The D prize: for 1st synthetic down cluster

What's wrong with the natural stuff?

Why the hubristic certainty that we can "science it" better? What makes you think a synthetic version wouldn't suffer from the exact same shortcomings? If it shares the structure, it'll share the susceptibility to water.

So again I ask, what's the issue?

Primaloft is synthetic down. It is modeled after down clusters, requires no baffles, and works when wet. Seems like improved down to me!

What we really need is geneticly altered birds… or sheep for that matter. I don't care as long as it grows 2000+ fill down! They're milking silk from goats, cloning sheep, and growing human ears on mice… why not super down from frogs? j/k

Yet it's not as light as down, no matter how you slice it. Modeled after, and synthetic facsimile are two different things.

Also, the misnomer that "synthetic insulation is effective when wet" is just wrong. Yes it may insulate more than none, but less bad doesn't equal good.

It's pretty obvious that every alternative to just about everything that has ever existed in nature or as a result of scientific advancement is rife with trade-offs.

For my part, down does the job, what's your beef with it, and why should humanity spend it's focus trying to improve upon it? X-prize makes sense, it's not like we have a natural pre-existing escalator into space they're asking for improvements upon.

BTW Primaloft requires stabilization, which is effectively what baffles are.

Down has improved as much as polyester insulation over the past decade. There is always room for improvement. When my dad was a kid corn stalks had 1 ear, go look at the corn field next time you are out there and start counting. Down wasn't always the bees knees. Before we knew how to grade it, sort it out, and clean it up as we do today it was a real crap shoot. Down quilts lasted 2 seasons at best before they turned into pancakes when my dad was a kid. Synthetic insulation has gone through many similar changes over the years.

Primaloft is a down cluster in synthetic form. It is improved because the lil strands of polyester are slicked to reduce moisture issues. It definitely dries a lot faster than down too. Especially considering I can flip my quilt inside out (not primaloft cuz its quilted) and dry it fast fast fast. So in that sense, I guess the nature of synthetic down is that it still needs baffles in the sense of quilting, which adds a lot of complexity. In every other way its superior to cheap down an can hold its own with the good stuff. Not because it is hands down "better" but because many different synthetic insulations are available that absolutely excel in specific applications, while not so hot in others. If you're talking weight to warmth though… well the birds win on that one. Unfortunately, for me there is a lot more to planning my treks than just how much it weighs versus some value in a controlled test room.

My point wasn't really to debate which is better. Just wanted to put out there that synthetic down already exists from my understanding of primaloft.

The weight issue you bring up is important to the polar bear club, but not most 3 season backpackers. I agree down is by far superior based on the weight comparison alone when talking zero degree sleep systems. Summer quilts? Meh not so much of an issue and suddenly a fast drying quilt is more appealing than a slightly lighter one I have to baby.

However, to define synthetic down as "best" or "better" we first need a way to determine what that means. The D prize would have to spell out exactly what needs to improve. I'm sure they could improve the weight of synthetic insulation at a huge cost, so again more parameters.

What would we make the parameters for judging the "best" synthetic down insulation? Does it absolutely have to copy down or do all polyester insulations count as a synthetic down? Well I kind of answered my own question, only one poly insulation currently mimicks down clusters as far as I know. Ah and it starts already, mass confusion due to the haphazard use of the word "best".

Troy it's obvious that you and I have deep ideological differences, so I'll bow out of this conversation after this. To my mind, the abject bastardization of the corn crops are endemic of the hubris I mentioned.

I only see one short coming of down, and that's it's performance when soaked, which I feel is a fair trade-off for it's performance otherwise.

Yes synthetic insulation has infinite potential, as does everything. We could just as easily focus on a coating for ultra high quality down clusters that would repel moisture as creating a completely synthetic alternative, synergizing nature and science more fully as opposed to trying to simply supplant it. I'll always believe that the best result comes from maximizing the best of multiple forms, as opposed to brute forcing the total synthetic. My belief in that stems from the fact that scientific construction itself is an express wielding of nature.

As to whether synthetic can hold its own with the good stuff? It's a matter of opinion, but in the context of this forum, to me, it doesn't. Show me a synthetic quilt sized to me that can keep me toasty below 30deg for 13.5oz, and I'll concede. My 3-season down quilt does.

Lastly to the issue of drying, well, that depends on the level of "wet". Synthetic insulation wont ever absorb the level of water that down will, so if you're not experienced enough to keep your down gear out of the rain-storm, yeah, stick with synthetic. Me? I suffered from soaked insulation once (synethtic btw, and it didn't keep me warm), and it'll never happen again. Otherwise, I've never had an issue drying whatever body moisture out of my quilt in marginal time on the trail.

It's also funny your quote of "Down quilts lasted 2 seasons at best before they turned into pancakes when my dad was a kid.", since longevity is one of the major draw-backs of synthetic insulation, where-as there are countless anecdotes of people using the same top quality down bags for decades, and they're still effective.

Anyway, it's obvious we both *believe* different things. So YMMV, cheers, HYOH, etc.

edit: grammatical only

Ok… sry million and a half of these debates already dunno how it became down versus polyester.

So how would we define the "best" synthetic down? Obviously the weight to loft issues would have to be resolved first. Does it need to be lighter?

Second, we need to truly test the loft retention of synthetics and establish a benchmark by testing top quality down for the same thing. Does it need to retain more loft over a certain time? or more loft over all? If it retains the same loft for x cycles of compression, how many cycles is this acceptable? How much can it lose per cycle if we're looking at it over all time? What is the life span of an insulation for that matter?

Cost? Should it cost a lot more, more comparable to down? More than down? Not a factor? We compare down and polyester all the time regardless of the fact that one is a fraction the cost.

Performance? We all know what we want out of insulation but defining one insulation relative to one another is hard to do in this category.

Its endless. Basically in the end I don't think you could get a true objective prize winner. I'm pretty sure it would be a matter of BS to win something like this. So in the end the only thing we can really do is improve weight to loft, which they would have done already if they could. Synthetic insulation is so freaking cheap already I don't understand why there isn't a premium synthetic down that actually takes advantage of the prices that down has set. The only reason I can assume is they simply can't make it that light yet. Birds have been flying for a long time for very good reason after all!

Troy,

Sorry man, looks like I'm being confrontational tonight. I just have a chip on my shoulder when I feel like I see the "man made" vs "natural" which is better argument.

Humble apologies, I'm just opinionated. I don't believe in editing my posts out, so I hope the apology will do.

Yeah no bigs. I don't know why I assume people aren't informed about these sorts of things around here. If I didn't condescend to you then I probably wouldn't have been the catalyst in your man versus wild turmoil. I don't like messing with the grain any more than you. It is scary that people are being diagnosed as allergic to grain for the first time in recorded human history that we know of. Scary stuff.

Anyway, back to the topic.

"I only see one short coming of down, and that's it's performance when soaked, which I feel is a fair trade-off for it's performance otherwise."

Actually there are two other draw backs to down — it's relatively rare and time consuming to collect. A major driver behind better synthetics is undoubtedly the military. In the event of a major war the military in the US would expand from 1 million to at least 10 million. many of those would need sleeping bags. They need to be able to set up factories which can use cheap, domestic materials to crank out sleeping bags by the million ASAP. That cannot be accomplished with down — most of which comes from overseas anyway.

Is the demand for no compromise technical synthetic insulation great enough to produce an affordable product? The military is on a budget and the synthetics we're using are made to fit that budget. This is why change takes time in manufacturing technologies. We can refine what we have but usually there is a huge amount of capital invested up front to be able to do ANYTHING, even to make junk for a while before they hammer out the kinks. For this reason we're kind of stuck with what we started in a sense. Do they need to go back to the drawing board and update the manufacturing techniques to make better synthetic insulation? Is polyester the "best" synthetic insulation hands down, or is it simply effective at a price we can swallow?

Perhaps its just a matter of time until they can afford to manufacture a true synthetic clone of down clusters. Not a matter of knowledge. If they haven't finished making their $$$ building the polyester stuff, well they ain't going to stop. They'll invest in new factories, new technology, and better insulation when they can do so w/out screwing themselves out of $$$.

Hopefully there is a big enough market or someone besides Albany and Dupont that knows how to make better insulation. Not just put a twist on the same thing they've been doing. Even if this did happen Dupont would just buy them out and sit on the idea until their current goals were met anyway.

You can make better cars. You can't afford to ditch all the factories that make steel bodies and combustion engines for 50 years after that point. Not because you can't, but because you'll make more money.

I suspect down lasts a long time because it is in individual clusters that an slide over each other, also you can't rip a sheet of something if it isn't in a big sheet(like wadding) which will be stressed when folded.

Also, I suspect its compressablity and resiliance is also due to its clustered nature.

So I think the prize should be fairly literal:

unless any one can disprove the above ideas….

so far the argument seems to be that the synthetic companies havent tried it so it is impossible / not worth it… but there's such a thing as "not questioning the received wisdom" or "not thinking outside the box enough".

Wadding is probably more convenient for manufacture, buy good synthetic bags are
not cheap, so, why not synthetic down that lives in price between wadding and down.

A UK company recently came up with a way of making very thin fibers that's something like an order of magnitude faster than current processes, and with less hassle. Why would they want to switch to what would certainly be an expensive process to replicate an insulation that isn't very expensive? Goose skin grown in a factory sized petri dish might actually be more feasible than synthetic down.

"I suspect down lasts a long time because it is in individual clusters that an slide over each other, also you can't rip a sheet of something if it isn't in a big sheet(like wadding) which will be stressed when folded."

Not actually true. Read this: http://www.jreneeonline.com/about_down.cfm
Down actually clings together breaking up air pockets into smaller ones.

Look at a fractal tree. Producing large clusters and in large quantities is the key.
It is far cheaper to simply make a hollow fiber and pull it, making it thinner then raking it over a sharp edge to make it curl. Untill we can learn to "grow" things to our specifications, much as nature does now, we can never hope to exceede the many thousands of years of past evolution. Down will continue to retain it's supremecy for the near future.

Generally, most synthetics lack the combination of properties that the cutanacious materials of down have. Resiliancy, texture, weight, strength, to name the 4 big stumbling blocks.

""Look at a fractal tree. Producing large clusters and in large quantities is the key.
It is far cheaper to simply make a hollow fiber and pull it, making it thinner then raking it over a sharp edge to make it curl. Untill we can learn to "grow" things to our specifications, much as nature does now, we can never hope to exceede the many thousands of years of past evolution. Down will continue to retain it's supremecy for the near future.""

How can you be sure that this is the only way? What about throwing a blob of molten polyester/olefin in to a vacuum: this might give a down=like cluster of fibres. Hence the prize: to avoid people saying we cant do it with out trying

""
I suspect down lasts a long time because it is in individual clusters that an slide over each other, also you can't rip a sheet of something if it isn't in a big sheet(like wadding) which will be stressed when folded."

Not actually true."";

I just meant synthetic wadding is continuous hence can be ripped whereas down is already in small units that will separate with sufficent force.

"How can you be sure that this is the only way? What about throwing a blob of molten polyester/olefin in to a vacuum: this might give a down=like cluster of fibres. Hence the prize: to avoid people saying we cant do it with out trying"

Absolutely. I think you are reading more into it than I wrote. This was only one methode of the many possibles. Chemical "growth" factories, mechanical drwing factories, Space based "zero" gravity factories, low pressure factories all have their place. All will contribute new methodologies, technologies and build from each other. I don't pretend to be able to predict the future. Your thought is a good one.

10 years from now we'll likely be carrying batteries and electric blankets with tiny solar cells that charge said batteries in the shade on a cloudy day. In the future we'll have low tech and high tech forums, not heavy weight and light weight.

We keep forgetting that loft may not always be the answer. 20 years from now I wouldn't be shocked to see backpackers carrying sub 16oz batteries that are strong enough to run their car's headlights for 3 hours or a thermal blanket for 7 nights. Now consider the possibility that a thermal charger takes your heat or kinetic energies and charges your blanket while you hike, with the aid of a solar panel or not who knows. They're developing a lot of tech to cool batteries, increase efficiency, and reclaim kinetic energy. Trekking poles that charge your batteries from striking the ground are no more far fetched than the brakes on electric cars that reclaim energy while slowing the car, versus just throwing heat off a metal rotor to stop the car.

The medical field is also building biomechanical batteries that operate a human's lifetime with nothing more than the pressure of blood in their vessels. Yep your heart powers your pace maker in the future. If we had piezoelectric devices in the knees of our pants alone it would be enough to charge your blanket before you got to the next stop. That is by today's standards, not 10 years from now.

I also wouldn't be shocked to see companies start to move into reclaiming lost radiant energy with fancy electronic devices or some new manufacturing technique for insulation as a result of their development on these cells.

Batteries haven't changed for decades. The demand for clean energy is changing that rapidly. We've advanced energy cells far further in the past 5 years than the past several decades due to this demand. I really wouldn't be shocked to find high efficiency cells in backpacker's gear lists 10 years from now.

All of this may screw us out of true synthetic down in the end. Maybe true synthetic down will come from the polymers they're developing for these new energy cells. Who knows at this point? Everything we use in backpacking today was discovered by mistake then refined for a purpose as a result of something else we were making. Very few industries have the resources to design something and manufacture it as is, w/out a lil luck on their side.

I could see a point where our biological means also surpasses the tired tortured and bastardized polymers we use today. If we can milk spider silk, the strongest lightest filament in the world, from goats… yeah you get the picture.

I just wanted to add. For my capstone project in mechanical engineering I built a kite that can recharge batteries on my sail boat during long trips. Why a kite? It doubles to triples the amount of wind speed I can obtain just putting the kite several hundred feet above the boat, also increasing boat speed and reducing stress on my rig. It flys in a figure eight pattern against a force balance system. Even if I could afford the stuff I need, this tech isn't anywhere near backpacking feasible yet.

You never really know what can happen until you put yourself out there. But as far as mass manufacturing… synthetic down is further off than a lot of tech right on the horizon, for sure. Unfortunately copying nature only gets us so far in the lifespan of a human, because it takes GENERATIONS to even somewhat understand the things we tinker with.

@Alan

That's an idea, but it still comes down to production costs. Creating a little piece of insulation one-by-one is insanely expensive. They'd do very well to create insulation that's 10% better than down in every way. Some of the cutting edge ultralight fanatics may buy it, but that's not enough to fund a completely new manufacturing process.

I do have to wonder about silk. There has been renewed interest in silk textiles. If the processes materialized and became affordable enough, would it work as insulation?

@Troy

This thread is about down and synthetic insulation.

Why would you build a factory to make synthetic insulation for 1% of the population? It can't be afforded in rescue efforts during disasters. It can't be afforded by the military. It can't be afforded for use in bedding or home use….

Its not going to happen and my point was a lot else is happening before we have the nano technology to affordable manufacture things like true synthetic down. It will take nano technology to build things to that exact of specifications on that scale. That or biological, basically same difference.

So if the synthetic insulation is good enough to last us another decade then the synthetic down ain't happening was my point. They call primaloft synthetic down because it was their best attempt at making something like down, at a realistic cost, and with substantial improvements over other polyester insulation. However, it still ain't down or even close to it in terms of weight. This is because they're using the same technology for 30 years to turn polyester into insulation with a slight twist here and there along the way to "fix" the problems. This is a bandaid for cancer. In a big steel and iron world of mechanical factories that take up an entire city block, we're not going to see the manufacturing change any time soon.

The guys making this stuff know this and are not producing what works best, its what pays best and still works for the application. This is the world we live in.

So with this being true. Where is synthetic down actually going to come from in the next decade? The point of an X prize is to advancement for human kind. We're talking such a small niche in humanity here that I highly doubt anyone with the resources or know how is going to do this. We pay people $1 an hour to sort through feathers now and look how expensive down is. Just imagine what it would take to top that in terms of manufacturing.

I stand by my belief that synthetic down will be created as a byproduct or accident or possibly refinement of a future manufacturing technique. It will not just be invented to be sold as is. Look at the history of polymers after all. Polymers make our gear what it is today and those weren't invented specifically for anything actually. It will not come from the tech we are using at this moment to spin plastic into lil air bubbles. That's just too far fetched.

Meanwhile, a lot else is happening in the world with a lot more substantial byproducts and accidental discoveries than manufacturing polymers. My guess is true synthetic down will never happen because we'll completely surpass the need for it.

Now if some meteor crashes into the earth tomorrow and kills every avian creature on the planet, I could see a true synthetic coming to fruition that actually is down. You never know what the future holds but my best guess is it ain't synthetic down.

I'm still waiting for someone who actually knows about polyester insulation to chime in on what is really happening in that industry today, tomorrow, and in the future. My best attempt is truly only a guess at what the future holds.

I think it would be nice to see an insulation that rivals down in warmth, compressibility, and longevity that DOES NOT come from an animal source.

Eugene,

That is exactly the kind of thinking that will not produce a synthetic down. The answer isn't in the current technology we're using. It is far from the profitable nature of what we currently produce and sell. Thinking outside the box was only to demonstrate that there are many many other advances on the horizon that will eliminate the need for synthetic down, or down period. I believe 20 years from now down will be considered heavy and "traditional". Not something we want to copy or sell as some trendy new product.

My point was we will likely use the same technique to manufacture insulation until the need for pounds and pounds of it are diminished by other technologies. The technology to produce synthetic down has to be so available and cheap that it replaces ALL other synthetic insulation in every application. That is something we haven't done since the 70's and we ain't going to do any time in the next decade.

The only reason we have sweet linked up polyester filament now is because the military used down in their bags and realized, oh crap down comes from communists. We're lucky there is ANY alternative to down. FYI my old military down bag is a nightmare compared to the synthetic stuff they use today so it was still an advancement imo. Even if it was the result of needing a domestic product, not a better down.

Synthetic insulation is already getting better. I'd rather just accept that synthetic insulation won't offer than same weight:warmth benefits as down, and then focus on making down better. Use existing science to genetically modify those geese to produce better down, preferably without feathers, and then use their stem cells to grow down by the acre. If only you could genetically modify geese to grow down with a flouropolymer DWR treatment…

There is no real way that we can define down as better. In the military where you're going into hostile territory, drudging through muddy swamps, and sleeping with one eye open 3 hours a night, who wants to deal with a wet down bag? The soldiers are trained but a hostile war environment is far from trekking on the PCT. They simply can't keep down dry so synthetic is "better".

Perhaps what we are looking for is a light weight synthetic insulation. How do you make something based on the structure of down but without it absorbing water like a sponge? I don't think we can based on my limited understanding of physics. So is there truly even a need for synthetic down if it acts just like down clusters?

I haven't been discouraged by synthetics losing their loft like a lot of people mention around here. Maybe this is because I only started using them recently. I also don't waste $$$ on cuben or try to compete on pack weight. Heck I don't even list weight of items unless they're MYOG. When my bag gets wet for some unknown reason (like the bear that just HAD to have my pack last year or the stream crossing where I had to let my bag float a mile down stream or get dragged along with it) it is really nice hanging it up and in a matter of 30 minutes having 90% of my insulation back except for the wet foot box.

I don't use down in my survival gear pieces like my quilt because its not reliable and I'm not risking it. I would not be interesting in synthetic down if it was just a copy of standard down in every day.

Have you checked out open cell foam?