertures through the material of widest dimension about 20 mm or 30 mm. In some embodiments the material comprises air space apertures in the range 10-30 mm.
In some embodiments the monofilament, yarn, or tape of the netting, crop cover, or ground cover material is formed from polypropylene.
In some embodiments, the netting or crop cover material is constructed to have a higher density in stronger parallel side margins of the material.
In some embodiments the netting or crop cover material is a bird netting, an insect netting, a shade cloth netting, a windbreak netting, or a hail protection netting.
In broad terms in another aspect the invention comprises a reflective netting material knitted, woven or non-woven from a synthetic monofilament, yarn, or tape or a combination thereof formed from a resin comprising at least one white, translucent, or colourless titanium pigment, which resin has been formed by mixing a masterbatch consisting essentially of 0.5 to 90% by weight of a white, translucent or colourless titanium pigment, and a first polymer, with a second polymer such that the resin (masterbatch) comprising the white, translucent, or colourless titanium pigment comprises between about 4 to 50% by weight of the total mixture. In some embodiments, the titanium pigment is white.
In some embodiments the material may incorporate a compound or compounds added to cause or increase the extent to which the material reflects and/or absorption of radiation from the earth (terrestrial (long wave or infrared) radiation). Thus when the material is placed over or adjunct to plants it will assist in retaining heat beneath the material, which may be desirable for some plants or applications.
In some further embodiments the material may incorporate a compound or compounds added to cause or increase the extent to which the material allows transmission and/or absorption of radiation from the earth (terrestrial (long wave or infrared) radiation). Thus when the material is placed over or adjacent to plants it will assist in releasing the heat beneath the material, which may be desirable for some plants or applications.
In yet another embodiment the material may incorporate a compound or compounds added to cause or increase the extent to which the material reflects and/or absorbs solar radiation. Thus when the material is placed over or adjunct to plants it will assist in cooling beneath the material, which may be desirable for some plants or applications. In some applications, there is a need for the material to allow visible light transmission in the form of diffused light.
In broad terms in another aspect the invention comprises a method of treating a plant or fruit or vegetables thereon which comprises providing over and/or adjacent the plant as bird netting, insect netting, shadecloth netting, windbreak netting, or hail protection netting a reflective netting material of any form or embodiment above.
In some embodiments, the resin comprises one or more additional pigments or colourants.
The materials, the netting, the crop cover, the ground cover may also contain additional pigments or materials to aid on the total system. The addition of pigments such as micro void generating pigments is of interest due to the ability to generate high reflectivity though the production of micro voids, which are very small air voids in the plastic/polymer material that give two materials with different light refractive indexes, in this case air and polymer. The combination of the micro void generating pigments along with UV absorbing pigments, gives useful combination. Possible micro void generating pigments include magnesium zirconate, calcium zirconate, strontium zirconate, calcium carbonate, barium zirconate and zirconium silicate.
Possible UV absorbing pigments include but are not limited to titanium dioxide, zinc oxide, zinc oxide nano particle size, altiris form of titanium dioxide barium titanate, magnesium titanate, strontium titanate, neodymium titanate, tin oxide, titanium oxide, cerium dioxide, zinc sulphide, zinc sulphate, zirconium silicate and magnesium oxide.
In broad terms in another aspect the invention comprises a method of treating a plant or fruit or vegetables thereon which comprises providing over and/or adjacent the plant as bird netting, insect netting, shadecloth netting, windbreak netting, or hail protection netting a reflective netting material as defined above.
In broad terms in another aspect the invention comprises a method of making a reflective netting material knitted, woven or non-woven from a synthetic monofilament, yarn, or tape or a combination thereof formed from a resin comprising at least one pigment such that the monofilament, yarn, or tape reflects at least 10% solar radiation on average across the wavelength range about 700-2500 nm, the method comprising: (i) providing a resin comprising the at least one pigment; (ii) forming a synthetic monofilament, yarn, or tape or a combination thereof from the resin; and (iii) forming a knitted, woven or non-woven netting material from the synthetic monofilament, yarn, or tape or a a combination thereof.
By “netting” is meant:

- in the case of knitted material, material having a cover factor (as herein defined) of up to 98% but typically less than 95%, 90%, 80%, 70%, 60%, 50%, 40%, 30%, 20%, 10%, 5%, or 3%;
- in the case of woven material, material having a cover factor (as herein defined) less than 85% or 80% but typically less than 70%, 60%, 50%, 40%, 30%, 20%, 10%, 5%, or 3%; and
- in the case of non-woven material, material having a cover factor (as herein defined) of up to 98% but typically less than 95%, 90%, 80%, 70%, 60%, 50%, 40%, 30%, 20%, 10%, 5%, or 3%.

By “cover factor” is meant the percentage of the overall area of the netting material which comprises knitted, woven, or non-woven monofilament, yarn, or tape or a combination, forming the netting itself, judged from perpendicular to the plane of the netting when laid out flat, as opposed to air space in between the netting. Thus if a netting has a cover factor of 30% then the air space through the netting would be 70% of the total area of the netting.
By “reflective” in general is meant that the material is reflective of at least 20% on average of visible light or of energy across any particular wavelength range of interest, more preferably at least 30% or 40% or 50% or 60% or 70% or 80% or 90%, on at least one side of the netting material. At some wavelengths within the particular wavelength range of interest the material may be less reflective, so long as the average of the reflectance of the material at all wavelengths across the wavelength range of interest is at least the minimum specified.
“Non woven netting” includes extruded netting, comprising crossed strands heat welded or chemically bonded together.
As used herein the term “and/or” means “and” or “or”, or both.
The term “comprising” as used in this specification means “consisting at least in part of”. When interpreting each statement in this specification that includes the term “comprising”, features other than that or those prefaced by the term may also be present. Related terms such as “comprise” and “comprises” are to be interpreted in the same manner.
It is intended that reference to a range of numbers disclosed herein (for example, 1 to 10) also incorporates reference to all rational numbers within that range (for example, 1, 1.1, 2, 3, 3.9, 4, 5, 6, 6.5, 7, 8, 9, and 10) and also any range of rational numbers within that range (for example, 2 to 8, 1.5 to 5.5, and 3.1 to 4.7) and, therefore, all sub-ranges of all ranges expressly disclosed herein are hereby expressly disclosed. These are only examples of what is specifically intended and all possible combinations of numerical values between the lowest value and the highest value enumerated are to be considered to be expressly stated in this application in a similar manner.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The invention is further described by way of example with reference to the accompanying drawings in which:

FIGS. 1a and 1b shows a section of one form of knitted hexagonal monofilament netting, having a cover factor of approximately 10-15%

FIGS. 2a and 2b shows a section of one form leno woven based monofilament netting, having a cover factor of approximately 20-25%,

FIGS. 3a and 3b shows a section of one form of knitted diamond monofilament netting, having a cover factor of approximately 15-20%

FIGS. 4a and 4b shows a section of one form leno woven based monofilament and tape netting, having a cover factor of approximately 20-25%,

FIGS. 5a and 5b shows a section of one form knitted diamond monofilament netting, having a cover factor of approximately 5-10,

FIGS. 6a and 6b shows a section of one form extruded diamond monofilament netting, having a cover factor of approximately 3-8%,

FIGS. 7a and 7b shows a section of one form pillar monofilament netting, having a cover factor of approximately 30 to 35%,

FIGS. 8a and 8b shows a section of one form non woven netting, having a cover factor of approximately 90 to 95%,

FIGS. 9a and 9b shows a section of one form woven tape netting, having a cover factor of approximately 80 to 85%,

FIGS. 10a and 10b shows a section of one form pillar monofilament and tape netting, having a cover factor of approximately 35 to 40%,

FIGS. 11a and 11b shows a section of one form pillar monofilament netting, having a cover factor of approximately 45 to 50%,

FIGS. 12a and 12b shows a section of one form knitted diamond monofilament and tape netting, having a cover factor of approximately 25-30%,

FIGS. 13a and 13b shows a section of one form knitted diamond monofilament and tape netting, having a cover factor of approximately 20-25%,

FIG. 14 shows a scale of apples with no sunburn at a progressive scale of increasing amounts of sunburn from 1 to 5. The circle area inside the apple shows the discoloured area, normally yellow in colour (in sunburn 1 to 5 examples) and then the dark inner circle in black (in example 4 and 5) is the burnt are that appears black on the fruit,

FIG. 15 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm for monofilament 1%, TiO2,

FIG. 16 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm for monofilament, 1.5% TiO2,

FIG. 17 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm for monofilament, 2% TiO2,

FIG. 18 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm for monofilament, 10% Microvoid pigment,

FIG. 19 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm for monofilament, 14.0% Microvoid pigment,

FIG. 20 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm for monofilament, 2% TiO2, 2.5% Microvoid pigment,

FIG. 21 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament, 2.0% carbon Black,

FIG. 22 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament, 0.4% Aluminium,

FIG. 23 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament, 2% Altiris,

FIG. 24 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament, 3% Altiris,

FIG. 25 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament, 4% Altiris,

FIG. 26 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament, 1% Altiris, 2.5% Microvoid pigment,

FIG. 27 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament, 1% Altiris, 10% Microvoid pigment,

FIG. 28 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament, 1% Altiris, 14% Microvoid pigment,

FIG. 29 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament, 2% Altiris, 2.5% Microvoid pigment,

FIG. 30 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament, 2% Altiris, 5% Microvoid pigment,

FIG. 31 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament, 2% Altiris, 14% Microvoid pigment,

FIG. 32 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament, 1% TiO2, 5% Microvoid pigment,

FIG. 33 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament, 1% TiO2, 10% Microvoid pigment,

FIG. 34 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament, 1% TiO2, 14% Microvoid pigment,

FIG. 35 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament, 2% ZnO nano, 2.5% Microvoid pigment,

FIG. 36 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm film extruded onto woven fabic, Polymer only,

FIG. 37 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament, 1% TiO2,

FIG. 38 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm film, 2% TiO2,

FIG. 39 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm film extruded onto woven fabic, 3% Altiris,

FIG. 40 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm tape, 2% TiO2,

FIG. 41 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm tape, 20% Microvoid pigment,

FIG. 42 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm tape, 2.5% black, 4.0% Microvoid pigment,

FIG. 43 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm tape, Al coated tape,

FIG. 44 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament, 1% Altiris, 14% Microvoid pigment,

FIG. 45 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament, 2% Altiris, 14% Microvoid pigment,

FIG. 46 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament, 1% TiO2, 14% Microvoid pigment, and

FIG. 47 shows a graph of diffuse transmittance versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm tape, 2% TiO2, 15% Microvoid pigment.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF EMBODIMENTS

Netting, crop cover, or ground cover material of the invention may be knitted, woven or non-woven from a synthetic monofilament, yarn (multifilament and non-multifilament), or tape or a combination thereof, formed from a resin comprising sufficient of at least one pigment the desired light transmission, reflection, and absorption properties described herein.
In one embodiment the monofilament, yarn, or tape is formed from a resin comprising at least one pigment, which resin has been formed by mixing a masterbatch consisting essentially of 10 or 20 to 90% by weight of the pigment(s) and a first polymer, with a second polymer. The first polymer may be a mixture of polymers as may the second polymer. The masterbatch may be in the form of thermoplastic granules. The pigment(s) may be added to the first polymer or mix of polymers when heated to be liquid or flowable and is vigorously mixed to distribute the pigment evenly, and the first polymer comprising the mixed pigment(s) is then formed into solid granules on cooling. The first polymer or polymers acts to bind the pigment(s) into granules enabling solid granulation of the mixture, the masterbatch; for ease of handling in a subsequent monofilament, yarn, fibre, or tape manufacturing process. The masterbatch is then mixed with a second polymer and may be mixed in a letdown range of 4 or 5 to 50% of the masterbatch to the second polymer or polymers, to form the mixture from which the monofilament, yarn, or tape is then manufactured. Monofilament may be extruded; synthetic yarn may be formed by known methods including extrusion of individual fibres which are then twisted to form a yarn. Tape may be extruded directly or the resin may be extruded into sheet form which may then be cut to tapes suitable for knitting or weaving into netting. Nonwoven netting may be formed by random binding at numerous irregular crossing points, of thermoplastic monofilament, yarn, or tape, by application of heat and pressure.
The first polymer and the second polymer may be the same or different and may be any suitable polyolefin such as polyethylene or polypropylene, for example, or a mixture thereof, or an ethylene alpha-olefin, or a polyester, or a biopolymer, or a blend of any of the foregoing. Certain plastics are particularly useful when present as minor or major components. Ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA), ethylene butyl acrylate (EBA) and ethylene methyl acrylate (EMA) are useful for imparting elasticity and other properties. Polyesters and polystyrene, styrene-butdienie (SB), acrylonitrile-butadienie-styrene (ABS), styrene-acrylonitrile (SAN), polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) and polycarbonate are useful as dye carriers and also for influencing radiation (reflecting, absorbing and transmission) properties and also other properties on the materials. Starch and other plant polymers are useful to increase biodegradability. Alternatively the material may comprise in part or whole of paper, wood or cellulose fibre, starch based polymers, casein, latex or in any combination of the above and/or with petroleum derived plastic polymers. In addition to the pigment the polymer or polymer blend may incorporate other agents such as a UV stabiliser or combination of stabilisers and processing aid or aids.
The at least one pigment in the resin from which the netting or ground cover material is formed provides the material with improved transmittance of visible light relative to the amount of infrared light transmitted by the material, and increased absorption of UV light.
In some embodiments, the at least one pigment is a single pigment that provides improved transmittance of visible light relative to the amount of infrared light transmitted by the material, and increased absorption of UV light. In some embodiments, the at least one pigment comprises two or more individual pigments that provide the desired transmission and absorption properties.
In one embodiment, the at least one pigment comprises a particulate material. The particulate material may be white, coloured or colourless. In some exemplary embodiments, the particulate material comprises at least one white pigment. In some embodiments, the particulate material is a microvoiding pigment, as described herein.
In some embodiments the at least one pigment comprises at least one white pigment. In some embodiments, the at least one white pigment comprises an inorganic white pigment.
In certain embodiments the at least one white pigment comprises a white zirconium, strontium, barium, magnesium, zinc, calcium, titanium, or potassium pigment or a combination thereof. In some embodiments, the white pigment comprises zirconium dioxide, magnesium zirconate, calcium zirconate, strontium zirconate, barium zirconate, zirconium silicate, zinc sulphide, calcium carbonate, barium sulphate, magnesium oxide, strontium carbonate, barium carbonate, potassium tintanate, barium titanate, magnesium titanate, strontium titanate, neodymium titanate, tin oxide, titanium dioxide, titanium oxide, zinc oxide, zinc sulphide, zinc sulphate, dipotassium titanium trioxide, potassium oxide, potassium titanate, magnesium carbonate, aluminium oxide, aluminium hydroxide, or a combination thereof.
In some embodiments, the at least one white pigment comprises zirconium dioxide, magnesium zirconate, calcium zirconate, strontium zirconate, barium zirconate, zirconium silicate, zinc sulphide, calcium carbonate, barium sulphate, magnesium oxide, strontium carbonate, barium carbonate, titanium dioxide, potassium oxide, potassium titanate or a combination thereof.
In certain embodiments, the white pigment comprises a white zirconium, strontium, barium, magnesium or calcium pigment, or a combination thereof.
In certain embodiments, the white pigment comprises zirconium dioxide, magnesium zirconate, calcium zirconate, strontium zirconate, barium zirconate, zirconium silicate, calcium carbonate, barium sulphate, magnesium oxide, strontium carbonate, barium carbonate, dipotassium titanium trioxide, and potassium titanate, magnesium carbonate, aluminium oxide, aluminium hydroxide, or a combination thereof.
In some embodiments, the white pigment is selected from the group consisting of zirconium dioxide, barium sulphate, calcium carbonate, and titanium dioxide.
In some embodiments, the white pigment is selected from the group consisting of zirconium dioxide, barium sulphate, calcium carbonate.
In some embodiments, the white pigment is selected from the group consisting of barium sulphate, calcium carbonate, and titanium dioxide.
In some embodiments, the white pigment is selected from the group consisting of barium sulphate and calcium carbonate. In some embodiments the barium sulphate or calcium carbonate is provided in an amount of 12% to 30% by weight. In some embodiments said barium sulphate or calcium carbonate is in the form of particles of size 0.5-3 microns.
In some embodiments, the white pigment is selected from the group consisting of calcium carbonate and titanium dioxide.
In some embodiments, the white pigment comprises a titanium pigment, a calcium pigment, or a combination thereof.
In one exemplary embodiment, the white pigment is titanium dioxide. In some embodiments, the titanium dioxide is present in an amount of 0.1% to about 4% by weight of the material. In some embodiments, the titanium dioxide is present in an amount of 1% to about 4% by weight of the material. In some embodiments, the titanium dioxide is conventional titanium dioxide. In some embodiments, the titanium dioxide is non-conventional titanium dioxide, as described herein.
In some embodiments, the white pigment is calcium carbonate.
In some embodiments, the at least one white pigment comprises a UV absorbing pigment or a UV reflecting pigment. In some embodiments, the at least one pigment comprises a UV reflecting white pigment and UV absorbing pigment; or a UV absorbing white pigment.
In some embodiments, the at least one white pigment comprises a microvoiding pigment as described herein. In some embodiments, the microvoiding pigment is a UV reflecting white pigment. In some embodiments, the at least one pigment comprises a microvoiding UV reflecting white pigment and a UV absorbing pigment.
As described herein, the UV absorbing pigment reduced the amount of UV light reflected within the material, which may cause photodegradation, and reduced the amount of UV light transmitted by the material. Reduced transmission of UV light in netting and crop cover materials can also reduce sunburn on, for example, fruit and vegetables beneath the canopy of the netting or crop cover, and other UV related stress on plants.
The at least one white pigment may comprise one or more white pigments in the form of particles. In some embodiments, the at least one white pigment is a particulate material.
In some embodiments, the at least one pigment comprises titanium dioxide substantially in the rutile crystal form. Titanium dioxide in rutile crystal form is capable of scattering near-infrared light while also providing low scattering and low absorbance of visible light. Such properties may be obtained when the titanium dioxide has an average particle size as defined above.
Titanium dioxide substantially in the rutile crystal form and having a large average particle size, as defined herein, is distinct from conventional pigmentary titanium dioxide and may be referred to herein as non-conventional titanium dioxide.
Titanium dioxide in the rutile form having an average particle size as defined above reflects significantly more near-infrared light and less visible light than conventional titanium dioxide pigment. The reflection in the visible spectrum as a percent of incoming radiation is more similar to the infrared spectrum, while conventional titanium dioxide reflects more visible light in proportion to the infrared spectrum. Such non-conventional titanium dioxide is commercially available, for example, from Huntsman Corporation under the trade name Altiris® 550 and Altiris® 800 and from Tayca Corporation under the trade name JR-1000.
WO 2011/101657 A1, WO 2011/101658 A1, and WO 2011/101659 A1, each of which is incorporated herein by reference, describe titanium dioxide in the rutile crystal form having a large average particle size, relative to conventional pigmentary titanium dioxide.
As described therein, crystal size is distinct from particle size. Crystal size relates to the size of the fundamental crystals which make up the particulate material. Crystals may aggregate to form larger particles. For example, conventional titanium dioxide in the rutile crystal form has a crystal size of about 0.17 μm-0.29 μm and a particle size of about 0.25 μm-0.40 μm, while conventional titanium dioxide in the anatase crystal form has a crystal size of about 0.10 μm-0.25 μm and a particle size of about 0.20 μm-0.40 μm. Particle size is affected by factors such as the crystal size and milling technique used during production.
In some embodiments, the particle size of the titanium dioxide is greater than the crystal size. In other embodiments, the particle size of the titanium dioxide is about equal to the crystal size. In one embodiment, the average particle size is about equal to the average crystal size. In another embodiment, the ratio of the average particle size to the average crystal size ratio is less than 1.4.
The crystal size and particle size of the titanium dioxide may be determined by methods well known to those skilled in the art. For example, the crystal size may be determined by transmission electron microscopy on a sample and analysis of the resulting image.
The particulate material comprises titanium dioxide substantially in the rutile crystal form because of its high refractive index. In some embodiments, greater than 90% by weight of the titanium dioxide, greater than 95% by weight of the titanium dioxide, or greater than 99% by weight of the titanium dioxide, is in the rutile crystal form. In some embodiments, the particulate material may further comprise titanium dioxide in the anatase crystal form.
The titanium dioxide may by prepared using natural ores such as ilmenite and mineral rutile, enriched ores such as titanium slag and beneficiated ilmenite, or both as the starting raw material. The titanium dioxide may be prepared by modifying known processes for the preparation of titanium dioxide. Examples of known processes include but are not limited to the sulfate, chloride, fluoride, hydrothermal, aerosol and leaching processes. To provide the desired titanium dioxide, each of these processes is modified by: (a) treating at a higher temperature, for example, 900° C. or higher; (b) treating for a longer period of time, for example, 5 hours or more; (c) increasing or reducing typical levels of growth moderators present during the process; and/or (d) reducing the typical level of rutile seeds. In some embodiments, the titanium dioxide is commercially available.
In some embodiments, the titanium dioxide comprises doped titanium dioxide. As used herein, “doped titanium dioxide” refers to titanium dioxide that includes one or more dopants which have been incorporated during preparation of the titanium dioxide. The dopants may be incorporated by known processes. Examples of dopants include, but are not limited to, calcium, magnesium, sodium, vanadium, chromium, manganese, iron, nickel, aluminum, antimony, phosphorus, niobium or cesium. In some embodiments, the dopant is incorporated in an amount of no more than 30% by weight, no more than 15% by weight, orno more than 5% by weight, based on the total weight of the titanium dioxide. In some embodiments, the dopant is incorporated in an amount of from 0.1 to 30% by weight, or 0.5 to 15% by weight, or 1 to 5% by weight, relative to the total weight of the titanium dioxide. Typically, the doped titanium dioxide issubstantially in the rutile crystal form because of its high refractive index. In some embodiments, the particulate material may further comprise doped titanium dioxide in an anatase crystal form.
In one embodiment, the doped titanium dioxide is nickel antimony titanate or chromium antimony titanate. In another embodiment, the doped titanium oxide is chromium antimony titanate.
In certain embodiments, the dopant is incorporated by adding a salt of the dopant to the pulp during preparation of the titanium dioxide. In some embodiments, the dopant is manganese, aluminium or potassium. In certain embodiments, manganese sulphate is added at a concentration of <0.2% by weight (wt/wt). For example, manganese sulphate may be added at a concentration of from 0.01 to 0.2% by weight (wt/wt). In other embodiments, Al₂O₃and K₂O are added to the pulp. For example, from 0.01 to 0.5% by weight of Al₂O₃(wt/wt) and 0.01 to 0.5% by weight of K₂O (wt/wt) may be added to the pulp. In a particular embodiment, 0.05%> by weight of Al₂O₃(wt/wt) and 0.2%> by weight of K₂O (wt/wt) are added to the pulp. In another particular embodiment, 0.2%> by weight K₂O (wt/wt) and 0.2%> by weight Al₂O₃(wt/wt) are added to the pulp.
In some embodiments, the particulate material comprises coated titanium dioxide.
In some embodiments, the coated titanium dioxide provides UV light protection without also increasing UV light activated photocatalytic effects, which are generally observed with conventional titanium dioxide. Such coated titanium dioxide can provide netting material with improved durability/longevity to UV light exposure. In some embodiments, the coated titanium dioxide also has low visible scattering.
In some embodiments, the coated titanium dioxide comprises coated doped titanium dioxide. In certain embodiments, the titanium dioxide is doped with a dopant that can act as recombination centres for holes and electrons. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that increased recombination provides decreased UV stimulated photocatalytic activity. In one embodiment, the dopant is chromium, manganese, and/or vanadium.
The coated titanium dioxide is prepared by depositing an effects coating material onto the particles surface. With such coating, the titanium dioxide exhibits increased UV light protective capability as compared to conventional pigmentary crystal size titanium dioxide. It also exhibits reduced photocatalytic activity and improved dispersibilty.
The titanium dioxide may be milled, since the optical performance depends on reducing the average particle size so that it tends towards the crystal size. The titanium dioxide may be wet milled (e.g. sand or bead milled) and may be subsequently separated from the aqueous medium by coating the particles with, for example, aluminium oxyhydroxide. The titanium dioxide must be dispersed prior to milling. A crude alumina coating renders the titanium dioxide flocculent at neutral pH, facilitating filtration and washing prior to drying.
The coatings may be used to impart, for example, dispersibilty, photocatalytic inertness, or photostability.
Coating materials suitable for use include those commonly used to coat an inorganic oxide or hydrous oxide onto the surface of particles. Typical inorganic oxides and hydrous oxides include oxides and/or hydrous oxides of silicon, aluminum, titanium, zirconium, magnesium, zinc, cerium, phosphorus, or tin, for example, Al₂O₃, SiO₂, ZrO₂, CeO₂, P₂O₅, sodium silicate, potassium silicate, sodium aluminate, aluminum chloride, aluminum sulphate, and mixtures thereof. The amount of coating coated onto the surface of the titanium dioxide or doped titanium dioxide may range from about 0.1% by weight to about 20% by weight of the inorganic oxide and/or hydrous oxide relative to the total weight of the titanium dioxide or doped titanium dioxide.
Coating materials suitable for use also include, silica, dense amorphous silica, zirconia, aluminium phosphate, titania, tin, antimony, manganese and cerium. In some embodiments, the coating is white or colourless.
Particles of the titanium dioxide may be coated with any suitable amount of coating material. In some embodiments, the particles are coated with the coating material at a level of up to about 7% by weight. In certain embodiments, the level is from about 0.1% to about 7% by weight or from about 0.2% to about 7% by weight, relative to the total weight of titanium dioxide.
In some embodiments, the particles comprise a dense silica coating, an alumina coating, a zirconia coating or a combination thereof. In some embodiments, the particles comprise a coating of from 1-3% alumina and/or 2-4% silica.
In some embodiments, two or more coating materials may be used to coat the particles. The coatings may be applied simultaneously to produce a single layer or successively to produce two or more layers, wherein each layer may have a different composition. In one embodiment, the particles are coated with silica, such as dense silica, to produce a first layer, and also with zirconia to produce a second layer.
Coated titanium dioxide may be prepared by treating titanium dioxide with a coating material, as known in the art. For example, the titanium dioxide may be dispersed in water along with the coating material, and the pH of the solution adjusted to precipitate the desired hydrated oxide to form a coating on the surface of the particulate material. After coating, the coated material may be washed and dried before being ground, for example, in a fluid energy mill or micronizer, to separate agglomerates formed during coating. At this milling stage, an organic surface treatment, may also be applied.
The titanium dioxide particles may be milled prior to coating. In some embodiments, the particles may be dry milled, for example with a Raymond mill, or they may be wet milled, for example with a fine media mill or sandmill, or both. Generally, to wet mill, the particles are dispersed in water and ground into sub micrometer sized particles to form an aqueous slurry.
In another embodiment, the particles may be dry milled using a Raymond mill and then wet milled in a fine media mill containing Ottawa sand. During wet milling, the particles may be slurried to 350 grams/litre and milled for 30 minutes. After wet milling, the sand may be separated from the slurry, such as by settling or any other suitable means to form the aqueous slurry.
Particles may be coated by adding a suitable coating material to the aqueous slurry prior to or during a pH adjustment to effect precipitation. For example, the effect coating material may be added to the aqueous slurry first, followed by pH adjustment; alternatively, the pH of the aqueous slurry may be adjusted while the effect coating material is being added to the aqueous slurry.
Suitable coating materials include, but are not limited to, salts such as zirconium sulphate, phosphoric acid, and sodium silicate. In the case of zirconium sulphate, zirconyl oxy hydroxide may be precipitated onto the surface of the particles to coat the particles; in the case of sodium silicate, silica may be precipitated onto the surface of the particles to coat the particles.
In one exemplary embodiment, the aqueous slurry comprising particles of titanium dioxide is introduced into a tank for stirring. The temperature of the aqueous slurry may then be adjusted to 75° C. and its pH adjusted to 10.5. The coating material may then be introduced into the stirred tank in an amount sufficient to produce the desired coating. For example, to produce a 1% by weight dense silica coating, 1% silica (% wt/wt on titanium dioxide) is added to the stirred tank over 30 minutes and mixed for 30 minutes. Similarly, to produce a 3% by weight dense silica coating, 3% silica (% wt/wt on titanium dioxide) is added. In one embodiment, the coating material used to provide a silica coating is sodium silicate.
To precipitate a dense silica coating onto the particles, the pH may be adjusted by adding sulphuric acid to the stirred tank. In a particular embodiment, sulphuric acid is added over 60 minutes to bring the pH to 8.8 and then over 35 minutes to further adjust the pH to 1.3.
The particles of titanium dioxide or doped titanium dioxide coated with dense silica may then be coated with an alumina coating to, for example, assist onward processing such as filtration. In one embodiment, the particles are further coated with 0.6% by weight alumina by adding caustic sodium aluminate to the stirred tank over 25 minutes to bring the pH to 10.25, at which point the contents of the tank are mixed for 20 minutes. Sulphuric acid can then be added to the tank to adjust the pH to 6.5.
After coating, the coated titanium dioxide or doped titanium dioxide may then be washed and dried before grinding in, for example, a micronizer or fluid energy mill. Generally, this grinding step separates particles that have aggregated during the coating and/or drying procedures.
During this grinding step the coated material may be treated with a surface treatment. Surface treatments include, for example, organic surface treatments such as treatment with polyols, amines, and silicone derivatives. In one embodiment, the organic surface treatment comprises treatment with trimethylolpropane, pentaerythritol, triethanolamine, n-octyl phosphonic acid, trimethylolethane, or a combination thereof. Organic surface treatments may improve the dispersibilty of the coated titanium dioxide.
In one embodiment, the coated titanium dioxide particles are treated to selectively remove particular size fractions. In one embodiment, particles greater than or equal to 5 μm in diameter are removed. In another embodiment, particles greater than or equal to 3 μm in diameter are removed. Any suitable method for removal may be used. In some embodiments, selective removal may be performed by centrifugation.
The titanium dioxide may be dispersed within suitable vehicle for incorporation into the resin. In certain embodiments, non-conventional titanium dioxide is incorporated into the netting material in an amount from about 0.5% to about 4.0% by weight of the material. In certain embodiments non-conventional titanium dioxide is incorporated into the netting material in an amount from about 1% to about 4.0% by weight of the material. In certain embodiments non-conventional titanium dioxide is incorporated into the netting material in an amount of 0.2%, 0.25%, 0.5%, 1.0%, 1.5%, 2%, 2.5%, 3.0%, 3.5%, 4.0%, 4.5%, 5%, or 6%.
In some embodiments, the at least one pigment consists essentially of non-conventional titanium dioxide. In certain embodiments, the at least one pigment is non-conventional titanium dioxide.
As shown, in the Figures such non-conventional titanium dioxide advantageously has the desired absorbance, reflectance, and transmittance profile.
In one embodiment, the at least one pigment comprises conventional titanium dioxide. Such titanium dioxide is readily commercially available.
Conventional pigmentary titanium dioxide is typically used in the netting material in combination with at least one additional pigment. Accordingly, in certain embodiments, the at least one pigment comprises conventional titanium dioxide and at least one additional pigment.
In certain embodiments, the additional pigment comprises a particulate material that forms microvoids on stretching the monofilament, yarn, multifilament yarn, or tape from which the netting material is formed or a film material from which tape is cut. In some embodiments, the microvoiding pigment is barium sulphate and/or calcium carbonate.
In some embodiments, the netting material comprises microvoids in the material. In some embodiments, the microviods have been formed by stretching monofilament, yarn, or tape from which the netting material is formed or a film material from which tape is cut.
In some embodiments, the at least one pigment comprises a particulate material that forms microvoids when monofilament, yarn, or tape from which the netting material is formed or a film material from which tape is cut is stretched. Such particulate materials may be referred to herein as microvoiding pigments. Stretching monofilament, yarn, or tape from which the netting material is formed which comprises microvoiding pigments causes the pigment to to at least partially debond or separate from the polymer(s) of the resin from which the monofilament, yarn or tape of the netting material is formed. In some embodiments, the microvoids are formed by stretching mono-axially or bi-axially. For many applications mono-orientation is preferred with tapes being stretched to a length of at least 5 times greater or more.
The microvoids create areas in which the difference in refractive index between the air and the polymer(s) results in light scattering. The presence of microvoids in the material contribute to the reflectance and transmittance properties of the material. In some embodiments, stretching monofilament, yarn, or tape from which the netting material is formed or a film material from which tape is cut, to create microvoids increases the opacity of the monofilament, yarn, tape or film material.
In some embodiments, the microvoiding pigment is at least partially debonded or separated from the polymer(s) of the resin to create the microvoids is an inorganic pigment.
In some embodiments, the microvoiding pigment is a is a white pigment. In some embodiments, the white microvoiding pigment is an inorganic pigment. In some embodiments, the white inorganic pigment is a metal salt or oxide. In some embodiments the white inorganic pigment that create micro voids is barium sulphate, calcium carbonate, magnesium zirconate, calcium zirconate, strontium zirconate, barium zirconate, zirconium silicate, or a combination thereof.
In exemplary embodiments, the white pigment that creates microvoids is zirconium dioxide, barium sulphate and/or calcium carbonate. In exemplary embodiments, the white pigment that creates microvoids is barium sulphate and/or calcium carbonate. In one embodiment, the microvoiding pigment is calcium carbonate.
The stretching or orienting the polymer/pigment mixture also assists the development of thermic properties of the material.
In some embodiments, the microvoiding pigment is barium sulphate or calcium carbonate, as a mineral obtained from mining or as a precipitate from manufacturing. In one embodiment, the pigment is processed to a fine micron size in the range 0.05 to 10 microns. In some embodiments, the size is in the range 0.5-3 microns or 0.7-1.0 micron. Other useful white pigments for use as microvoiding pigments are described above.
In some embodiments, the material comprises comprises microvoids that have been formed by stretching monofilament, yarn, or tape from or a film material from which the tape is cut, formed from a resin comprising at least one microvoiding pigment. In some embodiments, the resin further comprises a UV absorbing pigment. In some embodiments, the UV absorbing pigment is an inorganic pigment. In some embodiments, the UV absorbing pigment is titanium dioxide or zinc oxide.
In some embodiments, the at least one pigment comprises at least one UV absorbing pigment. In some embodiments, the UV absorbing pigment is an organic UV absorbing pigment or an inorganic UV absorbing pigment.
In some embodiments the at least one pigment comprises an organic UV absorbing pigment. In some embodiments the organic UV absorbing pigment is chosen from the group consisting of benzotriazole, cyanoacrylates, phenylacrylate, oxanilides, benzophenones, hydroxyphenyltriazines, hyrdoxyphenylbenzotriazole, tri and octyl methoxycinnamate, aminobenzoic acid, aminobenzoate and oxybenzone.
In some embodiments the organic UV absorbing pigment is added at a rate of 0.01% to 5% by weight.
In some embodiments the at least one pigment comprises an inorganic UV absorbing pigment. In some embodiments, the UV absorbing pigment is a white pigment or colourless pigment. In some embodiments the inorganic UV absorbing pigment is clear or substantially clear. In some embodiments the inorganic clear or substantially clear UV absorbing pigment is chosen from the group consisting of nano zinc oxide and cerium dioxide.
In some embodiments the inorganic clear UV absorbing pigment is added at a rate of 0.1% to 5% by weight.
In some embodiments the at least one pigment comprises an inorganic white UV absorbing pigment. In some embodiments the inorganic white UV absorbing pigment is chosen from the group consisting of barium titanate, magnesium titanate, strontium titanate, neodymium titanate, tin oxide, titanium oxide, titanium dioxide, silica, alumina, zinc oxide, zinc sulphide, zinc sulphate, zirconium silicate and magnesium oxide. In some embodiments, the inorganic white UV absorbing pigment is titanium dioxide.
In some embodiments the inorganic white UV absorbing pigment is added at a rate of 0.1% to 5% by weight.
The at least one UV absorbing pigment is present in the monofilament, multifilament yarn, or tape in an amount such that the material has the desired absorbance profile. The UV absorbing pigment decreases the reflectance in the 280-400 nm or 300-380 nm range by increasing UV absorbance. Increasing the absorbance in the UV range improves the life of the polymer by protecting the polymer from UV light, and reduces plants exposure to excessive amounts of UV light, which may cause sunburn. The UV absorbing pigment absorbs UV light before free radicals can be produced by interaction of the UV light waves with the polymer.
In some embodiments, the at least one pigment comprises an UV absorbing pigment and one or more additional pigments. In one embodiment, the additional pigment is an inorganic pigment, an organic pigment, or a mixture thereof.
In some embodiments, the additional pigment is a white or colourless pigment or combination of pigments. In some embodiments, the white or colourless pigment is an inorganic pigment, an organic pigment, or a combination thereof.
In some embodiments, the additional pigment is a white or colourless inorganic pigment selected from zirconium dioxide, magnesium zirconate, calcium zirconate, strontium zirconate, barium zirconate, zirconium silicate, zinc sulphide, calcium carbonate, barium sulphate, magnesium oxide, strontium carbonate, barium carbonate, potassium oxide, conventional pigmentary titanium dioxide, and combinations thereof.
In some embodiments, the additional pigment is a white or colourless organic pigment.
In some embodiments, the additional pigment is coloured. Including a coloured pigment in the resin can provide the netting or ground cover material with a coloured tint. The pigment selected depends on the desired colour.
In some embodiments, the coloured pigment is a single coloured pigment or a mixture of two or more coloured pigments that provide the desired colour.
In some embodiments, the coloured pigment is an inorganic or organic coloured pigment. Examples of coloured organic pigments include azo, anthraquinone, phthalocyanine, perinone/perylene, indigo/thioindigo, dioxazine, quinacridone, isoindolinone, isoindoline, diketopyrrolopyrrole, azomethine and azomethine-azo pigments.
In some embodiments, the additional pigment(s) decreases the amount of infrared light transmitted and/or increases the amount of visible light transmitted.
In embodiments where the at least one pigment comprises two or more individual pigments, the individual pigments may be combined by any suitable method known in the art. In one embodiment, the pigments are combined by mixing. In some embodiments, the pigments are combined before addition to the polymer(s) of the resin. In some embodiments, the pigments are combined by adding one or more of the individual pigments to the polymer(s) of the resin separately to the other pigment(s), and in any order.
As referred to previously in some embodiments the material may also incorporate a compound or compounds added to increase the extent to which the material reflects and/or absorbs radiation.
As referred to previously in some embodiments the material may also incorporate a compound or compounds added to increase the extent to which the material transmits and/or absorbs radiation.
As referred to previously in some embodiments the material may also incorporate a compound or compounds added to increase the extent to which the material reflects and/or absorbs solar radiation.
In some embodiments the material is of denier 50 to 2000 or 100 to 1000 and most typically 300 to 800 or 400 to 600.
The material may be constructed to have a higher knitted or woven or non-woven density in parallel side margins of the material, so that these side margins of the material are stronger.
FIGS. 1 to 13 show by way of example sections of netting material.
FIGS. 1a and 1b shows a section of one form of knitted hexagonal monofilament netting, having a cover factor of approximately 10-15%.
FIGS. 2a and 2b shows a section of one form leno woven based monofilament netting, having a cover factor of approximately 20-25%.
FIGS. 3a and 3b shows a section of one form of knitted diamond monofilament netting, having a cover factor of approximately 15-20%.
FIGS. 4a and 4b shows a section of one form leno woven based monofilament and tape netting, having a cover factor of approximately 20-25%.
FIGS. 5a and 5b shows a section of one form knitted diamond monofilament netting, having a cover factor of approximately 5-10.
FIGS. 6a and 6b shows a section of one form extruded diamond monofilament netting, having a cover factor of approximately 3-8%.
FIGS. 7a and 7b shows a section of one form pillar monofilament netting, having a cover factor of approximately 30 to 35%.
FIGS. 8a and 8b shows a section of one form non woven netting, having a cover factor of approximately 90 to 95%.
FIGS. 9a and 9b shows a section of one form woven tape netting, having a cover factor of approximately 80 to 85%.
FIGS. 10a and 10b shows a section of one form pillar monofilament and tape netting, having a cover factor of approximately 35 to 40%.
FIGS. 11a and 11b shows a section of one form pillar monofilament netting, having a cover factor of approximately 45 to 50%.
FIGS. 12a and 12b shows a section of one form knitted diamond monofilament and tape netting, having a cover factor of approximately 25-30%.
FIGS. 13a and 13b shows a section of one form knitted diamond monofilament and tape netting, having a cover factor of approximately 20-25%.
Typically reflective netting of the invention has a cover factor of 50% or less. Where the netting is knitted shade cloth however, for example, it may have a higher cover factor, up to 95% but typically still less than 70%. Where the netting is woven shade cloth however, for example, it may have a higher cover factor, up to 85% but typically still less than 70%.
In some embodiments reflective netting of the invention may comprise air space apertures through the material of widest dimension about 30 mm. In other embodiments reflective netting of the invention may comprise air space apertures through the material of widest dimension about 20 mm. In some embodiments reflective netting of the invention may comprise air space apertures through the material of widest dimension in the range 10-30 mm and also in the range of 1 to 10 mm.
In some embodiments, the netting material has a form substantially as depicted in any one of the accompanying Figures.
As referred to previously the netting may be knitted or woven or formed in a non-woven construction, from monofilament, yarn, or tape or a combination. Yarn may comprise multiple synthetic fibres twisted together (multifilaments). Tape may for example be formed by extruding synthetic sheet material from the resin, and then cutting the extruded sheet material to form long tapes of typically 1 to 5 mm of width.
The yarn or tape from which the netting, crop cover, or ground cover is formed has reflectance in the near infrared wavelength range, and reflects at least 10%, or 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%, 60%, 65%, 70%, 75%, 80%, 85%, or 90% or more light within this wavelength range.
In some embodiments the material is a ground cover material, which may be a woven material woven from flat warp and weft tapes of a plastics material. The tapes may be formed by extruding a film material from a polymer resin and then cutting the film into tapes which are in turn used to weave the material, or by extruding individual tapes. Optionally a woven material may be coated on at least one side with a coating which closes any porosity in the woven material. Alternatively the ground cover material may be a film material.
Trials
Trial 1—Crop Cover Effect on Temperature
A field trial was carried out on Blackberries in Oregon, United States of America to determine the effect of crop cover material according to the invention on temperature under the cover over time.
Rain cover fabric was installed over a hoop structure that measured 14 foot at the apex. The Rain cover fabric was approximately 12 feet in height where it crossed the row of blackberry bushes which were pruned to approximately 6 foot at the start of the trial. Data was collected from the east row of the coverage. Distance of the Rain cover fabric above the bushes started at 6 feet above the bushes and moved higher to the apex of the hoop which is between the two covered rows.
The Rain cover fabric panel covering the blackberries was comprised of 4 individual 40′ panels sewn together for an overall length of 160′.
The temperature sensor was a TempRecord Multi-Trip MK III combination sensor/data logger unit. The loggers were placed directly over the east row of the two rows covered by the Rain cover fabric panels. Loggers were placed at 78 inches above ground level.
The Rain cover fabric material was woven non-pigmented polymer material plus stabilisers, with a plastic coating on the top and on the bottom, as follows:
Top coating: LDPE 25 gsm
Woven polymer: HDPE 105 gsm
Bottom coating: LDPE 25 gsm.
Rain cover fabric 1 had 0% Altiris 800® added to the coating
Rain cover fabric 2 had 1% Altiris 800® added to the coating
Rain cover fabric 3 had 2% Altiris 800® added to the coating
Rain cover fabric 4 had 3% Altiris 800® added to the coating.
Tables 1 and 2 below show the percentage of time at certain temperatures under the Rain cover fabric 1, Rain cover fabric 2, Rain cover fabric 3, and Rain cover fabric 4.
As can be seen from the data below, the addition of Altiris to the coating of the Rain cover fabric material provides a reduction in the period of time that high temperatures of over 30° C. were reached.

TABLE 1

9 to 22 Aug. 2013 - Oregon
PERCENTAGE OF TIME AT TEMPERATURE

Temp	Rain cover	Rain cover	Rain cover	Rain cover
(° C.)	fabric 1	fabric 2	fabric 3	fabric 4

Average	21.0	20.7	20.6	20.5
Over 35	0%	0%	0%	0%
Over 30	18%	14%	11%	11%
Over 25	17%	19%	20%	20%
Over 20	14%	16%	16%	16%
Over 15	26%	26%	27%	26%
Over 10	24%	23%	24%	24%
Over 5	2%	2%	2%	2%
5 or under	0%	0%	0%	0%

TABLE 2

24 August To 5 Sep. 2013 - Oregon
PERCENTAGE OF TIME AT TEMPERATURE

Temp	Rain cover	Rain cover	Rain cover	Rain cover
(° C.)	fabric 1	fabric 2	fabric 3	fabric 4

Average	20.4	20.1	20.0	19.9
Over 35	0%	0%	0%	0%
Over 30	9%	6%	6%	5%
Over 25	17%	19%	19%	19%
Over 20	16%	17%	18%	18%
Over 15	38%	37%	38%	37%
Over 10	19%	20%	20%	21%
Over 5	0%	0%	0%	0%
5 or under	0%	0%	0%	0%

Trial 2—Crop Cover Material Effect on Sunburn
A field trial was carried out on Blackberries in Albany, Oreg., United States of America to determine the effect of crop cover material of the invention on sunburn.
The rows were 10 feet wide with two rows covered by each Rain cover fabric panel. The rows were running from North to South.
A Rain cover fabric was installed over a hoop structure that measures 14 foot at the apex. The Rain cover fabric was approximately 12 feet in height where it crossed the row of blackberry bushes which were pruned to approximately 6 foot at the start of the trial. Data was collected from the east row of the coverage. Distance of the Rain cover fabric above the bushes started at 6 feet above the bushes and moved higher to the apex of the hoop which is between the two covered rows.
The Rain cover fabric panel covering the blackberries was comprised of 4 individual 40′ panels sewn together for an overall length of 160′.
The control material, Rain cover fabric 1, was woven non-pigmented polymer material plus stabilisers, with a plastic coating on the top and on the bottom, as follows:
Top coating: LDPE 25 gsm
Woven polymer: HDPE 105 gsm
Bottom coating: LDPE 25 gsm.
Four different variations of trial material were used:
Rain cover fabric 4—3% Altiris 800® added to the coating
Rain cover fabric 3—2% Altiris 800® added to the coating
Rain cover fabric 2—1% Altiris 800® added to the coating
Rain cover fabric 1—0% Altiris 800® added to the coating.
Open was with no cover.
As shown in Table 3 below, the effect of using 1% Altiris was a reduction in sunburn from 34.8% with no cover to 1.1% sunburn with the addition of 1% Altiris.
Harvest dates were 7 Aug. 2013, 15 Aug. 2013 and 23 Aug. 2013.

TABLE 3

Results of sunbum reduction trial in Oregon, USA

	Total fruit	Total fruit	%
Rain cover fabric	no.	with sunburn	burn

Rain cover fabric 4	295	0	0.0%
Rain cover fabric 3	541	2	0.4%
Rain cover fabric 2	547	6	1.1%
Rain cover fabric 1	642	41	6.4%
OPEN	414	144	34.8%

Trial 3—Netting Material Effect on Temperature
A field trial was carried out on apples, Fuji variety, in Vantage, Wash., United States of America to determine the effect of netting material of the invention on temperature under the netting material over time.
The rows were running from East to West. The rows were 14 feet spacing in a V-trellis system. The total row length was approximately 1100 feet. Three rows were covered.
The net was suspended above the trees on a post and wire structure. The net height was 15 feet above the ground.
The netting was applied on 5 Aug. 2013.
The solar radiation was measured with a Watchdog LightScout Silicon Pyranometer with a range between 300 to 1100 nanometers. The UV radiation was measured with a Watchdog LightScout UV Light sensor, measuring between 250 to 400 nanometers. The Par Light was measured with a Watchdog External Temperature Sensor, at 400-700 nm.
The data was logged with a WatchDog 1000 Series Model 1400 Micro Station. The sensors were placed on a T-bar at 10′ above ground level.
Two nets were trialled:
Net 1-2% conventional titanium dioxide, with 35% coverage
Net 2-8% micro voiding pigments and 1% Altiris 800®, with 35% coverage.
The control area had no cover.
As shown in Table 4 below, Net 2 had a greater reduction in heat in temperatures over 100° F. of 66%, compared to 34% for Net 1. Net 2 also had a greater reduction in heat in temperatures between 80° F.-100° F. of 9%, compared to 3% for Net 1.

TABLE 4

Net Trial - Fuji Apples
Results of Trial in Washington State, USA, 3 and 4 Sep. 2013

			Percentage
	Hours	Hours	reduction	Percentage
Average	above	above	in heat -	reduction
Temperature	100 F.	80 F.	temperatures	in heat
(*F.)	per day	per day	over 100° F.	80-100° F.

No net	81.5	3.4	10.5
cover
Net
1	80.8	2.3	10.2	34%	3%
Net
2	78.1	1.2	9.6	66%	9%

Trial 4—Netting Material Effect on Temperature
A field trial was carried out on Blackberries in Oregon, United States of America to determine the effect of netting material of the invention on temperature under the netting material over time.
The data was collected over a period of 13 days, from 24 August until 5 Sep. 2013.
The net was installed over a hoop structure that measured 14 foot at the apex. The net was approximately 12 feet in height where it crossed the row of blackberry bushes which were pruned to approximately 6 foot at the start of the trial. Data was collected from the east row of the coverage. Distance of the net above the bushes started at 6 feet above the bushes and moved higher to the apex of the hoop which was between the two covered rows.
The temperature sensor was a TempRecord Multi-Trip MK III combination sensor/data logger unit. The loggers were placed directly over the east row of the two rows covered by the net. Loggers were placed at 78 inches above ground level.
Two nets were trialled:
Net 1-2% conventional titanium dioxide
Net 2-10% micro voiding pigments and 1% conventional titanium dioxide.
The nets were placed over steel hoops to form the tunnel house.
The control area had no cover.
As shown in Table 5 below, high temperatures of over 30° C. were reached only 3% of the time with Net 2, compared to 6% of time with Net 1. In addition, the mean temperature with Net 2 was 0.2 degrees lower, compared to Net 1.

TABLE 5

Net trial - Blackberries
Percentage of time at temperature
Trial period: 24 August to 5 Sep. 2013 (13 days)

Temp (° C.)	No cover	Net	1	Net 2

Average	20.0	19.6	19.4
Over 35	1%	0%	0%
Over 30	8%	6%	3%
Over 25	16%	16%	18%
Over 20	16%	18%	20%
Over 15	34%	38%	38%
Over 10	24%	23%	22%
Over 5	1%	0%	0%
5 or under	0%	0%	0%

Trial 5—Netting Material Effect on Solar Radiation
A field trial carried out on apples, Fuji variety, in Vantage, Wash., United States of America to determine the effect of netting material of the invention on solar radiation.
The rows were running from East to West. The rows were 14 feet spacing in a V-trellis system. The total row length was approximately 1100 feet. Three rows were covered. The net was suspended above the trees on a post and wire structure. The net height was 15 feet above the ground.
The netting was applied on 5 Aug. 2013. The trials were conducted on 3 to 4 Sep. 2013.
The solar radiation was measured with a Watchdog LightScout Silicon Pyranometer with a range between 300 to 1100 nanometers. The UV radiation was measured with a Watchdog LightScout UV Light sensor, measuring between 250 to 400 nanometers. The Par Light was measured with a Watchdog External Temperature Sensor 400-700 nanometers.
The data was logged with a WatchDog 1000 Series Model 1400 Micro Station. The sensors were placed on a T-bar at 10′ above ground level.
Two nets were trialled:
Net 1-2% conventional titanium dioxide with 35% coverage
Net 2-8% micro voiding pigments and 1% Altiris 800® with 35% coverage.
Table 6 below shows that:
Net 2 had an increased reduction in UV light of 29%, compared to 26% reduction for Net 1
Net 2 had an increased reduction in Solar Radiation of 22%, compared to 17% reduction for Net 1
Net 2 had an increased reduction in Infrared Radiation of 17%, compared to 9% reduction for Net 1.

TABLE 6

Net Trial - Fuji Apples, Washington State, USA
3 and 4 Sep. 2013

		Solar	Infrared
		Radiation	Radiation
UV Light		(wat/m2)	(wat/m2)
280 to	PAR	300 to	700 to
400 nm	400-700	1100 nm	1100 nm

Incoming Solar	1,981	35,254	76,812	39,577
radiation
Net 1 - wat/m2	1,467	26,253	64,123	36,133
Net 2 - wat/m2	1,411	25,436	59,622	32,755
Net 1 - reduction %	26%	25%	17%	9%
Net 2 - reduction %	29%	28%	22%	17%

Trial 6—Netting Material Effect on Solar Radiation
A field trial was carried out on apples, Fuji variety, in Vantage, Wash., United States of America to determine the effect of netting materials of the invention on solar radiation.
The rows were running from East to West. The rows were 14 feet spacing in a V-trellis system. The total row length was approximately 1100 feet. Three rows were covered. The net was suspended above the trees on a post and wire structure. The net height was 15 feet above the ground.
The netting was applied on 5 Aug. 2013. The trial period was 3 and 4 Sep. 2013.
The solar radiation was measured with a Watchdog LightScout Silicon Pyranometer with a range between 300 to 1100 nanometers. The UV radiation was measured with a Watchdog LightScout UV Light sensor, measuring between 250 to 400 nanometers. The Par Light was measured with a Watchdog External Temperature Sensor, measuring between 400 to 700 nanometers.
The data was logged with a WatchDog 1000 Series Model 1400 Micro Station. The sensors were placed on a T-bar at 10′ above ground level.
Three nets were trialled:
Net 1—conventional titanium dioxide and 2% Altiris 800®, with 35% coverage
Net 2-8% micro voiding pigment and 1% Altiris 800®, with 35% coverage
Net 3-12% micro voiding pigment and 0.5% Altiris 800®, with 35% coverage.
Table 7 below shows that:
The reduction in the period of time high temperatures of over 100° F. were reached, with the addition of Altiris to the netting
The reduction in the percentage of time that high temperatures of over 100° F. were reached, with the addition of Altiris to the net
The higher percentage of reduction in infrared radiation, from 9% in the Titanium Dioxide net to 17% in the netting with Altiris added.

TABLE 7

Net Trial - Fuji Apples
Results of Heat Reflecting Netting Trial in Washington State, USA - 3 and 4 Sep. 2013

			Percentage	Percentage
	Hours	Hours	reduction	reduction	Percentage
Average	above	above	in Infrared	in heat	reduction
Temperature	100 F.	80 F.	radiation	temperatures	in heat
(*F.)	per day	per day	(wat/m2)	over 100° F.	80-100° F.

Incoming solar	81.5	3.4	10.5
radiation
Net
1	80.8	2.3	10.2	9%	34%	3%
Net
2	78.1	1.2	9.6	17%	66%	9%
Net
3	78.6	0.2	9.4	17%	95%	10%

Trial 7—Netting Material Effect on Solar Radiation A field trial was carried out on apples, Fuji variety, in Vantage, Wash., United States of America to determine the effect of netting material of the invention on solar radiation.
The rows were running from East to West. The rows were 14 feet spacing in a V-trellis system. The total row length was approximately 1100 feet. Three rows were covered. The net was suspended above the trees on a post and wire structure. The net height was 15 feet above the ground.
The netting was applied on 5 Aug. 2013. The trial period was 18 to 26 Aug. 2013.
The solar radiation was measured with a Watchdog LightScout Silicon Pyranometer with a range between 300 to 1100 nanometers. The UV radiation was measured with a Watchdog LightScout UV Light sensor, measuring between 250 to 400 nanometers. The Par Light was measured with a Watchdog External Temperature Sensor, measuring between 400 to 700 nanometers.
The data was logged with a WatchDog 1000 Series Model 1400 Micro Station. The sensors were placed on a T-bar at 10′ above ground level.
Four nets were trialled:
Net 1-35% coverage and 2% conventional titanium dioxide
Net 4-30% coverage and 2% Altiris 800®
Net 5-40% coverage and 2% Altiris 800®
Net 2-35% coverage with 8% micro voiding pigment and 1% Altiris 800®
Table 8 shows that:
Net 4 had a greater reduction in solar radiation of 19%, compared to 17% with Net 1, and a greater reduction in infrared radiation of 17% compared to 11% with Net 1
Net 5 had a greater reduction in solar radiation of 26% compared to 17% with Net 1, and a greater reduction in infrared radiation of 23% compared to 11% with Net 1
Net 2 had a greater reduction in solar radiation of 24% compared to 17% with Net 1, and a greater reduction in infrared radiation of 22% compared to 11% with Net 1.

TABLE 8

Net Trial - Fuji Apples
Results of Heat Reflecting Netting Trial in
Washington State, USA, 18-26 Aug. 2013

		Solar	Infrared
UV Light		Radiation	Radiation
wat/m2		wat/m2	wat/m2
280 to	PAR	400 to	700 to
400 nm	wat/m2	1100 nm	1100 nm

Incoming Solar	8,962	148,826	336,342	178,824
radiation
Net 1 - wat/m2	6,679	113,601	278,662	158,383
Net 4 - wat/m2	7,099	117,761	272,928	148,068
Net 5 - wat/m2	5,799	103,515	247,841	138,547
Net 2 - watt/m2	6,899	2,937,647	254,807	139,055
Net 1 - reduction in	23%	24%	17%	11%
solar and infrared
radiation (%)
Net 4 - reduction in	18%	21%	19%	17%
solar and infrared
radiation (%)
Net 5 - reduction in	34%	30%	26%	23%
solar and infrared
radiation (%)
Net 2 - reduction in	21%	27%	24%	22%
solar and infrared
radiation (%)

Trial 8—Netting Material Effect on Sunburn
A field trial was carried out on apples, Granny Smith variety, in Wenatchee, Wash., United States of America.
The netting was applied on 5 May 2013. The crop was picked on 9 Sep. 2013. 200 apples were counted.
Two nets were trialled:
Net 1-14% micro voiding pigments and 1% conventional titanium dioxide, with 25% coverage
Net 2-2% conventional titanium dioxide, with 35% coverage.
As shown in the table below, Net 1 and Net 2 provide the same level of sunburn protection, even though Net 1 had a lower coverage.

TABLE

COMPARATIVE HEAT REFLECTING MATERIAL TRIAL
Results of Sunburn reduction trial

Per-

Fruit

Per-

centage

No.

centage

Sun-

picked

not burnt

burn 1

burn 2

burn 3

burn 4

burn 5

burn 6

No net	199	32%	36	18%	44	22%	45	23%	7	4%	3	2%	0	0%
Net
1	200	40%	71	36%	43	22%	7	4%	0	0%	0	0%	0	0%
No net	200	24%	45	23%	48	24%	31	16%	14	7%	6	3%	8	4%
Net
2	200	39%	69	35%	41	21%	13	7%	0	0%	0	0%	0	0%

Trial 9—Netting Material Effect on Solar Radiation
A field trial was carried out on apples, Fuji variety, in Vantage, Wash., United States of America.
The rows were running from East to West.
The rows were 14 feet spacing in a V-trellis system. The total row length was approximately 1100 feet. Three rows were covered. The net was suspended above the trees on a post and wire structure. The net height was 15 feet above the ground.
The netting was applied on 5 Aug. 2013. The trials were conducted on 6 to 9 Sep. 2013 (4 days).
The solar radiation was measured with a Watchdog LightScout Silicon Pyranometer with a range between 300 to 1100 nanometers. The UV radiation was measured with a Watchdog LightScout UV Light sensor, measuring between 250 to 400 nanometers. The Par Light was measured with a Watchdog External Temperature Sensor 400-700 nanometers.
The data was logged with a WatchDog 1000 Series Model 1400 Micro Station. The sensors were placed on a T-bar at 10′ above ground level.
Two net were trialled:
Net 1-2% conventional titanium dioxide with 35% coverage
Net 2-12% micro voiding pigments and 1% Altiris 800® with 35% coverage.
Table 10 below shows that:
Net 2 had an increased reduction in UV light of 34, compared to 26% reduction for Net 1
Net 2 had an increased reduction in Solar Radiation of 25%, compared to 17% reduction for Net 1
Net 2 had an increased reduction in Infrared Radiation of 19%, compared to 10% reduction for Net 1.

TABLE 10

Net Trial - Fuji Apples, Washington State, USA
6-9 Sep. 2013 (4 Days)

		Solar	Infrared
UV Light		Radiation	Radiation
(wat/m2)	PAR	(wat/m2)	(wat/m2)
280 to	(wat/m2)	400 to	700 to
400 nm	400-700	1100 nm	1100 nm

Incoming Solar	3,029	50,962	111,394	57,404
radiation
Net 1 - wat/m2	2,241	37,950	92,040	51,850
Net 2 - wat/m2	2,002	35,647	83,950	46,302
Net 1 - reduction %	26%	26%	17%	10%
Net 2 - reduction %	34%	30%	25%	19%

Trial 10—Netting Material Effect on Temperature
A field trial was carried out on apples, Fuji variety, in Vantage, Wash., United States of America.
The rows were running from East to West. The rows were 14 feet spacing in a V-trellis system. The total row length was approximately 1100 feet. Three rows were covered. The net was suspended above the trees on a post and wire structure. The net height was 15 feet above the ground.
The netting was applied on 5 Aug. 2013.
The solar radiation was measured with a Watchdog LightScout Silicon Pyranometer with a range between 300 to 1100 nanometers. The UV radiation was measured with a Watchdog LightScout UV Light sensor, measuring between 250 to 400 nanometers. The Par Light was measured with a Watchdog External Temperature Sensor, at 400-700 nm.
The data was logged with a WatchDog 1000 Series Model 1400 Micro Station. The sensors were placed on a T-bar at 10′ above ground level.
Two nets were trialled:
Net 1—2% conventional titanium dioxide with 35% coverage
Net 2—12% micro voiding pigments and 1% Altiris 800® with 35% coverage.
As shown below in Table 11, Net 2 reduced the percentage of time per day that high temperatures of over 35° C. were reached to 2%, compared to 5% with Net 1.

TABLE

Net Trial - Fuji Apples
Heat Reflecting Netting Trial, 6-9 Sep. 2014 (4 days)
PERCENTAGE OF TIME AT TEMPERATURE

Temp (° C.)	No Net	Net	1	Net 2

Average	20.56	20.38	19.64
Over 35	7%	5%	2%
30-35	9%	10%	11%
25-30	6%	6%	7%
20-25	20%	22%	19%
15-20	32%	32%	34%
10-15	26%	26%	28%
5-10	0%	0%	0%
5 or under	0%	0%	0%

Trial 11—Netting Material Effect on Sunburn
A field trial was carried out on apples, Fuji variety, in Vantage, Wash., United States of America.
The rows were running from East to West. The rows were 14 feet spacing in a V-trellis system. The total row length was approximately 1100 feet. Three rows were covered. The net was suspended above the trees on a post and wire structure. The net height was 15 feet above the ground.
The netting was applied on 5 Aug. 2013. The crop was scored for sunburn on 11 Sep. 2013.
Four nets were trialled:
Net 1-2% conventional titanium dioxide, with 35% coverage
Net 2—12% micro voiding pigments and 1% Altiris 800®, with 35% coverage
Net 3—8% micro voiding pigments and 0.5% Altiris 800®, with 40% coverage
Net 4—2% Altiris 800® with 25% coverage.
As shown in the Tables 12 and 13 below, the effect of using 2% Altiris was a significant reduction in the percentage of fruit with no sunburn from 64% with no cover to 86% with the addition of 2% Altiris.

TABLE 12

COMPARATIVE HEAT REFLECTING MATERIAL TRIAL
Results of Sunburn reduction trial 13 August and 6 Sep. 2013

Fruit No.	Total Not	Percentage
picked	Burnt	not burnt

	No net	175	112	64%
	Net
1	212	143	67%
	Net
2	177	137	78%
	Net
3	215	174	81%
	Net
4	233	200	86%

TABLE 13

COMPARATIVE HEAT REFLECTING MATERIAL TRIAL
Results of Sunburn reduction trial 13 August and 6 Sep. 2013

Sunburn	Percentage	Sunburn	Percentage	Sunburn	Percentage	Sunburn	Percentage	Sunburn	Percentage
1	Sunburn 1	2	Sunburn 2	3	Sunburn 3	4	Sunburn 4	5	Sunburn 5

No net	50	29%	11	6%	2	1%	0	0%	0	0%
Net
1	63	30%	3	1%	1	0%	1	0%	1	0%
Net
2	39	22%	1	1%	0	0%	0	0%	0	0%
Net
3	34	16%	3	1%	0	0%	2	1%	2	1%
Net
4	28	12%	3	1%	1	0%	1	0%	0	0%

Trial 12—Netting Material Effect on Sunburn
A field trial was carried out on established on apples, Fuji variety, in Vantage, Wash., United States of America.
The rows were running from East to West. The rows were 14 feet spacing in a V-trellis system.
The total row length was approximately 1100 feet. Three rows were covered. The net was suspended above the trees on a post and wire structure. The net height was 15 feet above the ground.
The netting was applied on 5 Aug. 2013. The crop was scored for sunburn on 11 Sep. 2013.
Three nets were trialled:
Net 1—8% micro voiding pigments and 1% Altiris 800® with 25% coverage
Net 2—8% micro voiding pigments and 1% Altiris 800® with 30% coverage
Net 3—8% micro voiding pigments and 1% Altiris 800® with 40% coverage.
As shown in Tables 14 and 15, the percentage of sunburn decreased as the netting coverage was increased.

TABLE 14

COMPARATIVE HEAT REFLECTING MATERIAL TRIAL
Results of Sunburn reduction trial 13 August and 6 Sep. 2013

Fruit No.	Fruit not	Percentage
picked	burnt	not burnt

	No net	175	112	64%
	Net
1	155	108	70%
	Net
2	198	143	72%
	Net
2	177	137	78%

TABLE 15

COMPARATIVE HEAT REFLECTING MATERIAL TRIAL
Results of Sunburn reduction trial 13 August and 6 Sep. 2013

No net	50	29%	11	6%	2	1%	0	0%	0	0%
Net
1	33	21%	9	6%	2	1%	2	1%	1	0%
Net
2	44	22%	8	4%	1	1%	0	0%	1	1%
Net
2	39	22%	1	1%	0	0%	0	0%	0	0%

Diffuse Transmittance
The diffuse transmittance of a series of the monofilament or tape or yarn that make up netting, crop cover or ground cover materials were measured by spectrophotometry to determine the effect of netting or crop cover or ground cover materials of the invention compared to conventional netting crop cover, or ground cover materials.
The monofilament or tape material was a prepared by (i) mixing the pigments into a masterbatch (ii) mixing the masterbatch with polymer (iii) extruding the mixture into a water bath for cooling, and (iv) then drawing though air or a water bath to orientate the mixture. A sample of the resulting is used for measuring the properties.
Conventional netting materials were prepared using conventional pigmentary titanium dioxide or mirco void generating pigment in the amount specified below. Netting materials of the invention were prepared using Altiris 800®, a combination of Altiris 800® and micro void generating pigment, or a combination of micro void generating pigment and zinc oxide or a combination of micro void generating pigment and conventional titanium dioxide in the amount specified below.
The spectrophotometer was based on a GSA/McPherson 2051 1 metre focal length monochromator fitted with a prism predisperser and also stray light filters. The light source is a current regulated tungsten halogen lamp. The bandwidth is adjustable up to 3 nm. The monochromatic beam from the monochromator is focused onto the sample or into the integrating sphere using off-axis parabolic mirrors. The integrating spheres are coated with pressed halon powder (PTFE powder). Halon powder is also used as the white reflectance reference material. The detector is usually a silicon photodiode connected to an electrometer amplifier and digital volt meter. The whole system is controlled using software written in LabVIEW. The detectors used can be photomultiplier tubes, silicon diodes or lead sulphide detectors.
The integrating sphere has an internal diameter of 120 mm and is coated with pressed halon powder. The sample is mounted on one port and the incident light port is at an angle of 90° around the sphere. The sphere rotates by 90° in the horizontal plane to allow the focused incident light to enter the sphere through the incident light port or the incident light to be transmitted through the sample and enter the sphere. The detector is mounted at the top of the sphere.
Diffuse transmittance over the 280-2,500 nm wavelength range was measured for monofilament or tape or yarn. The graphs are for 100% coverage.
Graphs of the diffuse transmittance are shown in FIGS. 15-47.
FIGS. 15-22 show diffuse transmittance graphs for prior art netting material.
FIGS. 23-35 show diffuse transmittance graphs for netting material of the invention.
FIGS. 36-38 show diffuse transmittance graphs for prior art crop cover material.
FIG. 39 shows diffuse transmittance graphs for crop cover material of the invention.
FIGS. 40-43 show diffuse transmittance graphs for prior art ground cover material.
FIGS. 44-47 show diffuse transmittance graphs for prior art ground cover material of the invention.
Data from which the graphs in FIGS. 15-47 were created are shown below in FIGS. 48-80, each of which contains a table showing the transmittance for each wavelength, a table showing transmittance average for each wavelength range, and a table showing transmittance difference each wavelength range.
The graphs show that netting, crop cover, and ground cover materials of the invention have advantageous UV, visible and heat transmission profiles.
Conventional titanium dioxide is currently used in the netting industry has limitations in that it blocks some of the light that plants use in the 400-700 nm range, and transmits heat rather than absorbing or reflecting it.
The graphs show that non-conventional titanium dioxide, as described herein, such as Altiris 800® transmits less heat and more visible light, which is used by plants for photosynthesis, than conventional titanium dioxide. The graphs also show that Altiris 800® has relatively low UV transmission.
The graphs show that the combination of Altiris 800® and a microvioding pigment and also the combination of a microvoiding pigment and a UV absorbing pigment, such as zinc oxide or conventional titanium dioxide have similar transmission properties.
The graphs demonstrate that use of a microvoiding pigment in combination with Altiris 800® allows the use of lower amounts Altiris 800®, while providing transmission profiles comparable to those obtained when Altiris 800® is used alone in comparatively higher amounts. This is useful as microvoiding pigments can be comparatively less expensive.
Several of the graphs are compared below.
2% Standard Titanium Dioxide Vs 10% Micro Void Pigment
In the UV region standard TiO2 transmits less UV light than the micro void pigments. Adding organic UV absorbers will reduce this transmittance in the UV region.
In the infrared region the micro void pigment transmits less heat than standard titanium dioxide.
The micro void pigments transmittance is more similar to Altiris than standard TiO2 from 400 nm to 2500 nm, but not exactly the same. The micro void pigment is allowing more light for plants though from 400 to 700 nm and reflecting more heat than TiO2.
2% Standard Titanium Dioxide Vs 2.5% Micro Void Pigment
The micro void pigments is a lower % than in the comparison above, therefore the transmittance is proportionally higher.
2% Standard Titanium dioxide vs 1% Altiris+5% Micro void pigments
In the UV region the combination of 1% Altiris and 5% micro void pigments has similar transmittance to 3% Altiris. Adding organic UV absorbers will reduce this transmittance in the UV region.
In the infrared and visible region the Altiris/micro void pigments combination has flattened the transmittance over the 400 nm to 1660 nm range, compared to TiO2, so that it is similar to 3% Altiris.
The Altiris/micro void pigments combination allows more light for plants through from 400 to 700 nm and reflects more heat than TiO2.
This combination of micro void pigments and Altiris reduces the costs of the formula.
10% Micro Void Pigments Vs 3% Altiris
Over the 1150 nm to 2500 nm wavelength range 10% micro void pigments has similar transmittance to 3% Altiris. But Altriris is allowing more plant light and reducing more heat.
In the UV range the Altiris has significantly less transmittance than the micro void pigments so it would need less organic UV absorbers to reduce this compared to the micro void pigments.
2.5% Micro void pigments vs 3% Altiris
Over the 280-2280 nm wavelength range 2.5% micro void pigments has greater transmittance than the 3% Altiris.
At around 420-500 nm the 2.4% micro void pigments and 3% Altiris have similar transmittance.
In the UV range the Altiris has significantly less transmittance than the micro void pigments. So it would need less organic UV absorbers to reduce this compared to the micro void pigments.
2.5% Micro Void Pigments Vs 10% Micro Void Pigments
In the UV region the 10% micro void pigments is blocking more UV light than the 2.5% micro void pigments. The transmittance has increased for 2.5% micro void pigments compared to 10% micro void pigments.
The micro void pigment generally has slightly increasing transmittance with increasing wavelength from 300 nm to 1660 nm.
2.5% Micro void pigments allows more light through for plants, but also allows more heat and UV through than 10% micro void pigments. 10% Micro void pigments has higher heat reflectance than 2.5% micro void pigments.
Diffuse Transmittance Data
Prior Art Netting Material


FIG. 48: Diffuse transmittance table, diffuse transmittance
versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm for monofilament 1%, TiO2
FIG. 48

Transmittance for each wavelength

	wavelength	Mono
	(nm)	1% TiO2

	280	0.1403
	300	0.1553
	320	0.1540
	340	0.1557
	360	0.1554
	380	0.1629
	400	0.2955
	420	0.4304
	440	0.4419
	460	0.4527
	480	0.4616
	500	0.4716
	520	0.4803
	540	0.4899
	560	0.4975
	580	0.5058
	600	0.5126
	620	0.5220
	640	0.5281
	660	0.5357
	680	0.5412
	700	0.5490
	720	0.5557
	740	0.5642
	760	0.5681
	780	0.5745
	800	0.5786
	820	0.5848
	840	0.5910
	860	0.5952
	880	0.6020
	900	0.6051
	920	0.6078
	940	0.6110
	960	0.6220
	980	0.6262
	1000	0.6322
	1020	0.6325
	1040	0.6398
	1060	0.6494
	1080	0.6549
	1100	0.6632
	1120	0.6669
	1140	0.6719
	1160	0.6689
	1180	0.6601
	1200	0.6365
	1220	0.6171
	1240	0.6765
	1260	0.6934
	1280	0.7018
	1300	0.7086
	1320	0.7141
	1340	0.7195
	1360	0.7239
	1380	0.7124
	1400	0.7019
	1420	0.6927
	1440	0.7034
	1460	0.7208
	1480	0.7362
	1500	0.7446
	1520	0.7498
	1540	0.7471
	1560	0.7591
	1580	0.7651
	1600	0.7684
	1620	0.7710
	1640	0.7720
	1660	0.7717
	1680	0.7588
	1700	0.7328
	1720	0.6035
	1740	0.6319
	1760	0.6363
	1780	0.6921
	1800	0.6904
	1820	0.6923
	1840	0.7082
	1860	0.7279
	1880	0.7418
	1900	0.7449
	1920	0.7433
	1940	0.7503
	1960	0.7503
	1980	0.7557
	2000	0.7485
	2020	0.7550
	2040	0.7553
	2060	0.7603
	2080	0.7775
	2100	0.7859
	2120	0.7867
	2140	0.7897
	2160	0.7928
	2180	0.7868
	2200	0.7716
	2220	0.7602
	2240	0.7382
	2260	0.6907
	2280	0.5714
	2300	0.3504
	2320	0.4424
	2340	0.4320
	2360	0.3938
	2380	0.3078
	2400	0.3284
	2420	0.3304
	2440	0.3403
	2460	0.4542
	2480	0.4867
	2500	0.5986

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		1% TiO2

	Average: 300-380	16%
	Average 420-700	49%
	Average 700-1000	59%
	Average 1500-1600	76%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	10%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	16%


FIG. 49: Diffuse transmittance table, diffuse transmittance
versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm for monofilament, 1.5% TiO2
FIG. 49

Transmittance for each wavelength

	wavelength	Mono
	(nm)	1.5% TiO2

	280	0.1476
	300	0.1591
	320	0.1540
	340	0.1568
	360	0.1551
	380	0.1587
	400	0.2297
	420	0.3729
	440	0.3838
	460	0.3923
	480	0.4004
	500	0.4090
	520	0.4170
	540	0.4253
	560	0.4330
	580	0.4405
	600	0.4487
	620	0.4569
	640	0.4644
	660	0.4713
	680	0.4785
	700	0.4852
	720	0.4921
	740	0.5004
	760	0.5054
	780	0.5108
	800	0.5168
	820	0.5223
	840	0.5276
	860	0.5331
	880	0.5390
	900	0.5431
	920	0.5458
	940	0.5496
	960	0.5597
	980	0.5657
	1000	0.5703
	1020	0.5725
	1040	0.5799
	1060	0.5886
	1080	0.5960
	1100	0.6016
	1120	0.6071
	1140	0.6115
	1160	0.6074
	1180	0.5999
	1200	0.5744
	1220	0.5555
	1240	0.6170
	1260	0.6346
	1280	0.6434
	1300	0.6502
	1320	0.6568
	1340	0.6630
	1360	0.6663
	1380	0.6594
	1400	0.6477
	1420	0.6378
	1440	0.6487
	1460	0.6678
	1480	0.6844
	1500	0.6942
	1520	0.6993
	1540	0.6977
	1560	0.7122
	1580	0.7181
	1600	0.7228
	1620	0.7267
	1640	0.7296
	1660	0.7306
	1680	0.7171
	1700	0.6877
	1720	0.5565
	1740	0.5888
	1760	0.5911
	1780	0.6520
	1800	0.6508
	1820	0.6535
	1840	0.6686
	1860	0.6932
	1880	0.7107
	1900	0.7127
	1920	0.7149
	1940	0.7143
	1960	0.7209
	1980	0.7292
	2000	0.7267
	2020	0.7299
	2040	0.7360
	2060	0.7372
	2080	0.7502
	2100	0.7670
	2120	0.7696
	2140	0.7694
	2160	0.7746
	2180	0.7667
	2200	0.7559
	2220	0.7433
	2240	0.7342
	2260	0.6902
	2280	0.5689
	2300	0.3402
	2320	0.4362
	2340	0.4181
	2360	0.3858
	2380	0.2963
	2400	0.3153
	2420	0.3296
	2440	0.3228
	2460	0.4090
	2480	0.4634
	2500	0.5808

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		1.5% TiO2

	Average: 300-380	16%
	Average 420-700	43%
	Average 700-1000	53%
	Average 1500-1600	71%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	10%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	18%


FIG. 50: Diffuse transmittance table, diffuse transmittance
versus radiation from 250 to 2500 nm for monofilament, 2% TiO2
FIG. 50

Transmittance for each wavelength

	wavelength	Mono
	(nm)	2% TiO2

	280	0.0173
	300	0.0432
	320	0.0577
	340	0.0656
	360	0.0718
	380	0.0761
	400	0.1281
	420	0.2552
	440	0.2662
	460	0.2751
	480	0.2833
	500	0.2916
	520	0.3001
	540	0.3078
	560	0.3167
	580	0.3248
	600	0.3330
	620	0.3384
	640	0.3492
	660	0.3567
	680	0.3643
	700	0.3716
	720	0.3790
	740	0.3826
	760	0.3978
	780	0.4019
	800	0.4080
	820	0.4127
	840	0.4178
	860	0.4227
	880	0.4281
	900	0.4335
	920	0.4366
	940	0.4432
	960	0.4523
	980	0.4598
	1000	0.4662
	1020	0.4679
	1040	0.4714
	1060	0.4808
	1080	0.4858
	1100	0.4928
	1120	0.4924
	1140	0.5036
	1160	0.4992
	1180	0.4902
	1200	0.4689
	1220	0.4481
	1240	0.5100
	1260	0.5271
	1280	0.5358
	1300	0.5418
	1320	0.5496
	1340	0.5540
	1360	0.5320
	1380	0.6157
	1400	0.5703
	1420	0.5349
	1440	0.5340
	1460	0.5614
	1480	0.5739
	1500	0.5848
	1520	0.5895
	1540	0.5884
	1560	0.6028
	1580	0.6101
	1600	0.6116
	1620	0.6206
	1640	0.6225
	1660	0.6229
	1680	0.6116
	1700	0.5842
	1720	0.4463
	1740	0.4743
	1760	0.4847
	1780	0.5502
	1800	0.5527
	1820	0.5234
	1840	0.4709
	1860	0.6184
	1880	0.6267
	1900	0.6199
	1920	0.6493
	1940	0.6202
	1960	0.6171
	1980	0.6400
	2000	0.6256
	2020	0.6341
	2040	0.6516
	2060	0.6305
	2080	0.6551
	2100	0.6614
	2120	0.6816
	2140	0.6885
	2160	0.6885
	2180	0.6707
	2200	0.6676
	2220	0.6744
	2240	0.6231
	2260	0.6158
	2280	0.4615
	2300	0.2119
	2320	0.3322
	2340	0.2990
	2360	0.2688
	2380	0.2135
	2400	0.2322
	2420	0.2696
	2440	0.2611
	2460	0.3499
	2480	0.3737
	2500	0.6091

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		2% TiO2

	Average: 300-380	6%
	Average 420-700	32%
	Average 700-1000	42%
	Average 1500-1600	60%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	10%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	18%


FIG. 51
FIG. 51: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm for monofilament,
10% Microvoid pigment

Transmittance for each wavelength

		Mono 10%
	wavelength (nm)	Microvoid pigment

	280	0.1556
	300	0.2535
	320	0.2702
	340	0.2852
	360	0.2973
	380	0.3160
	400	0.3548
	420	0.3717
	440	0.3757
	460	0.3811
	480	0.3834
	500	0.3878
	520	0.3901
	540	0.3948
	560	0.3959
	580	0.4018
	600	0.4027
	620	0.4052
	640	0.4078
	660	0.4085
	680	0.4118
	700	0.4127
	720	0.4154
	740	0.4186
	760	0.4175
	780	0.4199
	800	0.4229
	820	0.4236
	840	0.4248
	860	0.4274
	880	0.4282
	900	0.4300
	920	0.4286
	940	0.4306
	960	0.4362
	980	0.4393
	1000	0.4403
	1020	0.4412
	1040	0.4420
	1060	0.4440
	1080	0.4483
	1100	0.4495
	1120	0.4521
	1140	0.4552
	1160	0.4477
	1180	0.4372
	1200	0.4143
	1220	0.3949
	1240	0.4445
	1260	0.4554
	1280	0.4607
	1300	0.4640
	1320	0.4676
	1340	0.4691
	1360	0.4701
	1380	0.4623
	1400	0.4480
	1420	0.4373
	1440	0.4434
	1460	0.4568
	1480	0.4686
	1500	0.4733
	1520	0.4768
	1540	0.4717
	1560	0.4821
	1580	0.4836
	1600	0.4869
	1620	0.4868
	1640	0.4883
	1660	0.4853
	1680	0.4708
	1700	0.4440
	1720	0.3328
	1740	0.3549
	1760	0.3538
	1780	0.4020
	1800	0.4025
	1820	0.3996
	1840	0.4127
	1860	0.4311
	1880	0.4434
	1900	0.4430
	1920	0.4442
	1940	0.4398
	1960	0.4452
	1980	0.4455
	2000	0.4472
	2020	0.4500
	2040	0.4496
	2060	0.4567
	2080	0.4645
	2100	0.4806
	2120	0.4851
	2140	0.4862
	2160	0.4833
	2180	0.4860
	2200	0.4632
	2220	0.4652
	2240	0.4591
	2260	0.4148
	2280	0.3248
	2300	0.2379
	2320	0.2608
	2340	0.2491
	2360	0.2519
	2380	0.2145
	2400	0.2262
	2420	0.2347
	2440	0.2201
	2460	0.2942
	2480	0.2873
	2500	0.3387

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		10% Microvoid pigment

	Average: 300-380	28%
	Average 420-700	40%
	Average 700-1000	43%
	Average 1500-1600	48%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	3%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	5%


FIG. 52
FIG. 52: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm for monofilament,
14.0% Microvoid pigment

Transmittance for each wavelength

		Mono 14.0%
	wavelength (nm)	Microvoid pigment

	280	0.1618
	300	0.1842
	320	0.1895
	340	0.1975
	360	0.2145
	380	0.2375
	400	0.2721
	420	0.2800
	440	0.2868
	460	0.2889
	480	0.2950
	500	0.2950
	520	0.3002
	540	0.3010
	560	0.3024
	580	0.3089
	600	0.3088
	620	0.3128
	640	0.3133
	660	0.3187
	680	0.3190
	700	0.3241
	720	0.3217
	740	0.3213
	760	0.3263
	780	0.3260
	800	0.3304
	820	0.3292
	840	0.3330
	860	0.3334
	880	0.3351
	900	0.3340
	920	0.3350
	940	0.3342
	960	0.3425
	980	0.3422
	1000	0.3426
	1020	0.3442
	1040	0.3449
	1060	0.3480
	1080	0.3512
	1100	0.3524
	1120	0.3554
	1140	0.3550
	1160	0.3502
	1180	0.3409
	1200	0.3180
	1220	0.3020
	1240	0.3455
	1260	0.3574
	1280	0.3614
	1300	0.3648
	1320	0.3672
	1340	0.3696
	1360	0.3700
	1380	0.3576
	1400	0.3472
	1420	0.3396
	1440	0.3447
	1460	0.3553
	1480	0.3675
	1500	0.3724
	1520	0.3766
	1540	0.3703
	1560	0.3815
	1580	0.3832
	1600	0.3867
	1620	0.3854
	1640	0.3876
	1660	0.3836
	1680	0.3719
	1700	0.3447
	1720	0.2383
	1740	0.2597
	1760	0.2603
	1780	0.3052
	1800	0.3031
	1820	0.3037
	1840	0.3164
	1860	0.3328
	1880	0.3412
	1900	0.3458
	1920	0.3411
	1940	0.3459
	1960	0.3495
	1980	0.3525
	2000	0.3481
	2020	0.3502
	2040	0.3572
	2060	0.3584
	2080	0.3668
	2100	0.3819
	2120	0.3902
	2140	0.3911
	2160	0.3832
	2180	0.3842
	2200	0.3790
	2220	0.3529
	2240	0.3321
	2260	0.3012
	2280	0.2210
	2300	0.1494
	2320	0.1769
	2340	0.1651
	2360	0.1440
	2380	0.1416
	2400	0.1494
	2420	0.1537
	2440	0.1399
	2460	0.1724
	2480	0.1507
	2500	0.2265

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		14.0% Microvoid pigment

	Average: 300-380	20%
	Average 420-700	30%
	Average 700-1000	33%
	Average 1500-1600	38%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	3%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	5%


FIG. 53
FIG. 53: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm for monofilament,
2% TiO2, 2.5% Microvoid pigment

Transmittance for each wavelength

		Mono 2% TiO2,
	wavelength (nm)	2.5% Microvoid pigment

	280	0.1643
	300	0.1456
	320	0.1498
	340	0.1535
	360	0.1531
	380	0.1563
	400	0.2006
	420	0.3242
	440	0.3335
	460	0.3419
	480	0.3483
	500	0.3559
	520	0.3625
	540	0.3697
	560	0.3761
	580	0.3831
	600	0.3885
	620	0.3950
	640	0.4015
	660	0.4080
	680	0.4131
	700	0.4194
	720	0.4241
	740	0.4291
	760	0.4357
	780	0.4407
	800	0.4455
	820	0.4499
	840	0.4549
	860	0.4594
	880	0.4636
	900	0.4671
	920	0.4687
	940	0.4719
	960	0.4813
	980	0.4861
	1000	0.4901
	1020	0.4932
	1040	0.4978
	1060	0.5058
	1080	0.5108
	1100	0.5141
	1120	0.5198
	1140	0.5216
	1160	0.5179
	1180	0.5077
	1200	0.4823
	1220	0.4620
	1240	0.5220
	1260	0.5367
	1280	0.5424
	1300	0.5493
	1320	0.5564
	1340	0.5589
	1360	0.5598
	1380	0.5470
	1400	0.5354
	1420	0.5288
	1440	0.5346
	1460	0.5537
	1480	0.5648
	1500	0.5755
	1520	0.5785
	1540	0.5719
	1560	0.5833
	1580	0.5866
	1600	0.5914
	1620	0.5910
	1640	0.5951
	1660	0.5906
	1680	0.5745
	1700	0.5453
	1720	0.4154
	1740	0.4398
	1760	0.4486
	1780	0.5026
	1800	0.4989
	1820	0.5031
	1840	0.5169
	1860	0.5404
	1880	0.5534
	1900	0.5553
	1920	0.5562
	1940	0.5619
	1960	0.5606
	1980	0.5701
	2000	0.5643
	2020	0.5689
	2040	0.5731
	2060	0.5704
	2080	0.5891
	2100	0.6037
	2120	0.6094
	2140	0.6080
	2160	0.6155
	2180	0.6013
	2200	0.5939
	2220	0.5724
	2240	0.5509
	2260	0.5086
	2280	0.4060
	2300	0.2595
	2320	0.3152
	2340	0.3053
	2360	0.2840
	2380	0.2463
	2400	0.2285
	2420	0.2363
	2440	0.2322
	2460	0.2797
	2480	0.3172
	2500	0.4017

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		2% TiO2,
		2.5% Microvoid pigment

	Average: 300-380	15%
	Average 420-700	37%
	Average 700-1000	46%
	Average 1500-1600	58%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	8%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	13%


FIG. 54
FIG. 54: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament,
2.0% carbon Black

Transmittance for each wavelength

	wavelength (nm)	Mono 2% carbon Black

	280	0.1184
	300	0.1076
	320	0.1115
	340	0.1116
	360	0.1116
	380	0.1116
	400	0.1106
	420	0.1113
	440	0.1097
	460	0.1103
	480	0.1116
	500	0.1108
	520	0.1088
	540	0.1092
	560	0.1109
	580	0.1087
	600	0.1095
	620	0.1072
	640	0.1094
	660	0.1080
	680	0.1088
	700	0.1096
	720	0.1091
	740	0.1085
	760	0.1088
	780	0.1100
	800	0.1093
	820	0.1099
	840	0.1092
	860	0.1097
	880	0.1087
	900	0.1094
	920	0.1086
	940	0.1090
	960	0.1100
	980	0.1082
	1000	0.1096
	1020	0.1130
	1040	0.1086
	1060	0.1101
	1080	0.1081
	1100	0.1094
	1120	0.1068
	1140	0.1082
	1160	0.1071
	1180	0.1074
	1200	0.1072
	1220	0.1067
	1240	0.1080
	1260	0.1062
	1280	0.1075
	1300	0.1064
	1320	0.1065
	1340	0.1057
	1360	0.1050
	1380	0.1009
	1400	0.1045
	1420	0.1058
	1440	0.1061
	1460	0.1066
	1480	0.1065
	1500	0.1062
	1520	0.1070
	1540	0.1066
	1560	0.1048
	1580	0.1063
	1600	0.1061
	1620	0.1070
	1640	0.1045
	1660	0.1065
	1680	0.1035
	1700	0.1072
	1720	0.1046
	1740	0.1047
	1760	0.1041
	1780	0.1057
	1800	0.1041
	1820	0.1067
	1840	0.1049
	1860	0.1056
	1880	0.1039
	1900	0.1017
	1920	0.1007
	1940	0.1004
	1960	0.1053
	1980	0.1011
	2000	0.1001
	2020	0.0990
	2040	0.0950
	2060	0.0993
	2080	0.0976
	2100	0.0898
	2120	0.1002
	2140	0.0984
	2160	0.0834
	2180	0.0953
	2200	0.0735
	2220	0.0733
	2240	0.0855
	2260	0.0895
	2280	0.0852
	2300	0.0873
	2320	0.0888
	2340	0.0888
	2360	0.0885
	2380	0.0812
	2400	0.0722
	2420	0.0665
	2440	0.0749
	2460	0.0615
	2480	0.0616
	2500	0.0406

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		2% carbon Black

	Average: 300-380	11%
	Average 420-700	11%
	Average 700-1000	11%
	Average 1500-1600	11%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	0%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	0%


FIG. 55
FIG. 55: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament,
0.4% Aluminium

Transmittance for each wavelength

	wavelength (nm)	Mono 0.4% Aluminium

	280	0.0916
	300	0.1347
	320	0.1403
	340	0.1429
	360	0.1486
	380	0.1532
	400	0.1578
	420	0.1573
	440	0.1562
	460	0.1553
	480	0.1540
	500	0.1528
	520	0.1521
	540	0.1503
	560	0.1496
	580	0.1488
	600	0.1480
	620	0.1455
	640	0.1451
	660	0.1444
	680	0.1431
	700	0.1419
	720	0.1407
	740	0.1373
	760	0.1392
	780	0.1357
	800	0.1340
	820	0.1323
	840	0.1320
	860	0.1321
	880	0.1334
	900	0.1353
	920	0.1373
	940	0.1399
	960	0.1408
	980	0.1436
	1000	0.1452
	1020	0.1530
	1040	0.1477
	1060	0.1564
	1080	0.1541
	1100	0.1563
	1120	0.1491
	1140	0.1718
	1160	0.1523
	1180	0.1543
	1200	0.1450
	1220	0.1525
	1240	0.1530
	1260	0.1675
	1280	0.1496
	1300	0.1658
	1320	0.1527
	1340	0.1564
	1360	0.1998
	1380	0.1960
	1400	0.1648
	1420	0.1599
	1440	0.1569
	1460	0.1698
	1480	0.1589
	1500	0.1659
	1520	0.1560
	1540	0.1647
	1560	0.1717
	1580	0.1652
	1600	0.1664
	1620	0.1584
	1640	0.1703
	1660	0.1667
	1680	0.1722
	1700	0.1759
	1720	0.1520
	1740	0.1532
	1760	0.1531
	1780	0.1673
	1800	0.1481
	1820	0.0960
	1840	0.1772
	1860	0.1004
	1880	0.1681
	1900	0.1149
	1920	0.0903
	1940	0.1898
	1960	0.1556
	1980	0.1617
	2000	0.1671
	2020	0.1589
	2040	0.1861
	2060	0.1640
	2080	0.1591
	2100	0.1954
	2120	0.1814
	2140	0.1449
	2160	0.1804
	2180	0.1908
	2200	0.1905
	2220	0.1630
	2240	0.2434
	2260	0.1377
	2280	0.0906
	2300	0.1675
	2320	0.1532
	2340	0.0821
	2360	0.1023
	2380	0.1330
	2400	0.1885
	2420	0.0795
	2440	0.1093
	2460	0.0127
	2480	0.2727
	2500	0.1630

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		0.4% Aluminium

	Average: 300-380	14%
	Average 420-700	15%
	Average 700-1000	14%
	Average 1500-1600	16%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	−1%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	3%

Netting Material of the Invention


FIG. 56
FIG. 56: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament,
2% Altiris

Transmittance for each wavelength

	wavelength (nm)	Mono 2% Altiris

	280	0.2714
	300	0.2684
	320	0.2696
	340	0.2747
	360	0.2734
	380	0.2866
	400	0.3752
	420	0.5433
	440	0.5550
	460	0.5558
	480	0.5616
	500	0.5607
	520	0.5651
	540	0.5647
	560	0.5691
	580	0.5697
	600	0.5674
	620	0.5709
	640	0.5699
	660	0.5738
	680	0.5716
	700	0.5748
	720	0.5711
	740	0.5738
	760	0.5735
	780	0.5771
	800	0.5747
	820	0.5776
	840	0.5756
	860	0.5735
	880	0.5746
	900	0.5714
	920	0.5722
	940	0.5689
	960	0.5717
	980	0.5763
	1000	0.5737
	1020	0.5755
	1040	0.5754
	1060	0.5793
	1080	0.5798
	1100	0.5838
	1120	0.5831
	1140	0.5811
	1160	0.5758
	1180	0.5625
	1200	0.5375
	1220	0.5130
	1240	0.5683
	1260	0.5780
	1280	0.5854
	1300	0.5852
	1320	0.5903
	1340	0.5903
	1360	0.5922
	1380	0.5738
	1400	0.5655
	1420	0.5524
	1440	0.5582
	1460	0.5751
	1480	0.5865
	1500	0.5893
	1520	0.5927
	1540	0.5871
	1560	0.5982
	1580	0.5998
	1600	0.6031
	1620	0.6028
	1640	0.6033
	1660	0.5978
	1680	0.5872
	1700	0.5556
	1720	0.4279
	1740	0.4514
	1760	0.4577
	1780	0.5095
	1800	0.5031
	1820	0.5060
	1840	0.5214
	1860	0.5399
	1880	0.5526
	1900	0.5573
	1920	0.5508
	1940	0.5521
	1960	0.5575
	1980	0.5604
	2000	0.5603
	2020	0.5573
	2040	0.5688
	2060	0.5624
	2080	0.5865
	2100	0.5897
	2120	0.6018
	2140	0.6027
	2160	0.5979
	2180	0.5988
	2200	0.5671
	2220	0.5807
	2240	0.5308
	2260	0.5015
	2280	0.3938
	2300	0.2940
	2320	0.3309
	2340	0.3246
	2360	0.3204
	2380	0.2705
	2400	0.2733
	2420	0.2938
	2440	0.2766
	2460	0.3660
	2480	0.3511
	2500	0.4295

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		2% Altiris

	Average: 300-380	27%
	Average 420-700	56%
	Average 700-1000	57%
	Average 1500-1600	60%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	1%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	2%


FIG. 57
FIG. 57: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament,
3% Altiris

Transmittance for each wavelength

	wavelength (nm)	Mono 3% Altiris

	280	0.1226
	300	0.1617
	320	0.1552
	340	0.1578
	360	0.1598
	380	0.1619
	400	0.2113
	420	0.4140
	440	0.4238
	460	0.4282
	480	0.4299
	500	0.4330
	520	0.4341
	540	0.4353
	560	0.4376
	580	0.4389
	600	0.4409
	620	0.4411
	640	0.4432
	660	0.4431
	680	0.4451
	700	0.4447
	720	0.4458
	740	0.4454
	760	0.4448
	780	0.4468
	800	0.4463
	820	0.4479
	840	0.4475
	860	0.4495
	880	0.4487
	900	0.4496
	920	0.4466
	940	0.4475
	960	0.4522
	980	0.4531
	1000	0.4544
	1020	0.4534
	1040	0.4514
	1060	0.4549
	1080	0.4564
	1100	0.4587
	1120	0.4602
	1140	0.4600
	1160	0.4527
	1180	0.4417
	1200	0.4150
	1220	0.3954
	1240	0.4452
	1260	0.4591
	1280	0.4634
	1300	0.4649
	1320	0.4684
	1340	0.4694
	1360	0.4717
	1380	0.4581
	1400	0.4472
	1420	0.4347
	1440	0.4437
	1460	0.4563
	1480	0.4703
	1500	0.4747
	1520	0.4748
	1540	0.4742
	1560	0.4810
	1580	0.4861
	1600	0.4860
	1620	0.4886
	1640	0.4859
	1660	0.4862
	1680	0.4717
	1700	0.4444
	1720	0.3203
	1740	0.3401
	1760	0.3479
	1780	0.3954
	1800	0.3961
	1820	0.3924
	1840	0.4139
	1860	0.4296
	1880	0.4410
	1900	0.4433
	1920	0.4412
	1940	0.4453
	1960	0.4458
	1980	0.4544
	2000	0.4509
	2020	0.4568
	2040	0.4529
	2060	0.4687
	2080	0.4747
	2100	0.4840
	2120	0.4966
	2140	0.4859
	2160	0.4994
	2180	0.4992
	2200	0.4923
	2220	0.4747
	2240	0.4585
	2260	0.4168
	2280	0.3203
	2300	0.2216
	2320	0.2516
	2340	0.2399
	2360	0.2343
	2380	0.2088
	2400	0.2116
	2420	0.2108
	2440	0.1999
	2460	0.2529
	2480	0.2760
	2500	0.3430

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		3% Altiris

	Average: 300-380	16%
	Average 420-700	44%
	Average 700-1000	45%
	Average 1500-1600	48%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	1%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	3%


FIG. 58
FIG. 58: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament,
4% Altiris

Transmittance for each wavelength

	wavelength (nm)	Mono 4% Altiris

	280	−0.0076
	300	0.0530
	320	0.0530
	340	0.0499
	360	0.0577
	380	0.0586
	400	0.0879
	420	0.2453
	440	0.2561
	460	0.2603
	480	0.2629
	500	0.2653
	520	0.2675
	540	0.2691
	560	0.2708
	580	0.2721
	600	0.2734
	620	0.2737
	640	0.2752
	660	0.2762
	680	0.2769
	700	0.2777
	720	0.2786
	740	0.2781
	760	0.2821
	780	0.2803
	800	0.2806
	820	0.2808
	840	0.2811
	860	0.2817
	880	0.2825
	900	0.2826
	920	0.2812
	940	0.2818
	960	0.2854
	980	0.2880
	1000	0.2889
	1020	0.2859
	1040	0.2852
	1060	0.2790
	1080	0.2899
	1100	0.2948
	1120	0.2814
	1140	0.2931
	1160	0.2822
	1180	0.2770
	1200	0.2521
	1220	0.2307
	1240	0.2766
	1260	0.2869
	1280	0.2906
	1300	0.3033
	1320	0.2976
	1340	0.2996
	1360	0.3334
	1380	0.3569
	1400	0.2944
	1420	0.2692
	1440	0.2738
	1460	0.2889
	1480	0.2956
	1500	0.3071
	1520	0.3026
	1540	0.2983
	1560	0.3146
	1580	0.3101
	1600	0.3183
	1620	0.3136
	1640	0.3197
	1660	0.3190
	1680	0.3006
	1700	0.2818
	1720	0.1769
	1740	0.1932
	1760	0.1998
	1780	0.2527
	1800	0.2452
	1820	0.1522
	1840	0.2243
	1860	0.2263
	1880	0.2842
	1900	0.2391
	1920	0.2194
	1940	0.3028
	1960	0.2798
	1980	0.3143
	2000	0.3095
	2020	0.3020
	2040	0.3010
	2060	0.3014
	2080	0.3150
	2100	0.3405
	2120	0.3423
	2140	0.3395
	2160	0.2978
	2180	0.3384
	2200	0.3146
	2220	0.3560
	2240	0.3216
	2260	0.2896
	2280	0.1966
	2300	0.1150
	2320	0.1247
	2340	0.0981
	2360	0.1146
	2380	0.0177
	2400	0.0589
	2420	0.0829
	2440	0.0199
	2460	0.1100
	2480	0.1713
	2500	0.0560

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		4% Altiris

	Average: 300-380	5%
	Average 420-700	27%
	Average 700-1000	28%
	Average 1500-1600	31%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	1%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	3%


FIG. 59
FIG. 59: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament,
1% Altiris, 2.5% Microvoid pigment

Transmittance for each wavelength

		Mono 1% Altiris,
	wavelength (nm)	2.5% Microvoid pigment

	280	0.1258
	300	0.1696
	320	0.1518
	340	0.1504
	360	0.1532
	380	0.1631
	400	0.2736
	420	0.4392
	440	0.4471
	460	0.4505
	480	0.4537
	500	0.4569
	520	0.4581
	540	0.4614
	560	0.4620
	580	0.4632
	600	0.4638
	620	0.4660
	640	0.4670
	660	0.4681
	680	0.4687
	700	0.4697
	720	0.4718
	740	0.4720
	760	0.4739
	780	0.4737
	800	0.4754
	820	0.4751
	840	0.4765
	860	0.4792
	880	0.4796
	900	0.4816
	920	0.4775
	940	0.4794
	960	0.4835
	980	0.4868
	1000	0.4858
	1020	0.4873
	1040	0.4872
	1060	0.4900
	1080	0.4940
	1100	0.4946
	1120	0.4970
	1140	0.4966
	1160	0.4895
	1180	0.4770
	1200	0.4478
	1220	0.4259
	1240	0.4825
	1260	0.4979
	1280	0.5020
	1300	0.5056
	1320	0.5084
	1340	0.5103
	1360	0.5104
	1380	0.4953
	1400	0.4828
	1420	0.4708
	1440	0.4791
	1460	0.4950
	1480	0.5079
	1500	0.5158
	1520	0.5184
	1540	0.5123
	1560	0.5242
	1580	0.5272
	1600	0.5296
	1620	0.5297
	1640	0.5303
	1660	0.5265
	1680	0.5129
	1700	0.4774
	1720	0.3396
	1740	0.3647
	1760	0.3707
	1780	0.4293
	1800	0.4240
	1820	0.4266
	1840	0.4400
	1860	0.4650
	1880	0.4769
	1900	0.4810
	1920	0.4766
	1940	0.4779
	1960	0.4828
	1980	0.4903
	2000	0.4836
	2020	0.4895
	2040	0.4894
	2060	0.4940
	2080	0.5087
	2100	0.5200
	2120	0.5339
	2140	0.5308
	2160	0.5305
	2180	0.5162
	2200	0.5059
	2220	0.4848
	2240	0.4706
	2260	0.4139
	2280	0.2981
	2300	0.1859
	2320	0.2269
	2340	0.2143
	2360	0.1911
	2380	0.1677
	2400	0.1613
	2420	0.1793
	2440	0.1609
	2460	0.2592
	2480	0.2390
	2500	0.2890

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		1% Altiris,
		2.5% Microvoid pigment

	Average: 300-380	16%
	Average 420-700	46%
	Average 700-1000	48%
	Average 1500-1600	52%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	2%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	4%


FIG. 60
FIG. 60: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament,
1% Altiris, 10% Microvoid pigment

Transmittance for each wavelength

		Mono 1% Altiris,
	wavelength (nm)	10% Microvoid pigment

	280	0.1599
	300	0.1747
	320	0.1637
	340	0.1700
	360	0.1651
	380	0.1721
	400	0.2150
	420	0.3299
	440	0.3319
	460	0.3406
	480	0.3402
	500	0.3473
	520	0.3447
	540	0.3505
	560	0.3566
	580	0.3509
	600	0.3575
	620	0.3564
	640	0.3595
	660	0.3565
	680	0.3627
	700	0.3584
	720	0.3662
	740	0.3722
	760	0.3699
	780	0.3747
	800	0.3715
	820	0.3765
	840	0.3738
	860	0.3789
	880	0.3785
	900	0.3833
	920	0.3794
	940	0.3844
	960	0.3849
	980	0.3893
	1000	0.3967
	1020	0.3904
	1040	0.3928
	1060	0.3930
	1080	0.3983
	1100	0.4039
	1120	0.4011
	1140	0.4052
	1160	0.3944
	1180	0.3866
	1200	0.3569
	1220	0.3401
	1240	0.3881
	1260	0.4032
	1280	0.4111
	1300	0.4106
	1320	0.4168
	1340	0.4162
	1360	0.4178
	1380	0.4008
	1400	0.3907
	1420	0.3787
	1440	0.3871
	1460	0.4019
	1480	0.4137
	1500	0.4234
	1520	0.4265
	1540	0.4223
	1560	0.4319
	1580	0.4375
	1600	0.4379
	1620	0.4394
	1640	0.4396
	1660	0.4364
	1680	0.4221
	1700	0.3903
	1720	0.2720
	1740	0.2938
	1760	0.2982
	1780	0.3469
	1800	0.3429
	1820	0.3456
	1840	0.3578
	1860	0.3801
	1880	0.3888
	1900	0.3918
	1920	0.3894
	1940	0.3902
	1960	0.3942
	1980	0.3971
	2000	0.3947
	2020	0.3960
	2040	0.4049
	2060	0.4004
	2080	0.4153
	2100	0.4286
	2120	0.4404
	2140	0.4297
	2160	0.4403
	2180	0.4288
	2200	0.4050
	2220	0.3841
	2240	0.3493
	2260	0.3223
	2280	0.2324
	2300	0.1618
	2320	0.1806
	2340	0.1767
	2360	0.1678
	2380	0.1511
	2400	0.1303
	2420	0.1395
	2440	0.1366
	2460	0.1843
	2480	0.1661
	2500	0.2038

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		1% Altiris,
		10% Microvoid pigment

	Average: 300-380	17%
	Average 420-700	35%
	Average 700-1000	38%
	Average 1500-1600	43%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	3%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	5%


FIG. 61
FIG. 61: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament,
1% Altiris, 14% Microvoid pigment

Transmittance for each wavelength

Mono

1% Altiris,
	wavelength (nm)	14% Microvoid pigment

	280	0.0574
	300	0.0376
	320	0.0466
	340	0.0471
	360	0.0484
	380	0.0572
	400	0.1003
	420	0.1837
	440	0.1902
	460	0.1940
	480	0.1969
	500	0.1999
	520	0.2026
	540	0.2049
	560	0.2073
	580	0.2096
	600	0.2113
	620	0.2136
	640	0.2152
	660	0.2172
	680	0.2193
	700	0.2213
	720	0.2232
	740	0.2254
	760	0.2267
	780	0.2274
	800	0.2291
	820	0.2311
	840	0.2329
	860	0.2352
	880	0.2368
	900	0.2378
	920	0.2364
	940	0.2372
	960	0.2420
	980	0.2445
	1000	0.2448
	1020	0.2399
	1040	0.2324
	1060	0.2412
	1080	0.2595
	1100	0.2428
	1120	0.2569
	1140	0.2462
	1160	0.2515
	1180	0.2264
	1200	0.2202
	1220	0.2282
	1240	0.2410
	1260	0.2752
	1280	0.2568
	1300	0.2719
	1320	0.2568
	1340	0.2747
	1360	0.2000
	1380	0.4113
	1400	0.3465
	1420	0.2459
	1440	0.2443
	1460	0.2612
	1480	0.2532
	1500	0.2662
	1520	0.2845
	1540	0.2618
	1560	0.2903
	1580	0.2763
	1600	0.2926
	1620	0.2759
	1640	0.2856
	1660	0.3079
	1680	0.2679
	1700	0.2623
	1720	0.1421
	1740	0.1724
	1760	0.1609
	1780	0.2174
	1800	0.2228
	1820	0.2224
	1840	−0.0007
	1860	0.3368
	1880	0.2810
	1900	0.2830
	1920	0.4342
	1940	0.2613
	1960	0.2552
	1980	0.2445
	2000	0.2577
	2020	0.2468
	2040	0.2632
	2060	0.2478
	2080	0.2727
	2100	0.2687
	2120	0.2889
	2140	0.2680
	2160	0.2855
	2180	0.2955
	2200	0.2420
	2220	0.2792
	2240	0.2221
	2260	0.2106
	2280	0.1754
	2300	0.0589
	2320	0.1118
	2340	0.0707
	2360	0.0892
	2380	0.0546
	2400	0.0808
	2420	0.0413
	2440	0.0889
	2460	0.0707
	2480	0.0572
	2500	0.2232

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		1% Altiris,
		14% Microvoid pigment

	Average: 300-380	5%
	Average 420-700	21%
	Average 700-1000	23%
	Average 1500-1600	28%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	3%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	5%


FIG. 62
FIG. 62: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament,
2% Altiris, 2.5% Microvoid pigment

Transmittance for each wavelength

Mono

2% Altiris,
	wavelength (nm)	2.5% Microvoid pigment

	280	0.1377
	300	0.1386
	320	0.1448
	340	0.1402
	360	0.1425
	380	0.1463
	400	0.2157
	420	0.3849
	440	0.3944
	460	0.4004
	480	0.4039
	500	0.4093
	520	0.4131
	540	0.4174
	560	0.4201
	580	0.4235
	600	0.4245
	620	0.4293
	640	0.4300
	660	0.4333
	680	0.4336
	700	0.4379
	720	0.4424
	740	0.4445
	760	0.4456
	780	0.4474
	800	0.4501
	820	0.4512
	840	0.4523
	860	0.4512
	880	0.4554
	900	0.4575
	920	0.4549
	940	0.4569
	960	0.4616
	980	0.4648
	1000	0.4645
	1020	0.4658
	1040	0.4647
	1060	0.4709
	1080	0.4758
	1100	0.4753
	1120	0.4796
	1140	0.4774
	1160	0.4722
	1180	0.4587
	1200	0.4315
	1220	0.4073
	1240	0.4657
	1260	0.4775
	1280	0.4848
	1300	0.4863
	1320	0.4914
	1340	0.4940
	1360	0.4923
	1380	0.4805
	1400	0.4655
	1420	0.4540
	1440	0.4604
	1460	0.4763
	1480	0.4879
	1500	0.4957
	1520	0.4985
	1540	0.4922
	1560	0.5039
	1580	0.5070
	1600	0.5083
	1620	0.5088
	1640	0.5092
	1660	0.5043
	1680	0.4899
	1700	0.4558
	1720	0.3211
	1740	0.3466
	1760	0.3517
	1780	0.4080
	1800	0.4024
	1820	0.4030
	1840	0.4151
	1860	0.4409
	1880	0.4504
	1900	0.4537
	1920	0.4561
	1940	0.4554
	1960	0.4583
	1980	0.4635
	2000	0.4570
	2020	0.4587
	2040	0.4657
	2060	0.4628
	2080	0.4775
	2100	0.4951
	2120	0.5070
	2140	0.5056
	2160	0.4947
	2180	0.4933
	2200	0.4646
	2220	0.4502
	2240	0.4236
	2260	0.3793
	2280	0.2779
	2300	0.1621
	2320	0.1994
	2340	0.1981
	2360	0.1819
	2380	0.1426
	2400	0.1221
	2420	0.1537
	2440	0.1387
	2460	0.1703
	2480	0.1776
	2500	0.3100

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		2% Altiris,
		2.5% Microvoid pigment

	Average: 300-380	14%
	Average 420-700	42%
	Average 700-1000	45%
	Average 1500-1600	50%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	4%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	5%


FIG. 63
FIG. 63: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament,
2% Altiris, 5% Microvoid pigment

Transmittance for each wavelength

Mono

2% Altiris,
	wavelength (nm)	5% Microvoid pigment

	280	0.1689
	300	0.1744
	320	0.1767
	340	0.1750
	360	0.1769
	380	0.1799
	400	0.2281
	420	0.3232
	440	0.3304
	460	0.3353
	480	0.3386
	500	0.3443
	520	0.3463
	540	0.3490
	560	0.3496
	580	0.3516
	600	0.3550
	620	0.3558
	640	0.3591
	660	0.3606
	680	0.3618
	700	0.3637
	720	0.3655
	740	0.3675
	760	0.3699
	780	0.3715
	800	0.3726
	820	0.3744
	840	0.3754
	860	0.3775
	880	0.3777
	900	0.3793
	920	0.3770
	940	0.3787
	960	0.3833
	980	0.3856
	1000	0.3861
	1020	0.3863
	1040	0.3869
	1060	0.3915
	1080	0.3932
	1100	0.3948
	1120	0.3967
	1140	0.3973
	1160	0.3931
	1180	0.3826
	1200	0.3607
	1220	0.3427
	1240	0.3888
	1260	0.3996
	1280	0.4043
	1300	0.4063
	1320	0.4098
	1340	0.4110
	1360	0.4111
	1380	0.3992
	1400	0.3916
	1420	0.3817
	1440	0.3868
	1460	0.4014
	1480	0.4119
	1500	0.4186
	1520	0.4190
	1540	0.4173
	1560	0.4248
	1580	0.4264
	1600	0.4291
	1620	0.4310
	1640	0.4302
	1660	0.4266
	1680	0.4162
	1700	0.3884
	1720	0.2812
	1740	0.3002
	1760	0.3055
	1780	0.3490
	1800	0.3489
	1820	0.3457
	1840	0.3602
	1860	0.3780
	1880	0.3878
	1900	0.3888
	1920	0.3888
	1940	0.3891
	1960	0.3933
	1980	0.3990
	2000	0.3913
	2020	0.3959
	2040	0.3991
	2060	0.4031
	2080	0.4123
	2100	0.4263
	2120	0.4324
	2140	0.4281
	2160	0.4365
	2180	0.4281
	2200	0.4090
	2220	0.3941
	2240	0.3659
	2260	0.3443
	2280	0.2527
	2300	0.1783
	2320	0.2065
	2340	0.1970
	2360	0.1850
	2380	0.1770
	2400	0.1628
	2420	0.1726
	2440	0.1726
	2460	0.2093
	2480	0.2297
	2500	0.2018

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		2% Altiris,
		5% Microvoid pigment

	Average: 300-380	18%
	Average 420-700	35%
	Average 700-1000	38%
	Average 1500-1600	42%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	3%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	5%


FIG. 64
FIG. 64: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament,
2% Altiris, 14% Microvoid pigment

Transmittance for each wavelength

Mono

2% Altiris,
	wavelength (nm)	14% Microvoid pigment

	280	0.0127
	300	0.0081
	320	0.0009
	340	0.0037
	360	0.0053
	380	0.0085
	400	0.0320
	420	0.1225
	440	0.1308
	460	0.1347
	480	0.1375
	500	0.1404
	520	0.1429
	540	0.1450
	560	0.1472
	580	0.1492
	600	0.1508
	620	0.1521
	640	0.1540
	660	0.1560
	680	0.1579
	700	0.1598
	720	0.1616
	740	0.1624
	760	0.1662
	780	0.1655
	800	0.1669
	820	0.1682
	840	0.1695
	860	0.1710
	880	0.1722
	900	0.1728
	920	0.1716
	940	0.1721
	960	0.1761
	980	0.1790
	1000	0.1795
	1020	0.1868
	1040	0.1853
	1060	0.1902
	1080	0.1897
	1100	0.1913
	1120	0.1843
	1140	0.2074
	1160	0.1873
	1180	0.1941
	1200	0.1724
	1220	0.1433
	1240	0.1853
	1260	0.2062
	1280	0.1979
	1300	0.2200
	1320	0.2115
	1340	0.2109
	1360	0.2391
	1380	0.2527
	1400	0.2066
	1420	0.1779
	1440	0.1920
	1460	0.2033
	1480	0.1988
	1500	0.2109
	1520	0.2252
	1540	0.2130
	1560	0.2180
	1580	0.2206
	1600	0.2312
	1620	0.2233
	1640	0.2178
	1660	0.2293
	1680	0.2097
	1700	0.1792
	1720	0.0887
	1740	0.1091
	1760	0.1164
	1780	0.1612
	1800	0.1555
	1820	0.0587
	1840	0.1516
	1860	0.1183
	1880	0.1865
	1900	0.1415
	1920	0.1225
	1940	0.2151
	1960	0.1865
	1980	0.1988
	2000	0.2026
	2020	0.1843
	2040	0.2164
	2060	0.2087
	2080	0.2360
	2100	0.2311
	2120	0.2452
	2140	0.2312
	2160	0.2432
	2180	0.2290
	2200	0.2052
	2220	0.2372
	2240	0.1495
	2260	0.1791
	2280	0.1171
	2300	0.0379
	2320	−0.0083
	2340	0.0317
	2360	0.0249
	2380	−0.0277
	2400	0.0280
	2420	−0.0482
	2440	0.0478
	2460	0.0161
	2480	0.0405
	2500	0.0214

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		2% Altiris,
		14% Microvoid pigment

	Average: 300-380	1%
	Average 420-700	15%
	Average 700-1000	17%
	Average 1500-1600	22%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	2%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	5%


FIG. 65
FIG. 65: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament,
1% TiO2, 5% Microvoid pigment

Transmittance for each wavelength

Mono

1% TiO2,
	wavelength (nm)	5% Microvoid pigment

	280	0.1295
	300	0.1514
	320	0.1334
	340	0.1351
	360	0.1342
	380	0.1934
	400	0.3964
	420	0.4087
	440	0.4151
	460	0.4206
	480	0.4253
	500	0.4292
	520	0.4333
	540	0.4373
	560	0.4404
	580	0.4436
	600	0.4464
	620	0.4499
	640	0.4530
	660	0.4554
	680	0.4578
	700	0.4602
	720	0.4623
	740	0.4653
	760	0.4678
	780	0.4701
	800	0.4717
	820	0.4739
	840	0.4755
	860	0.4782
	880	0.4795
	900	0.4808
	920	0.4797
	940	0.4809
	960	0.4877
	980	0.4902
	1000	0.4918
	1020	0.4905
	1040	0.4945
	1060	0.4991
	1080	0.5015
	1100	0.5059
	1120	0.5078
	1140	0.5084
	1160	0.5025
	1180	0.4911
	1200	0.4654
	1220	0.4443
	1240	0.4987
	1260	0.5128
	1280	0.5185
	1300	0.5212
	1320	0.5251
	1340	0.5271
	1360	0.5274
	1380	0.5142
	1400	0.5015
	1420	0.4922
	1440	0.4998
	1460	0.5150
	1480	0.5285
	1500	0.5352
	1520	0.5377
	1540	0.5328
	1560	0.5439
	1580	0.5466
	1600	0.5502
	1620	0.5494
	1640	0.5510
	1660	0.5468
	1680	0.5342
	1700	0.5038
	1720	0.3778
	1740	0.4028
	1760	0.4050
	1780	0.4586
	1800	0.4555
	1820	0.4567
	1840	0.4708
	1860	0.4937
	1880	0.5035
	1900	0.5042
	1920	0.5075
	1940	0.5087
	1960	0.5100
	1980	0.5149
	2000	0.5136
	2020	0.5113
	2040	0.5188
	2060	0.5265
	2080	0.5355
	2100	0.5480
	2120	0.5540
	2140	0.5495
	2160	0.5468
	2180	0.5474
	2200	0.5267
	2220	0.5117
	2240	0.4873
	2260	0.4582
	2280	0.3653
	2300	0.2185
	2320	0.2658
	2340	0.2639
	2360	0.2413
	2380	0.2081
	2400	0.2098
	2420	0.1953
	2440	0.1792
	2460	0.2753
	2480	0.2889
	2500	0.2870

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		1% TiO2,
		5% Microvoid pigment

	Average: 300-380	15%
	Average 420-700	44%
	Average 700-1000	48%
	Average 1500-1600	54%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	4%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	7%


FIG. 66
FIG. 66: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament, 1%
TiO2, 10% Microvoid pigment

Transmittance for each wavelength

Mono

1% TiO2,
	wavelength (nm)	10% Microvoid pigment

	280	0.1019
	300	0.1012
	320	0.1071
	340	0.1091
	360	0.1070
	380	0.1161
	400	0.1992
	420	0.3024
	440	0.3109
	460	0.3162
	480	0.3210
	500	0.3263
	520	0.3305
	540	0.3359
	560	0.3396
	580	0.3451
	600	0.3487
	620	0.3519
	640	0.3562
	660	0.3594
	680	0.3631
	700	0.3660
	720	0.3693
	740	0.3719
	760	0.3750
	780	0.3781
	800	0.3816
	820	0.3839
	840	0.3870
	860	0.3896
	880	0.3912
	900	0.3937
	920	0.3928
	940	0.3952
	960	0.4023
	980	0.4060
	1000	0.4078
	1020	0.4113
	1040	0.4134
	1060	0.4170
	1080	0.4233
	1100	0.4269
	1120	0.4296
	1140	0.4305
	1160	0.4247
	1180	0.4125
	1200	0.3845
	1220	0.3616
	1240	0.4224
	1260	0.4376
	1280	0.4452
	1300	0.4485
	1320	0.4534
	1340	0.4551
	1360	0.4564
	1380	0.4405
	1400	0.4278
	1420	0.4167
	1440	0.4254
	1460	0.4432
	1480	0.4568
	1500	0.4656
	1520	0.4676
	1540	0.4639
	1560	0.4753
	1580	0.4798
	1600	0.4818
	1620	0.4840
	1640	0.4829
	1660	0.4791
	1680	0.4649
	1700	0.4299
	1720	0.2932
	1740	0.3187
	1760	0.3220
	1780	0.3805
	1800	0.3769
	1820	0.3780
	1840	0.3945
	1860	0.4159
	1880	0.4305
	1900	0.4334
	1920	0.4298
	1940	0.4365
	1960	0.4361
	1980	0.4426
	2000	0.4361
	2020	0.4418
	2040	0.4426
	2060	0.4470
	2080	0.4633
	2100	0.4694
	2120	0.4845
	2140	0.4810
	2160	0.4875
	2180	0.4726
	2200	0.4664
	2220	0.4399
	2240	0.3974
	2260	0.3567
	2280	0.2502
	2300	0.1411
	2320	0.1961
	2340	0.1878
	2360	0.1519
	2380	0.1203
	2400	0.1295
	2420	0.1299
	2440	0.1629
	2460	0.1380
	2480	0.1419
	2500	0.2077

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		1% TiO2,
		10% Microvoid pigment

	Average: 300-380	11%
	Average 420-700	34%
	Average 700-1000	39%
	Average 1500-1600	47%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	5%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	9%


FIG. 67
FIG. 67: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament, 1%
TiO2, 14% Microvoid pigment

Transmittance for each wavelength

Mono

1% TiO2,
	wavelength (nm)	14% Microvoid pigment

	280	0.1586
	300	0.0011
	320	0.0558
	340	0.0504
	360	0.0565
	380	0.0625
	400	0.0983
	420	0.1650
	440	0.1700
	460	0.1733
	480	0.1759
	500	0.1790
	520	0.1811
	540	0.1845
	560	0.1871
	580	0.1901
	600	0.1919
	620	0.1962
	640	0.1968
	660	0.1994
	680	0.2016
	700	0.2040
	720	0.2061
	740	0.2116
	760	0.2070
	780	0.2120
	800	0.2147
	820	0.2181
	840	0.2222
	860	0.2262
	880	0.2289
	900	0.2300
	920	0.2295
	940	0.2295
	960	0.2357
	980	0.2373
	1000	0.2377
	1020	0.2487
	1040	0.2515
	1060	0.2415
	1080	0.2555
	1100	0.2474
	1120	0.2454
	1140	0.2635
	1160	0.2534
	1180	0.2372
	1200	0.2190
	1220	0.2012
	1240	0.2457
	1260	0.2693
	1280	0.2686
	1300	0.2680
	1320	0.2734
	1340	0.2790
	1360	0.2437
	1380	0.4001
	1400	0.3106
	1420	0.2521
	1440	0.2371
	1460	0.2591
	1480	0.2686
	1500	0.2797
	1520	0.2818
	1540	0.2802
	1560	0.2857
	1580	0.2876
	1600	0.2783
	1620	0.2911
	1640	0.2827
	1660	0.2960
	1680	0.2783
	1700	0.2541
	1720	0.1579
	1740	0.1734
	1760	0.1803
	1780	0.2204
	1800	0.2404
	1820	0.1731
	1840	0.0493
	1860	0.2879
	1880	0.2964
	1900	0.2550
	1920	0.3255
	1940	0.2896
	1960	0.2646
	1980	0.2649
	2000	0.2667
	2020	0.2648
	2040	0.2872
	2060	0.2884
	2080	0.3061
	2100	0.3223
	2120	0.3194
	2140	0.3294
	2160	0.3429
	2180	0.3121
	2200	0.2870
	2220	0.3077
	2240	0.2561
	2260	0.2121
	2280	0.1737
	2300	0.0774
	2320	0.0598
	2340	0.1124
	2360	0.0675
	2380	0.0579
	2400	0.0429
	2420	0.0757
	2440	0.0812
	2460	0.1693
	2480	0.0506
	2500	0.1911

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		1% TiO2,
		14% Microvoid pigment

	Average: 300-380	5%
	Average 420-700	19%
	Average 700-1000	22%
	Average 1500-1600	28%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	4%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	6%


FIG. 68
FIG. 68: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament, 2%
ZnO nano, 2.5% Microvoid pigment

Transmittance for each wavelength

Mono

2% ZnO nano,
	wavelength (nm)	2.5% Microvoid pigment

	280	0.1399
	300	0.1434
	320	0.1346
	340	0.1385
	360	0.1362
	380	0.1652
	400	0.3349
	420	0.4034
	440	0.4113
	460	0.4171
	480	0.4233
	500	0.4271
	520	0.4325
	540	0.4367
	560	0.4396
	580	0.4429
	600	0.4465
	620	0.4475
	640	0.4531
	660	0.4540
	680	0.4581
	700	0.4582
	720	0.4585
	740	0.4632
	760	0.4645
	780	0.4676
	800	0.4681
	820	0.4697
	840	0.4716
	860	0.4732
	880	0.4742
	900	0.4773
	920	0.4740
	940	0.4743
	960	0.4830
	980	0.4835
	1000	0.4862
	1020	0.4861
	1040	0.4870
	1060	0.4938
	1080	0.4956
	1100	0.5009
	1120	0.4998
	1140	0.5042
	1160	0.4961
	1180	0.4834
	1200	0.4575
	1220	0.4337
	1240	0.4910
	1260	0.5032
	1280	0.5109
	1300	0.5121
	1320	0.5178
	1340	0.5164
	1360	0.5201
	1380	0.4988
	1400	0.4934
	1420	0.4812
	1440	0.4910
	1460	0.5047
	1480	0.5146
	1500	0.5253
	1520	0.5244
	1540	0.5225
	1560	0.5315
	1580	0.5387
	1600	0.5365
	1620	0.5354
	1640	0.5396
	1660	0.5333
	1680	0.5207
	1700	0.4865
	1720	0.3589
	1740	0.3818
	1760	0.3877
	1780	0.4401
	1800	0.4402
	1820	0.4389
	1840	0.4566
	1860	0.4746
	1880	0.4861
	1900	0.4925
	1920	0.4870
	1940	0.4922
	1960	0.4925
	1980	0.4995
	2000	0.4945
	2020	0.5033
	2040	0.5024
	2060	0.4992
	2080	0.5218
	2100	0.5240
	2120	0.5366
	2140	0.5317
	2160	0.5369
	2180	0.5286
	2200	0.5179
	2220	0.4766
	2240	0.4706
	2260	0.4181
	2280	0.3297
	2300	0.2068
	2320	0.2625
	2340	0.2548
	2360	0.2281
	2380	0.1889
	2400	0.1881
	2420	0.2114
	2440	0.1850
	2460	0.2678
	2480	0.2620
	2500	0.3022

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		2% ZnO nano,
		2.5% Microvoid pigment

	Average: 300-380	14%
	Average 420-700	44%
	Average 700-1000	47%
	Average 1500-1600	53%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	3%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	6%

Prior Art Crop Cover Material


FIG. 69
FIG. 69: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm film extruded
onto woven fabic, Polymer only

Transmittance for each wavelength - crop cover
Film extruded onto woven fabric

	wavelength (nm)	Polymer only

	280	0.5959
	300	0.7082
	320	0.7367
	340	0.7502
	360	0.7624
	380	0.7712
	400	0.7770
	420	0.7812
	440	0.7851
	460	0.7883
	480	0.7910
	500	0.7929
	520	0.7952
	540	0.7969
	560	0.7985
	580	0.7996
	600	0.8004
	620	0.8017
	640	0.8018
	660	0.8021
	680	0.8010
	700	0.8063
	720	0.8071
	740	0.8082
	760	0.8089
	780	0.8099
	800	0.8101
	820	0.8102
	840	0.8110
	860	0.8114
	880	0.8120
	900	0.8119
	920	0.8115
	940	0.8113
	960	0.8138
	980	0.8141
	1000	0.8147
	1020	0.8146
	1040	0.8153
	1060	0.8154
	1080	0.8168
	1100	0.8167
	1120	0.8172
	1140	0.8178
	1160	0.8144
	1180	0.8096
	1200	0.7980
	1220	0.7892
	1240	0.8109
	1260	0.8156
	1280	0.8169
	1300	0.8183
	1320	0.8187
	1340	0.8183
	1360	0.8177
	1380	0.8114
	1400	0.8068
	1420	0.8014
	1440	0.8033
	1460	0.8098
	1480	0.8140
	1500	0.8167
	1520	0.8166
	1540	0.8149
	1560	0.8175
	1580	0.8180
	1600	0.8195
	1620	0.8180
	1640	0.8179
	1660	0.8171
	1680	0.8104
	1700	0.7931
	1720	0.7127
	1740	0.7360
	1760	0.7324
	1780	0.7687
	1800	0.7661
	1820	0.7659
	1840	0.7727
	1860	0.7827
	1880	0.7859
	1900	0.7848
	1920	0.7841
	1940	0.7891
	1960	0.7853
	1980	0.7893
	2000	0.7854
	2020	0.7842
	2040	0.7905
	2060	0.7900
	2080	0.7931
	2100	0.7999
	2120	0.8020
	2140	0.7982
	2160	0.8054
	2180	0.7956
	2200	0.7916
	2220	0.7914
	2240	0.7633
	2260	0.7478
	2280	0.6630
	2300	0.4002
	2320	0.5265
	2340	0.4911
	2360	0.4559
	2380	0.3721
	2400	0.3656
	2420	0.4014
	2440	0.3965
	2460	0.5188
	2480	0.5480
	2500	0.6022

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		Polymer only

	Average: 300-380	75%
	Average 420-700	80%
	Average 700-1000	81%
	Average 1500-1600	82%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	1%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	1%


FIG. 70
FIG. 70: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament, 1% TiO2

Transmittance for each wavelength - crop cover

	wavelength (nm)	Mono 1% TiO2

	280	0.1403
	300	0.1553
	320	0.1540
	340	0.1557
	360	0.1554
	380	0.1629
	400	0.2955
	420	0.4304
	440	0.4419
	460	0.4527
	480	0.4616
	500	0.4716
	520	0.4803
	540	0.4899
	560	0.4975
	580	0.5058
	600	0.5126
	620	0.5220
	640	0.5281
	660	0.5357
	680	0.5412
	700	0.5490
	720	0.5557
	740	0.5642
	760	0.5681
	780	0.5745
	800	0.5786
	820	0.5848
	840	0.5910
	860	0.5952
	880	0.6020
	900	0.6051
	920	0.6078
	940	0.6110
	960	0.6220
	980	0.6262
	1000	0.6322
	1020	0.6325
	1040	0.6398
	1060	0.6494
	1080	0.6549
	1100	0.6632
	1120	0.6669
	1140	0.6719
	1160	0.6689
	1180	0.6601
	1200	0.6365
	1220	0.6171
	1240	0.6765
	1260	0.6934
	1280	0.7018
	1300	0.7086
	1320	0.7141
	1340	0.7195
	1360	0.7239
	1380	0.7124
	1400	0.7019
	1420	0.6927
	1440	0.7034
	1460	0.7208
	1480	0.7362
	1500	0.7446
	1520	0.7498
	1540	0.7471
	1560	0.7591
	1580	0.7651
	1600	0.7684
	1620	0.7710
	1640	0.7720
	1660	0.7717
	1680	0.7588
	1700	0.7328
	1720	0.6035
	1740	0.6319
	1760	0.6363
	1780	0.6921
	1800	0.6904
	1820	0.6923
	1840	0.7082
	1860	0.7279
	1880	0.7418
	1900	0.7449
	1920	0.7433
	1940	0.7503
	1960	0.7503
	1980	0.7557
	2000	0.7485
	2020	0.7550
	2040	0.7553
	2060	0.7603
	2080	0.7775
	2100	0.7859
	2120	0.7867
	2140	0.7897
	2160	0.7928
	2180	0.7868
	2200	0.7716
	2220	0.7602
	2240	0.7382
	2260	0.6907
	2280	0.5714
	2300	0.3504
	2320	0.4424
	2340	0.4320
	2360	0.3938
	2380	0.3078
	2400	0.3284
	2420	0.3304
	2440	0.3403
	2460	0.4542
	2480	0.4867
	2500	0.5986

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	10%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	16%


FIG. 71
FIG. 71: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm film, 2% TiO2

Transmittance for each wavelength - crop cover

	wavelength (nm)	Film 2% TiO2

	280	0.012
	300	0.002
	320	0.001
	340	0.001
	360	0.001
	380	0.001
	400	0.036
	420	0.218
	440	0.229
	460	0.237
	480	0.244
	500	0.252
	520	0.260
	540	0.268
	560	0.275
	580	0.283
	600	0.288
	620	0.297
	640	0.302
	660	0.306
	680	0.302
	700	0.332
	720	0.341
	740	0.348
	760	0.355
	780	0.363
	800	0.370
	820	0.376
	840	0.383
	860	0.390
	880	0.396
	900	0.401
	920	0.402
	940	0.407
	960	0.419
	980	0.426
	1000	0.431
	1020	0.435
	1040	0.438
	1060	0.445
	1080	0.451
	1100	0.457
	1120	0.462
	1140	0.466
	1160	0.457
	1180	0.445
	1200	0.407
	1220	0.388
	1240	0.464
	1260	0.486
	1280	0.497
	1300	0.504
	1320	0.512
	1340	0.518
	1360	0.521
	1380	0.503
	1400	0.492
	1420	0.480
	1440	0.495
	1460	0.519
	1480	0.539
	1500	0.550
	1520	0.557
	1540	0.557
	1560	0.573
	1580	0.580
	1600	0.585
	1620	0.590
	1640	0.593
	1660	0.592
	1680	0.577
	1700	0.523
	1720	0.374
	1740	0.423
	1760	0.420
	1780	0.494
	1800	0.497
	1820	0.504
	1840	0.526
	1860	0.556
	1880	0.573
	1900	0.579
	1920	0.582
	1940	0.590
	1960	0.595
	1980	0.605
	2000	0.602
	2020	0.612
	2040	0.619
	2060	0.629
	2080	0.645
	2100	0.659
	2120	0.670
	2140	0.671
	2160	0.672
	2180	0.667
	2200	0.655
	2220	0.649
	2240	0.621
	2260	0.575
	2280	0.444
	2300	0.206
	2320	0.329
	2340	0.285
	2360	0.288
	2380	0.211
	2400	0.205
	2420	0.237
	2440	0.244
	2460	0.360
	2480	0.392
	2500	0.468

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		2% TiO2

	Average: 300-380	0%
	Average 420-700	27%
	Average 700-1000	38%
	Average 1500-1600	57%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	11%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	18%

Crop Cover Material of the Invention


FIG. 72
FIG. 72: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm film extruded
onto woven fabic, 3% Altiris

Transmittance for each wavelength - crop cover
Film extruded onto woven fabric

	wavelength (nm)	3% Altiris

	280	0.1840
	300	0.1255
	320	0.1469
	340	0.1261
	360	0.1316
	380	0.2565
	400	0.4897
	420	0.5861
	440	0.6138
	460	0.6274
	480	0.6320
	500	0.6345
	520	0.6364
	540	0.6377
	560	0.6381
	580	0.6386
	600	0.6386
	620	0.6384
	640	0.6375
	660	0.6370
	680	0.6354
	700	0.6373
	720	0.6368
	740	0.6368
	760	0.6362
	780	0.6365
	800	0.6361
	820	0.6362
	840	0.6359
	860	0.6362
	880	0.6357
	900	0.6351
	920	0.6328
	940	0.6322
	960	0.6365
	980	0.6370
	1000	0.6372
	1020	0.6355
	1040	0.6358
	1060	0.6374
	1080	0.6393
	1100	0.6404
	1120	0.6411
	1140	0.6414
	1160	0.6345
	1180	0.6249
	1200	0.6011
	1220	0.5846
	1240	0.6284
	1260	0.6387
	1280	0.6427
	1300	0.6442
	1320	0.6468
	1340	0.6481
	1360	0.6484
	1380	0.6362
	1400	0.6261
	1420	0.6171
	1440	0.6227
	1460	0.6356
	1480	0.6440
	1500	0.6487
	1520	0.6505
	1540	0.6479
	1560	0.6558
	1580	0.6586
	1600	0.6590
	1620	0.6601
	1640	0.6591
	1660	0.6567
	1680	0.6466
	1700	0.6191
	1720	0.5123
	1740	0.5395
	1760	0.5375
	1780	0.5856
	1800	0.5838
	1820	0.5840
	1840	0.5976
	1860	0.6139
	1880	0.6221
	1900	0.6247
	1920	0.6218
	1940	0.6272
	1960	0.6288
	1980	0.6315
	2000	0.6332
	2020	0.6326
	2040	0.6355
	2060	0.6421
	2080	0.6581
	2100	0.6625
	2120	0.6704
	2140	0.6621
	2160	0.6659
	2180	0.6663
	2200	0.6596
	2220	0.6396
	2240	0.6328
	2260	0.5764
	2280	0.4972
	2300	0.3007
	2320	0.4061
	2340	0.3796
	2360	0.3476
	2380	0.2940
	2400	0.2961
	2420	0.2843
	2440	0.3099
	2460	0.4070
	2480	0.4102
	2500	0.4401

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		3% Altiris

	Average: 300-380	16%
	Average 420-700	63%
	Average 700-1000	64%
	Average 1500-1600	65%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	0%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	2%

Prior Art Ground Cover Material


FIG. 73
FIG. 73: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm tape, 2% TiO2

Transmittance for each wavelength - ground cover

	wavelength (nm)	Tape 2% TiO2

	280	0.012
	300	0.002
	320	0.001
	340	0.001
	360	0.001
	380	0.001
	400	0.036
	420	0.218
	440	0.229
	460	0.237
	480	0.244
	500	0.252
	520	0.260
	540	0.268
	560	0.279
	580	0.283
	600	0.288
	620	0.297
	640	0.302
	660	0.306
	680	0.302
	700	0.332
	720	0.341
	740	0.348
	760	0.355
	780	0.363
	800	0.370
	820	0.376
	840	0.383
	860	0.390
	880	0.386
	900	0.401
	920	0.402
	940	0.407
	960	0.419
	980	0.426
	1000	0.431
	1020	0.435
	1040	0.438
	1060	0.445
	1080	0.451
	1100	0.457
	1120	0.462
	1140	0.466
	1160	0.457
	1180	0.445
	1200	0.407
	1220	0.388
	1240	0.464
	1260	0.486
	1280	0.497
	1300	0.504
	1320	0.512
	1340	0.518
	1360	0.521
	1380	0.503
	1400	0.492
	1420	0.480
	1440	0.495
	1460	0.519
	1480	0.539
	1500	0.550
	1520	0.557
	1540	0.557
	1560	0.573
	1580	0.580
	1600	0.585
	1620	0.590
	1640	0.593
	1660	0.592
	1680	0.577
	1700	0.523
	1720	0.374
	1740	0.423
	1760	0.420
	1780	0.494
	1800	0.487
	1820	0.504
	1840	0.526
	1860	0.556
	1880	0.573
	1900	0.579
	1920	0.582
	1940	0.580
	1960	0.595
	1980	0.605
	2000	0.602
	2020	0.612
	2040	0.619
	2060	0.629
	2080	0.645
	2100	0.659
	2120	0.670
	2140	0.671
	2160	0.672
	2180	0.667
	2200	0.655
	2220	0.649
	2240	0.621
	2260	0.575
	2280	0.444
	2300	0.206
	2320	0.328
	2340	0.285
	2360	0.288
	2380	0.211
	2400	0.205
	2420	0.237
	2440	0.244
	2460	0.360
	2480	0.352
	2500	0.468

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	11%
	(1500-1600) vs (200-1000)	18%


FIG. 74
FIG. 74: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm tape,
20% Microvoid pigment

Transmittance for each wavelength - ground cover

Fabric

20%
	wavelength (nm)	Microvoid pigment

	280	0.014
	300	0.067
	320	0.074
	340	0.078
	360	0.095
	380	0.106
	400	0.117
	420	0.121
	440	0.124
	460	0.127
	480	0.130
	500	0.132
	520	0.134
	540	0.136
	560	0.139
	580	0.141
	600	0.143
	620	0.145
	640	0.147
	660	0.149
	680	0.151
	700	0.153
	720	0.155
	740	0.156
	760	0.158
	780	0.160
	800	0.162
	820	0.164
	840	0.165
	860	0.167
	880	0.168
	900	0.170
	920	0.170
	940	0.173
	960	0.177
	980	0.179
	1000	0.181
	1020	0.181
	1040	0.184
	1060	0.185
	1080	0.187
	1100	0.190
	1120	0.192
	1140	0.191
	1160	0.188
	1180	0.180
	1200	0.175
	1220	0.181
	1240	0.195
	1260	0.201
	1280	0.204
	1300	0.207
	1320	0.209
	1340	0.210
	1360	0.203
	1380	0.196
	1400	0.195
	1420	0.202
	1440	0.207
	1460	0.213
	1480	0.216
	1500	0.221
	1520	0.225
	1540	0.227
	1560	0.230
	1580	0.231
	1600	0.232
	1620	0.231
	1640	0.230
	1660	0.231
	1680	0.223
	1700	0.152
	1720	0.140
	1740	0.151
	1760	0.177
	1780	0.189
	1800	0.195
	1820	0.193
	1840	0.204
	1860	0.218
	1880	0.219
	1900	0.223
	1920	0.225
	1940	0.227
	1960	0.227
	1980	0.228
	2000	0.239
	2020	0.241
	2040	0.243
	2060	0.244
	2080	0.242
	2100	0.253
	2120	0.253
	2140	0.251
	2160	0.241
	2180	0.236
	2200	0.224
	2220	0.203
	2240	0.209
	2260	0.122
	2280	0.078
	2300	0.069
	2320	0.044
	2340	0.074
	2360	0.054
	2380	0.076
	2400	0.063
	2420	0.078
	2440	0.085
	2460	0.040
	2480	0.124
	2500	0.121

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		20% Microvoid pigment

	Average: 300-380	8%
	Average 420-700	14%
	Average 700-1000	17%
	Average 1500-1600	23%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	3%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	6%


FIG. 75
FIG. 75: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm tape, 2.5% black,
4.0% Microvoid pigment

Transmittance for each wavelength - ground cover

		Tape 2.5% black,
	wavelength (nm)	4% microvoid pigment

	280	0.0090
	300	0.0090
	320	0.0090
	340	0.0090
	360	0.0090
	380	0.0090
	400	0.0090
	420	0.0090
	440	0.0090
	460	0.0090
	480	0.0090
	500	0.0090
	520	0.0090
	540	0.0090
	560	0.0090
	580	0.0090
	600	0.0090
	620	0.0090
	640	0.0090
	660	0.0090
	680	0.0090
	700	0.0090
	720	0.0090
	740	0.0090
	760	0.0090
	780	0.0090
	800	0.0090
	820	0.0090
	840	0.0090
	860	0.0090
	880	0.0090
	900	0.0090
	920	0.0090
	940	0.0090
	960	0.0090
	980	0.0090
	1000	0.0090
	1020	0.0090
	1040	0.0090
	1060	0.0090
	1080	0.0090
	1100	0.0090
	1120	0.0090
	1140	0.0090
	1160	0.0090
	1180	0.0090
	1200	0.0090
	1220	0.0090
	1240	0.0090
	1260	0.0090
	1280	0.0090
	1300	0.0109
	1320	0.0118
	1340	0.0121
	1360	0.0116
	1380	0.0073
	1400	0.0121
	1420	0.0185
	1440	0.0207
	1460	0.0204
	1480	0.0214
	1500	0.0240
	1520	0.0257
	1540	0.0279
	1560	0.0307
	1580	0.0305
	1600	0.0335
	1620	0.0325
	1640	0.0330
	1660	0.0373
	1680	0.0416
	1700	0.0403
	1720	0.0429
	1740	0.0306
	1760	0.0458
	1780	0.0549
	1800	0.0501
	1820	0.0434
	1840	0.0525
	1860	0.0504
	1880	0.0602
	1900	0.0535
	1920	0.0540
	1940	0.0588
	1960	0.0771
	1980	0.0643
	2000	0.0629
	2020	0.0688
	2040	0.0753
	2060	0.0575
	2080	0.0744
	2100	0.0867
	2120	0.0596
	2140	0.0627
	2160	0.0931
	2180	0.0602
	2200	0.0724
	2220	0.0999
	2240	0.0673
	2260	0.0346
	2280	0.0905
	2300	0.0577
	2320	0.1181
	2340	0.0424
	2360	0.0888
	2380	0.0366
	2400	0.0453
	2420	0.0240
	2440	0.0562
	2460	0.0305
	2480	0.0221
	2500	0.0558

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		2.5% black,
		4% microvoid pigment

	Average: 300-380	1%
	Average 420-700	1%
	Average 700-1000	1%
	Average 1500-1600	3%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	0%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	2%


FIG. 76
FIG. 76: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm tape, Al coated tape

Transmittance for each wavelength - ground cover

	wavelength (nm)	Tape Al coated tape

	280	0.0090
	300	0.0090
	320	0.0090
	340	0.0090
	360	0.0090
	380	0.0090
	400	0.0090
	420	0.0090
	440	0.0090
	460	0.0090
	480	0.0090
	500	0.0090
	520	0.0090
	540	0.0090
	560	0.0090
	580	0.0090
	600	0.0090
	620	0.0090
	640	0.0090
	660	0.0090
	680	0.0090
	700	0.0090
	720	0.0090
	740	0.0090
	760	0.0090
	780	0.0090
	800	0.0090
	820	0.0090
	840	0.0090
	860	0.0090
	880	0.0090
	900	0.0090
	920	0.0090
	940	0.0090
	960	0.0090
	980	0.0090
	1000	0.0090
	1020	0.0090
	1040	0.0090
	1060	0.0090
	1080	0.0090
	1100	0.0090
	1120	0.0090
	1140	0.0090
	1160	0.0090
	1180	0.0090
	1200	0.0090
	1220	0.0090
	1240	0.0090
	1260	0.0090
	1280	0.0090
	1300	0.0090
	1320	0.0090
	1340	0.0090
	1360	0.0090
	1380	0.0090
	1400	0.0090
	1420	0.0090
	1440	0.0090
	1460	0.0090
	1480	0.0090
	1500	0.0090
	1520	0.0090
	1540	0.0090
	1560	0.0090
	1580	0.0090
	1600	0.0090
	1620	0.0090
	1640	0.0090
	1660	0.0090
	1680	0.0090
	1700	0.0090
	1720	0.0090
	1740	0.0090
	1760	0.0090
	1780	0.0090
	1800	0.0090
	1820	0.0090
	1840	0.0090
	1860	0.0090
	1880	0.0090
	1900	0.0090
	1920	0.0090
	1940	0.0090
	1960	0.0090
	1980	0.0090
	2000	0.0090
	2020	0.0090
	2040	0.0090
	2060	0.0090
	2080	0.0090
	2100	0.0090
	2120	0.0090
	2140	0.0090
	2160	0.0090
	2180	0.0090
	2200	0.0090
	2220	0.0090
	2240	0.0090
	2260	0.0090
	2280	0.0090
	2300	0.0090
	2320	0.0090
	2340	0.0090
	2360	0.0090
	2380	0.0090
	2400	0.0090
	2420	0.0090
	2440	0.0090
	2460	0.0090
	2480	0.0090
	2500	0.0090

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		Al coated tape

	Average: 300-380	1%
	Average 420-700	1%
	Average 700-1000	1%
	Average 1500-1600	1%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	0%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	0%

Ground Cover Material of the Invention


FIG. 77
FIG. 77: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament,
1% Altiris, 14% Microvoid pigment

Transmittance for each wavelength - ground cover

Mono

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	3%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	5%


FIG. 78
FIG. 78: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament,
2% Altiris, 14% Microvoid pigment

Transmittance for each wavelength - ground cover

Mono

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	2%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	5%


FIG. 79
FIG. 79: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm monofilament,
1% TiO2, 14% Microvoid pigment

Transmittance for each wavelength - ground cover

Mono

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	4%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	6%


FIG. 80
FIG. 80: Diffuse transmittance table,
diffuse transmittance versus radiation
from 250 to 2500 nm tape, 1% Altiris,
10% Microvoid pigment

Transmittance for each wavelength

Mono

1% Altiris,
	wavelength (nm)	10% Microvoid pigment

	280	0.1599
	300	0.1747
	320	0.1637
	340	0.1700
	360	0.1691
	380	0.1721
	400	0.2150
	420	0.3299
	440	0.3319
	460	0.3406
	480	0.3402
	500	0.3473
	520	0.3447
	540	0.3505
	560	0.3566
	580	0.3509
	600	0.3575
	620	0.3584
	640	0.3595
	660	0.3565
	680	0.3627
	700	0.3584
	720	0.3682
	740	0.3722
	760	0.3699
	780	0.3747
	800	0.3715
	820	0.3765
	840	0.3738
	860	0.3789
	880	0.3785
	900	0.3833
	920	0.3794
	940	0.3844
	960	0.3849
	980	0.3893
	1000	0.3967
	1020	0.3904
	1040	0.3928
	1060	0.3930
	1080	0.3983
	1100	0.4039
	1120	0.4011
	1140	0.4052
	1160	0.3944
	1180	0.3866
	1200	0.3569
	1220	0.3401
	1240	0.3881
	1260	0.4032
	1280	0.4111
	1300	0.4106
	1320	0.4168
	1340	0.4162
	1360	0.4178
	1380	0.4008
	1400	0.3907
	1420	0.3787
	1440	0.3871
	1460	0.4019
	1480	0.4137
	1500	0.4234
	1520	0.4265
	1540	0.4223
	1560	0.4319
	1580	0.4375
	1600	0.4379
	1620	0.4394
	1640	0.4396
	1660	0.4364
	1680	0.4221
	1700	0.3908
	1720	0.2720
	1740	0.2938
	1760	0.2982
	1780	0.3469
	1800	0.3429
	1820	0.3456
	1840	0.3578
	1860	0.3801
	1880	0.3888
	1900	0.3918
	1920	0.3894
	1940	0.3902
	1960	0.3942
	1980	0.3971
	2000	0.3947
	2020	0.3960
	2040	0.4049
	2060	0.4004
	2080	0.4153
	2100	0.4286
	2120	0.4404
	2140	0.4297
	2160	0.4403
	2180	0.4288
	2200	0.4050
	2220	0.3841
	2240	0.3493
	2260	0.3223
	2280	0.2324
	2300	0.1618
	2320	0.1806
	2340	0.1767
	2360	0.1678
	2380	0.1511
	2400	0.1303
	2420	0.1395
	2440	0.1366
	2460	0.1843
	2480	0.1661
	2500	0.2038

Transmittance average for each wavelength range

		1%, Altiris
		10% Microvoid pigment

	Average: 300-380	17%
	Average 420-700	35%
	Average 700-1000	38%
	Average 1500-1600	43%

Transmittance difference for each wavelength range

	(700-1000) vs (420-700)	3%
	(1500-1600) vs (700-1000)	5%

The foregoing describes the invention including preferred forms thereof, alterations and modifications as will be obvious to those skilled in the art are intended to be incorporated in the scope hereof, as defined in the accompanying claims.
Any discussion of documents, acts, materials, devices, articles or the like which has been included in the present specification is solely for the purpose of providing a context for the present invention. It is not to be taken as an admission that any or all of these matters form part of the prior art base or were common general knowledge in the field relevant to the present invention as it existed before the priority date.

Claims

1-101. (canceled)

102. A ground cover material which is woven, or non-woven, from a synthetic monofilament, multifilament yarn, or tape or combination thereof, formed from a resin comprising at least one pigment such that the monofilament, multifilament yarn, or tape:

across a UV wavelength range about 300 to about 380 nm:

absorbs at least about 55% solar radiation on average, and

transmits less than about 20% solar radiation on average; and

reflects at least about 20% solar radiation on average;

across a visible wavelength range about 420 to about 700 nm:

transmits less than about 40% solar radiation on average, and

reflects at least about 10% of solar radiation on average;

across an infrared wavelength range about 700 to about 1000 nm: transmits between about 10% and about 50% of solar radiation on average; and

across an infrared wavelength range of 1500 to 1600 nm: transmits at least about 10% to about 60% solar radiation on average.

103. The ground cover material according to claim 102, wherein the resin comprises a microvoiding pigment and a UV absorbing substance.

104. The ground cover material according to claim 103 wherein the microvoiding pigment comprises barium sulphate, calcium carbonate, magnesium zirconate, calcium zirconate, strontium zirconate, barium zirconate, zirconium silicate, or a combination thereof.

105. The ground cover material according to claim 103 wherein the UV absorbing substance is an inorganic pigment or an organic pigment.

106. The ground cover material according to claim 103 wherein the UV absorbing substance is selected from the group consisting of barium titanate, magnesium titanate, strontium titanate, neodymium titanate, tin oxide, titanium oxide, titanium dioxide, silica, alumina, zinc oxide, zinc sulphide, zinc sulphate, zirconium silicate, magnesium oxide, and combinations thereof.

107. The ground cover material according to claim 106 wherein the wherein the UV absorbing substance is pigmentary titanium dioxide having a particle size of about 0.20 μm to about 0.40 μm.

108. The ground cover material according to claim 106 wherein the UV absorbing substance is titanium dioxide and has an average particle size of at least 0.5 μm.

109. The ground cover material according to claim 103 wherein the UV absorbing substance is titanium dioxide has an average particle size from about 0.7 μm to about 1.8 μm.

110. The ground cover material according to claim 103 wherein the UV absorbing substance is titanium dioxide is substantially in the rutile form.

111. The ground cover material according to claim 103 wherein said UV absorbing substance is comprises coated or doped titanium dioxide.

112. The ground cover material according to claim 106 wherein said titanium dioxide comprises nickel antimony titanate or chromium antimony titanate.

113. The ground cover material according to claim 106 wherein said titanium dioxide comprises coated titanium dioxide, wherein said titanium dioxide is coated with a coating comprising silica, alumina, or a combination thereof.

114. The ground cover material according to claim 103 comprising a pigment selected from the group consisting of barium titanate, magnesium titanate, strontium titanate, neodymium titanate, tin oxide, titanium oxide, titanium dioxide, silica, alumina, zinc oxide, zinc sulphide, zinc sulphate, zirconium silicate, magnesium oxide, and combinations thereof.

115. The ground cover material according to claim 103 comprising microvoids in the material.

116. The ground cover material according to claim 115 wherein said microvoids have been formed by stretching said synthetic monofilament, yarn, or tape from which the netting material is formed or stretching a film material from which said tape has been cut.

117. The ground cover material according to claim 116 wherein the microvoiding pigment forms microvoids when monofilament, yarn, or tape from which the netting material is formed or a film material from which tape is cut is stretched.

118. The ground cover material according to claim 117 wherein the microvoiding pigment is a white pigment.

119. The ground cover material according to claim 103 formed from a resin comprising at least 1% by weight of microvoiding and titanium dioxide pigments.

120. The ground cover material according to claim 103, wherein the resin comprises at least one microvoiding pigment and particulate material in substantially rutile form.

121. The ground cover material according to claim 103 wherein microvoids have been formed by mono-axial or bi-axial stretching of the synthetic monofilament, multifilament yarn, or tape.