## 3 Results and Discussion
### Total Solar Reflectance TSR (%)  
The total solar reflectance coefficient TSR (%) calculation subtraction (1--TSR) corresponds to the degree of nanoclay/hybrid pigment's total solar absorption. This calculation requires taking raw reflectance data and applying solar weighting factors for each collected wavelength (ASTM G173-03 [51]). Pigments with high TSR (%) values are designed as cool pigments because of the solar reflectance capacity within the UV-VIS-NIR range. The TSR (%) factor for hybrid pigments could be high due to the intervention of nanoclay particles in solar reflectance, especially in the NIR zone. As we see in Table 5, the TSR values of all the synthesized samples exceeded 50%. However, there were some differences depending on the synthesis conditions. We performed an ANOVA to know if these differences were significant and related to the selected factors. Some factors and interactions  
Figure 9: Main effects and interactions plots from the L* response in the PC pigments.  
Figure 12: (**a**) TGA and (**b**) DTA diagram of laponite (L), PE original pigment and the synthesized hybrid pigments under different conditions [1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11; 12; 13; 14; 15; 16]. (**c**) TGA and (**d**) DTA diagram of laponite (L), PE original pigment and the synthesized hybrid pigments under different conditions [1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11; 12; 13; 14; 15; 16].  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**REF.** & **TSR (\%)** & **REF.** & **TSR (\%)** \\ \hline nPC.1 & 52.02 & nPE.1 & 54.95 \\ nPC.2 & 39.78 & nPE.2 & 49.24 \\ nPC.3 & 53.58 & nPE.3 & 54.36 \\ nPC.4 & 59.71 & nPE.4 & 58.97 \\ nPC.5 & 48.76 & nPE.5 & 47.76 \\ nPC.6 & 62.84 & nPE.6 & 63.13 \\ nPC.7 & 36.46 & nPE.7 & 48.99 \\ nPC.8 & 41.76 & nPE.8 & 69.10 \\ nPC.9 & 50.20 & nPE.9 & 63.00 \\ nPC.10 & 42.86 & nPE.10 & 55.71 \\ nPC.11 & 46.01 & nPE.11 & 61.15 \\ nPC.12 & 47.31 & nPE.12 & 55.93 \\ nPC.13 & 43.48 & nPE.13 & 50.78 \\ nPC.14 & 40.81 & nPE.14 & 50.89 \\ nPC.15 & 52.95 & nPE.15 & 54.32 \\ nPC.16 & 53.36 & nPE.16 & 54.29 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 5: TSR (%) Values from the PC and PE hybrid pigments under different conditions [1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11; 12; 13; 14; 15; 16].  
Figure 14: Main effects and interactions plots from the TSR (%) response in the PE pigments.  
Figure 13: Main effects and interactions plots from the TSR (%) response in the PC pigments.  
In the PC samples, nanoclay origin was not significant, but the clay and silane concentration interactions were. With L, the best option was to use silane to increase the pigment TSR (%) values, while the opposite was true for M when using silane is not recommended. The dye concentration was also significant and, as expected, the low concentrated pigments obtained high TSR (%) values because of their high lightness values. The surfactant significantly increased the TSR (%) values when not combined with silane.  
In the PE pigments, the nanoclay and silane interaction was significant as it was in the PC pigments. Like before, the maximum TSR (%) value was obtained by L when silane was present. With M, no significant differences appeared due to silane interactions. In this pigment, the medium 1% concentration obtained a high TSR (%) value, and the presence of a surfactant increased the TSR (%) value combined with the highest 3% dye content. As previously mentioned, the color perception of these parameters matched the less chromatic and lighter samples, but their TSR (%) values rose.