Wool-based active insulation?

Piggybacking off Seb’s comment in the polartec alpha thread… who’s tried wool insulated jackets? Seems like there are a few offerings: salewa, ortovox, OR, and ibex, to name a few, though I’m sure there are plenty others. Durability? Warmth? Compressibility? Comparisons to down or synthetics, alpha included? I’ve heard plenty of people trash synthetics for losing warmth/loft quickly, down gets wet, so where does wool fit in?

For my dissertation I was looking at it, I managed to figure out it'd be about 100gsm of wool from a company called HDWool to be equivalent 60gsm of primaloft for equivalent warmth. With water, water uptake is primarily determined by the capillary capacity not the water absorption of the fiber, so 60 GSM of any insulation should dry at a similar rate. 

Wool will be more breathable than synthetic insulation I imagine similar to or better than Alpha but this would highly depend on the lining and face fabric. 

This has been pretty extensively researched this is more lining up with new eu regs and tech catching up, specifically the PLA bonding to improve stability of the non woven structure. 

I was talking to the CEO of HDWool at a convention and and he said they didn't expect it to last more than 4 washes or so, they don't target the outdoor market so it'll be different wash expectations at salewa or ortovox I imagine. 

I couldn't find any user reviews and I doubt you'll get anything on here, all these brands are mainly popular in Europe, and wool insulation is considerably more expensive than synthetic and that adds another barrier for consumers. 

Good info, thanks. When you say 4 washes, what kind of decrease in performance do they expect? Completely useless? Half-capacity? Would this include getting heavily rained on, or is it more the washing machine?

Do you have any anecdotal evidence, either from yourself or others, about the offerings?

M Fazio wrote:

Good info, thanks. When you say 4 washes, what kind of decrease in performance do they expect? Completely useless? Half-capacity? Would this include getting heavily rained on, or is it more the washing machine?

It's more about the stability of the insulation, I didn't ask specifics but I imagine mainly clumping and potentially some felting, I wouldn't expect much of a reduction in warmth but maybe some cold spots. Once again this is down to construction and wool fiber specifics, if there is lots of baffles I'd expect it to stay more stable than larger sheets, if it's cut with more PLA or polyester I'd expect better durability. 

Do you have any anecdotal evidence, either from yourself or others, about the offerings?

There are reviews out there on Google, but regarding breathability going off what a person says isn't a brilliant way tbh. Baselayers, humidity, what they've eaten/drank, temperature, all will effect a persons perception of how breathable and comfortable a garment is and reviewers are pretty poor at controlling for these variables.

BPL would usually be quite good for this but sadly it's not quite their area. 

Synthetics has better insulation at the same weight and dries much faster since they generally do not absorb water. Benefit of will would be that the resist smell better and you have “animal work” instead of microplastics. I definitely would pick synthetics for performance and comfort. I you have ethical considerations or care about smell in low intensity activity, wool could be a good option in my opinion.

that guy named seb wrote:

For my dissertation I was looking at it, I managed to figure out it'd be about 100gsm of wool from a company called HDWool to be equivalent 60gsm of primaloft for equivalent warmth. With water, water uptake is primarily determined by the capillary capacity not the water absorption of the fiber, so 60 GSM of any insulation should dry at a similar rate. 

My experience with wet wool clothing is very, very much at odds with this statement.

Gunkiemike wrote:

My experience with wet wool clothing is very, very much at odds with this statement.

There are many reasons why anecdotaly this has been your experience, wool is both less warm and weaker for its weight than synthetic fibers, what does this mean in practice? 

Wool fabric has to be thicker than polyester to achieve workable durability and similar warmth. Wool will actually dry slightly faster than polyester due to the fiber being moisture vapour permiable unlike polyester fibers. 

Drying time is time is determined largely by two factors, capillary capacity and thickness. These two properties are interlinked but not always the same. For example a grid fleece and a regular fleece may have the same thickness but the capillary capacity of the grid fleece is much lower because of the grid structure. A non woven insulation may have a high thickness but then dry very quickly due to a lack of capillary capacity.

Capillary capacity is the density of fiber to fiber channels that cause capillary action, the same thing that causes wicking of sweat. 

It's not 100% accurate but GSM is a good indicator for dry time. 

Are we talking wool beyond base layers? 

On of my favorite active insulation layers is a wood hoody for super cold environments. So pricy but worth it 

I have some salewa clothes, wool/synthetic puffy, as well a wool/synthetic fleece, and I really quite like both. I can't say that either has performed very different then just a full synthetic, I would happily buy them again but I also wouldn't go out of my way to find the hybrid fabric.

If you want to try it yourself Salewa drops trade show display models on gear trade at times so it can be easy to find 50% off practically new gear, just check the sizing some of it is in Europe sizes and some in us sizes. 

that guy named seb wrote:

There are many reasons why anecdotaly this has been your experience, wool is both less warm and weaker for its weight than synthetic fibers, what does this mean in practice? 

Wool fabric has to be thicker than polyester to achieve workable durability and similar warmth. Wool will actually dry slightly faster than polyester due to the fiber being moisture vapour permiable unlike polyester fibers. 

Drying time is time is determined largely by two factors, capillary capacity and thickness. These two properties are interlinked but not always the same. For example a grid fleece and a regular fleece may have the same thickness but the capillary capacity of the grid fleece is much lower because of the grid structure. A non woven insulation may have a high thickness but then dry very quickly due to a lack of capillary capacity.

Capillary capacity is the density of fiber to fiber channels that cause capillary action, the same thing that causes wicking of sweat. 

It's not 100% accurate but GSM is a good indicator for dry time. 

Have you washed grid fleece? It pretty much comes out of the washer dry. 

Wictor Dahlström wrote:

Have you washed grid fleece? It pretty much comes out of the washer dry. 

That's what I'm trying to say, the channels that create the grid reduce the fabrics capillary capacity, so despite it being potentially equal to or thicker than a conventional fleece, it dries much faster. 

that guy named seb wrote:

That's what I'm trying to say, the channels that create the grid reduce the fabrics capillary capacity, so despite it being potentially equal to or thicker than a conventional fleece, it dries much faster. 

My unlined traditional fleeces dry faster than my grid fleeces, I'm surprised that anyone would claim the opposite. 

The advantage of a grid fleece are stretch, weight, and increased breathability, but they don't dry faster. 

Both a grid fleece and a traditional fleece will come out of the spin cycle and feel "lightweight" because the FLEECE part of the garment (which both share) barely absorbs any water. Grid fleeces, however, must have a face fabric to bond the gridded fleece. That face fabric is always more absorbent than the fleece. Additionally, there is usually spandex/elastane etc woven in the face fabric which both holds water and slows drying.  

I can wear a traditional fleece in a very light rain or dense fog and the water will just bead up on the surface. I can shake it dry. In the same environment a grid fleece will sponge up that moisture and spread it along the surface of the garment via capillary action. I can't shake a grid fleece dry, a temperature gradient and moisture gradient are needed. 

Over my core, where the fabric sits atop a lot of warm mass, both garments dry quickly and efficiently. The sleeves are where disparity develops. There we have a lot of fabric sitting over not much mass and not a very warm mass, relatively speaking, and the traditional fleece dries much faster because it never absorbs much water in the first place. In contrast, I can wring out water from the sleeves of my grid fleeces. 

So we have two anecdotal experiences with grid fleece and a regular fleece. If you want to test your hypothesis Scott you need to take a few simple steps. Find out what the GSM is of both fabrics, measure fabric thickness(this is tricky without the proper bit of kit), and then design an experiment, you can figure out roughly the square meter age of each if you know the GSM so the fabrics being different weights won't matter. 

Tbh though, it sounds like the PEG wicking treatment on your regular fleece has either washed out, never been applied properly, or has a DWR. Polyester apparel must receive a chemical treatment of some sort for it to wick and take up moisture. 

A quick point regarding construction, they're both more of less the same, both have a knit base with a pile, the difference between the two is the grid fleece has a pile surface on one side. The only "bonding" is an acrylic finish that can be used on either products and is used to improve pill resistance.

that guy named seb wrote:

So we have two anecdotal experiences with grid fleece and a regular fleece. If you want to test your hypothesis Scott you need to take a few simple steps. Find out what the GSM is of both fabrics, measure fabric thickness(this is tricky without the proper bit of kit), and then design an experiment, you can figure out roughly the square meter age of each if you know the GSM so the fabrics being different weights won't matter. 

Tbh though, it sounds like the PEG wicking treatment on your regular fleece has either washed out, never been applied properly, or has a DWR. Polyester apparel must receive a chemical treatment of some sort for it to wick and take up moisture. 

A quick point regarding construction, they're both more of less the same, both have a knit base with a pile, the difference between the two is the grid fleece has a pile surface on one side. The only "bonding" is an acrylic finish that can be used on either products and is used to improve pill resistance.

I have 6 grid fleeces, I've been using the oldest one for 10 years. I have 7 or 8 traditional fleeces that I've been using for almost 30 years.

Personally, there's nothing to gain from doing experiments. I've already used both types of garments in all kinds of conditions and I know the results.

Sweat wicking, resistance to external moisture, and water retention are all different things. Grid fleece breaths and wicks better but it retains more water and thus does not dry the fastest. 

That was my point in responding, the mechanism you have laid out to decide whether stuff dries at _____ speed based on wicking seems fundamentally at odds with real world results across brands, designs, and decades of use. Probably because lots of other factors are also important. 

Considering the age of your fleeces that more or less adds up, the PEG treatment that's common on fleeces and all polyester baselayers allowing for dramatically improved wicking was patented in the late 90s. 

https://patents.google.com/patent/US6294254B1/en

https://patents.google.com/patent/US20010002737A1/en

Wicking actually has nothing to do with dry time despite what outdoor companies might tell you. 

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/004051755102100107

It's a shame this is behind a pay wall (find a scihub.se mirror that works) but what I'm saying has been researched and discovered decades ago, unfortunately naughty researchers seem to miss this and do another research project with more or less the same results. Different conditions and particular measurements tend to lead to slightly different results but the largest factors remain the same. 

I'm a fan of a wool sweater under the softshell, personally, as long as it'll be cold enough to wear the sweater all day. It's great - until you have to take off the sweater and put it in your pack. Then it's too bulky. I think a high quality 100% wool sweater is more breathable and has a greater range of comfortable temps than comparably warm fleeces or (even more so) non-fleece synthetic insulated jackets. The sweaters are heavy and they do seem to stay wet when they get wet. 

I wouldn't buy a wool insulated jacket though.