+618 9072 1514

support@blisterprevention.com.au

Follow Us

Moisture-Wicking Socks: Fibres, Yarns, Blends & More

Moisture-Wicking Socks: Fibres, Yarns, Blends & More

Ever wondered about all the different socks out there? Which ones should you buy? Moisture-wicking socks, double-socks, toesocks? Synthetic fibres, natural yarns, blends? I mean, it’s all so confusing.

If you want to keep your feet drier to prevent blisters, the answer is moisture-wicking socks. But which ones? And are they even worth it?

do you use moisture-wicking socks?
Are the fibres in your socks moisture-wicking?

The science behind aiming for dry with moisture-wicking socks

Moist skin exhibits a higher friction. Conversely, dry skin exhibits a lower friction level. So keeping the skin dry is one consideration in preventing blisters. That’s precisely why blister-prone athletes choose their socks carefully. Or at least they should. Because not all socks are created equal. It comes down to fibres.

It’s a tough ask!

Maintaining dry skin is a tough ask considering how much the feet perspire – especially when it’s hot and especially when we exercise. After all, the soles of the feet (along with the palms of the hands) have the highest density of eccrine sweat glands on the body. It’s well-known fact that the feet can produce in excess of a cup of sweat on an average day. That’s a lot of moisture for the sock to deal with. And still, that doesn’t count hot/humid weather, heavy exercise or environmental sources of moisture (like rain, dew, creek crossings, drink stations etc).

These aren't moisture wicking socks, they're water-proof
How do your socks interact with water? Image credit

The initial goal of a sock is to absorb this moisture. However, the sheer volume of moisture encountered is huge. Keeping the skin dry by absorption alone is an unrealistic expectation of any single material.

The sum total of moisture potentially collecting in the shoe of an athlete during exercise will quickly exceed the absorptive capacity of any sock. Therefore, in order to keep moisture content at a minimum level on the surface of the foot during exercise, a sock must “move” moisture away to the shoe upper for evaporation. This process is known as wicking.

Doug Richie DPM

Podiatrist and researcher Doug Richie DPM on sock fibres

There’s a lot of hype surrounding the topic of athletic sock construction. I must admit I do not possess the expertise in fibre and material properties. Much of the information to follow comes from American Podiatrist, Doug Richie. He has been at the forefront of sock research and education since the 1990s, is an authority on the subject and a trusted source of factual information. Before we go into this any further, please consider this insight from him from a recent article. It makes reference to diabetic socks but is similarly relevant to blister prone individuals and really any athletic or endurance activity.

A review of the medical literature shows a clear superiority of synthetic fibers over cotton fibers in providing health benefits for people with foot pathology. These studies have documented that acrylic fibers and polypropylene fibers can provide better protection from impact, pressure, shear, and moisture accumulation compared to cotton fibers Yet, the medical marketplace continues to feature “diabetic socks” composed of cotton fibers. Many authorities and professional organizations continue to provide consumer information to the general public which includes the choice of white cotton socks as being preferred for healthy feet …

There is no regulation of claims made by manufacturers of footwear and foot products sold to the general public. These products are sold in retail pharmacies, department stores, home/health stores and, most importantly, over the Internet. A visit to any of these vendor outlets will reveal a plethora of products and remedies for foot conditions which promise therapeutic benefits without any scientific verification. Doug Richie, DPM

Doug Richie DPM

Now let me attempt to explain how sock fibres interact differently with moisture. And how this knowledge relates to sock selection if you’re blister prone. But first…

What is “moisture-wicking”?

Moisture wicking is the process of moving moisture from the skin side of the sock, through the sock, to the shoe side of the sock. Obviously, the aim is to keep the skin dry. Moisture-wicking socks can be made of a single fibre type. More commonly, they are made from a combination of materials. We call these belnds. They have the ability to achieve a moisture gradient that encourages the transportation of moisture.

The process of wicking: moisture wicking socks
Moisture wicking is about moving moisture away from the skin.

As moisture reaches the outside of the sock, it needs to leave the sock. Then evaporate through the shoe upper. As such, shoe upper breathability is necessary for moisture-wicking socks to function. This is especially so for longer duration and in wetter conditions.

Sock fibres: Hydrophilic or hydrophobic

There are natural and synthetic sock fibres. Natural fibres include cotton and wool. Most athletic socks contain synthetics. Synthetics have been engineered with one or more favourable characteristics to suit the in-shoe application. These include acrylic, polyester and polypropylene. Favourable characteristics include thermal insulation, cushioning, durability, quick drying, ability to maintain shape. And in regard to the topic of this article, its interaction with water. That is, their hydrophilic or hydrophobic nature and wicking ability.

  • Hydrophilic fibres are water-attracting (absorbent)
  • Hydrophobic fibres are water repelling (non-absorbent)

Natural fibres

Cotton sock fibres

Cotton is the most hydrophilic fibre used in sock construction, for sure. It absorbs a lot of water! This is not good if you’re blister prone and taking part in activities where blisters are likely. The moisture held by the sock is trapped within the sock and against the skin. This keeps the skin moist and clammy. Higher moisture = higher skin friction level = easier to produce blisters. One of the easiest changes you can make is to wear something other than cotton socks. The next most absorbent fibre is wool. Richie (2010) lists sock fibres from most hydrophilic to most hydrophobic:

Cotton — Wool — Acrylic — Polyester — Polypropylene

Wool sock fibres

On its own, wool is not a great fibre for sock construction because of its hydrophilic nature. But Richie explains the premium Merino wool fibre is different. It is a common fibre used in specialist hiking sock construction for its thermal insulation properties. 

“Compared with traditional wool, Merino wool has a much finer core diameter of each fibre, giving a softer feel and more air space for moisture movement. Merino wool has fewer tendencies for skin itch, which is common with regular wool socks and apparel. The finer fibre and natural airspaces created by Merino wool have lead manufacturers to claim that this fibre is superior to any synthetic fibre for insulation and wicking.”

Synthetic sock fibres

Synthetic fibres used for their moisture wicking properties in sock construction include: 

Acrylic sock fibres 

In 1990, Richie and Herring assessed blister incidence in runners wearing either 100% acrylic socks (padded construction) or 100% cotton socks. The padded acrylic socks out-performed cotton in regard to both blister incidence and blister size (acrylic sock wearers experienced half as many blisters and of those blisters that did occur, they were one-third the size of those of cotton socks).

Polyester sock fibres

An example of a polyester fibre is Coolmax. Coolmax polyester fibres have a four-channel configuration that increases surface area and moisture movement. The best image I could find of this fibre and its properties is below.

Coolmax fibres are polyester fibres with a special shape that aids the transport of moisture
Coolmax fibres are polyester fibres with a special shape that aids the transport of moisture
Polypropylene sock fibres 

Polypropylene fibres absorb next to no moisture at all.

One of the main aims of synthetic fibres is to be more hydrophobic (water-repelling / less absorbant) than the natural fibres. The following three snippets about synthetic fibre performance are from publications of Richie.

Popularity

The most popular synthetic fibers utilised in athletic hosiery are acrylic and polyester. Both acrylic and polyester fibers are hydrophobic and have superior wicking properties and reduced drying time than cotton.

Cotton fiber retains three times the moisture of acrylic and fourteen times the moisture of CoolMax®. When exposed to ambient air, socks composed of cotton retain moisture ten times longer than acrylic.

One shortcoming of acrylic is its poor insulation. On hot surfaces in summer months, acrylic fiber socks can conduct heat and be undersirable. Hollow core polyester or Coolmax socks may  be preferred in these conditions.

Doug Richie DPM

You might have heard of Coolmax -it’s a polyester fibre

… studies have shown that Coolmax and other polyester fibers have a 15% faster drying time compared to acrylic fibers.

Doug Richie DPM, 2010

Coolmax is a well-known sock fibre. Coolmax is not a brand of sock – it is simply a fibre that sock manufacturers purchase along with other fibres to use to construct their socks. Socks can be 100% Coolmax fibre. But mostly it is used in combination with other fibres, for example, Thorlo uses Coolmax in their Xperia sock for its moisture-wicking ability. The table below shows how Coolmax is just one example of a polyester fibre, there are several others:

Fibres used in sock construction, including moisture-wicking socks
Fibres used in sock construction (adapted from Richie [in Werd and Knight] 2010)

Combining fibres in sock construction

Socks can be constructed of one single fibre (eg: 100% cotton socks). Or a combination (blend) of fibres. Synthetic fibres predominate in specialised socks. However, wool continues to be a common component. This is particularly so when thermal insulation is a priority.

Fibres can be combined. Defined layers or evenly intertwined (image below) are possible. I’m not sure if one arrangement is better than the other or if this is important to sock performance, but to explain further:

  • Defined layers: The hydrophobic synthetic layer is against the skin and the hydrophilic natural (usually wool) layer is on the shoe side. This arrangement sets up the moisture gradient required to wick moisture away from the skin. The layers are joined, unlike double-socks where the layers are separated and move relative to one another.
  • Fibres evenly intertwined (see images below): The moisture gradient is present throughout the entire sock.
Fibres are evenly intertwined. This give you an idea of how socks are constructed at a fibre level
Fibres are evenly intertwined – these are images from separate sources but give you an idea of how socks are constructed at a fibre level
Conclusion

I think moisture-wicking socks are definitely worth it. They don’t guarantee the prevention of blisters, but they don’t increase your risk like other fibres. If you’re prone to blisters or participate in where blisters are common (distance running, hiking, tennis), try them. If you participate in endurance activities, blister-susceptible sports or live in a hot, humid climate, similarly, give them a go. Just don’t pin all your hopes on them.

I hope you’ve come to recognize the effect of moisture on skin friction. It’s one factor that makes blisters more likely. The take home messages are:

  1. Cotton is not a good option for athletes or blister prone people.
  2. 100% wool may not be a good option unless it is Merino wool or where thermal insulation is a priority.
  3. Moisture-wicking is a favourable property for athletes, the blister prone and where moisture is a significant factor.
  4. Synthetic fibres improve the moisture wicking ability of natural fibres. A well-known fibre added to socks for its moisture wicking ability is Coolmax.

References

Rebecca Rushton

Podiatrist, blister prone ex-hockey player, foot blister thought-leader, author and educator. Can’t cook. Loves test cricket.

8 Comments
  • Mark Manzella
    12 February 2014 at 4:47 am

    The conclusions in this article are correct. However, I believe this article along with every other article I have read misses critical data. Think about where movement in the foot, sock, and shoe combination actually occurs. If the combination is working properly, the movement is occurring between the sock and the shoe, not the skin of the foot and the sock. Yes, there is micro movement between the sock and skin, If this movement is great enough you then get damaging subcutaneous movement, creating hot spots and blisters. Socks prevent this by allowing most of the movement to happen at the shoe interface. Lower coefficient between the sock and shoe is where we should be focusing our attention.

    Mark Manzella

  • Rebecca Rushton
    13 February 2014 at 2:30 am

    Good point Mark. I agree with you 100%, the ultimate in blister prevention is having movement between the shoe and sock – rather than against the skin or within the skin.

    But my understanding of the primary mechanism of moisture-wicking socks is to influence the skin-sock friction level. Materials are chosen because of their ability to get moisture movement away from the skin as this moisture increases friction levels.

    What happens to the moisture from there and what does it mean for friction levels? I’m not sure but it’s possible there is an increase in friction level between the shoe and sock – because there is more moisture at that interface as it is passing through the sock to be evaporated out of the shoe. And there is an inevitible reliance on how efficiently that moisture can evaporate.

    It’s a good point you raise Mark.

  • Sanz
    12 January 2015 at 1:25 am

    The moisture migration from foot through foot-sock interface is critical and hydrophobic layer is needed, followed by a hydrophilic layer at the sock-shoe interface. The shoe material is important to allow moisture evaporation. Natural leather is most effective in this case compared to synthetics like rubber which will trap the moisture and increase the sock-shoe friction interface. I recall many shoemakers in the past would design shoes with vent holes. Nowadays fashion has overtaken practicality. Sandals worn in many Eastern countries is very effective when worn with socks in this manner.

  • Rebecca Rushton
    12 January 2015 at 10:26 am

    Agreed Sanz and thank you for your comment! I wonder whether modern synthetic uppers do any better than leather these days?

  • JC
    18 December 2015 at 3:43 am

    These articles are a Wealth of Knowledge for me. I suffer with foot fungus. (Athletes Foot), that is also spreading to my hands now. I (thought I) contained the fungus pretty good between medical cream and, apple cider vinegar, plenty of foot powder etc. but I work just like most people for 8 hours. I’m in my shoes for about 10 hours a day. I was told cotton was good for moisture, but I’m realizing that I have to go synthetic. I need moisture wicking because fungus lives off of dark MOIST areas. Not fun.Very hard to keep fungus at bay when I have to wear black leather sneakers at work all day. I have had to change socks mid day and pour powder in both pairs of socks AND in my sneakers. It’s getting costly and MESSY. I don’t mind using the powder if j have to, but I need help in the sock department bc cotton is not cutting it.

  • James Taylor
    10 May 2016 at 11:46 am

    I have very wide feet and a high instep. Finding shoes that are a natural fit for me is near impossible so I buy leather shoes which eventually stretch into shape to fit my feet. Blisters used to be expected until I found putting vaseline on the area where I will blister. Blisters gone. I also use woollen sports socks which have an open weave

  • Graham
    21 October 2020 at 9:03 pm

    In the section on synthetic fibres, acrylic, polyester and polypropylene are mentioned, however, there is virtually nothing on polypropylene fibres. I assume that polypropylene is the best option? If so, it’s not clear.

Leave a Reply