Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41462059›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Fog collection improvement using harp structures formed from hairy yarns.

Atieh Almasi, Hooshang Nosraty, Seyed Abolfazl Mirdehghan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Atieh AlmasiTextile Engineering Department, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran.
Hooshang NosratyTextile Engineering Department, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran.
Seyed Abolfazl MirdehghanTextile Engineering Department, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran. mirdehghan@aut.ac.ir.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the increasing global problem of water scarcity, unconventional methods for water supply, such as fog collection, are emerging as viable solutions in certain regions. This study proposes a harp structure composed of hairy yarns, inspired by the Cotula fallax plant, to improve the fog collection efficiency. The presence of hair fibers can greatly enhance fog collection efficiency. In the harp structure, where yarns are widely spaced, thin hair fibers improve aerodynamic efficiency by increasing the shade coefficient without substantially affecting the pressure drop coefficient of the fog collector. Due to their extreme fineness, these fibers can increase droplet capture efficiency by approximately 2.5 times compare to the optimized Raschel mesh and reduce onset time. Harp structures formed by hairy yarns, owing to the entanglement of their hair fibers, retain more water on their surfaces than the optimized Raschel mesh, and the clogging of these structures is influenced by the arrangement of the hair fibers. The parallel arrangement of the hair fibers forms channels that transfer the water via capillary action, which reducing clogging. When the hair fibers are oriented downward, smaller droplets separate directly from fibers, further decreasing onset time. These findings offer a deeper understanding of the role of hair fibers in the fog collection process and propose an effective strategy for designing an optimal fog collector. Specifically, this study experimentally evaluates the impact of the fineness, arrangement, orientation, and density of hair fibers on fog collection efficiency.

Indexed as

Cotula fallax plantFog collection efficiencyFog collectorHairy yarnHarp

Identifiers

PMID41462059
PMCPMC12749363

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.