-
Adding licorice to a hair conditioner
I’ve pretty much finalised the coffee and licorice shampoo I’ve been working on, and it’s so popular that I decided to create a conditioner. However, it failed. The licorice was responsible. After some research I discovered that the 12% (yellow powder) extract I have, is a surfactant, it contains saponins. This didn’t play well with the cationic CETAC. It curdled in seconds.
Still, the whole reason for this project is to create this conditioner for men, we have seen a lot of interest in it.
This 12% extract is the lowest grade I have. It’s relatively inexpensive which is why I wanted to use it. However it does look unsuitable. So, here’s the question. I suspect I am going to have to try it but maybe someone knows?
I have pure glycyrrhizic acid and also some dipotassium salt which I made (it’s quite soluble). Maybe the pure dipotassium glycyrrhizate would be able to coexist with the cationic ingredient? -
14 Replies
-
Stearamidopropyl dimethylamine and some polyquat 10, skip the usual cationics here. Polyquat 10 is cationic but u know it can be used if added at a certain step. And of course a combo of oils and silicones, i m sure u know that much better. And remember u always mentioned one pseudo cationic polyquat H81, maybe it can help here.
-
I’ll do a small experiment tomorrow, see if the soluble pure salt still messes up a ready made conditioner.
-
Done. 2% dipotassium glycyrrhizate, no problem with the conditioner. Now to make the version that includes coffee.
-
To the original formula with cationics?
-
Yes. Also, it occurs to me that the 12% extract being anionic would not necessarily play well in some types of emulsion. At first I regarded the different concentrations as merely a more refined form. Now I realise that the yellow powder has other properties. For cosmetic use I think the dipotassium salt is the most practical.
-
How about the non-ionic one I mentioned above, SAPDA??
-
-
How about the non-ionic one I mentioned above, SAPDA??
- unobtainable here, unfortunately.
-
-
I concur with you then, better use the salt you mentioned above. Could not think of any other conditioner which is either non-ionic or can tolerate the anionics. Polyquat H81 was mentioned by you once, won’t work here?
-
Polyquat is nice, but it’s not a detangler; it’s a resin depositing additive. I use it in the shampoo actually, it gives a nice result at 1%.
-
Yeah CETAC is indeed a nice and cheap detangler, how about just adding coffee in a cationic formula and omitting licorice. Should work if it works so nicely in your shampoo.
-
Yes. It works fine. It’s not as attractive as the shampoo though; it makes a beige colour. The shampoo looks great, like liquid bronze, because it has 3% of Quick Pearl. Of course if I added the pearl also to the conditioner… but that would mean adding surfactant which is part of the pearl. I could use EGDS to pearl it I suppose, but right now I have so much occupying my attention that I don’t want yet another.
Normally we have a 2:1 female:male ratio in our customer base. Not surprising. But with the coffee shampoo, we are getting a 4:1 male:female ratio.
I did have one surprise with the coffee. I need to measure the pH of the brewed coffee (yeah, lazy me) because I have to adjust the shampoo with citric acid unlike the non-coffee one. I think the brewed coffee must be rather basic. -
You could add some mica for pearlizing, though very impressive ratios you got there. It is a great feeling once the products start doing well.
-
Your first mention of coffee products on here was October 30 when you were in the process of formulating your shampoo. You state the product is already on the market.
Have you carried out any stability testing on any of these products? Physical/chemical stability, storage testing, microbiological testing? -
It was an existing product, I replaced the water content by brewed coffee. The first sample is still stable. It has a lot more preservatives than the original. Seems fine so far.
Log in to reply.