-
Amphoacetate: glucoside ratio as cosurfactants for maximum deposition of actives
This chart is about deposition of silicone from Shampoo with amphoacetate, glucoside and both of them as co surfactants. <div>
As you can see their is a synergy between amphoacetate and glucoside and deposition increases but they don’t show what ratio between these two for maximum synergy.
<div>
I have CAPB and APG but not amphoacetate.
I know only one supplier of amphoacetate in another country and their MOQ is 200kg and its price is also 2 times more than CAPB so can’t purchase small amount to test it my self and using only amphoacetate or ≥50% of cosurfactant as amphoacetate instead of CAPB is not a good value option.
My question is: what ratio of amphoacetate:coco glucoside as co surfactant have the maximum synergy for deposition and for foam if they have any?
</div></div>
-
4 Replies
-
@Abdullah Hi there. This chart may be misleading, the actual coacervate complex is from the combination of anionic to amphoteric, or SLES-2 to sodium cocoamphoacetate. They show the glucoside as boosting that deposition (and it is amodimethicone/guar HPTC, not dimethicone, another misleading factor!), I can offer that is because glucosides make the whole damn formula more hydrophobic. Another bit of malfeasance: why add NaCl into this? Salt lowers the dilution-deposition threshold so that most of the conditioner materials will rinse away, not deposit. There is always at least 5.0% free NaCl in sodium cocoamphacetate and CAPB, CAHS so factor that into your formula. This is why we always used the salt-free Gemini amphos such as disodium cocoamphoacetate for conditioning shampoos. To answer your question: 2:1 ratio of anionic : amphoteric solids and add the least amount of salt you can manage. As for glucoside, I cannot see more than 2.0% added here. They are just trying to sell more glucoside.
-
Thanks
I didn’t know nacl reduces deposition and i was always trying to add more nacl because i thought the opposite it true.
I Will change all my formulas to use less nacl.
This chart is from supplier that is selling amphoacetate.
I was hoping if there is any synergy because amphoacetate is very expressive and glucoside inexpensive.
Some more questions
1. Will more nacl reduce the deposition of cationic guar from SLES/CAPB formula that doesn’t have silicone or any other lipophilic ingredient too?
2. How does deposition from sultaine compare to CAPB in same SLES/cosurfactant/cationic guar/amodimethicone formula?
I can purchase sultaine at almost the same price as CAPB if that is a good replacement.
-
-
I sure recommend using hydroxysultaine in place of CAPB, works just the same or better and comes in a 50% active state instead of 30% - a good move there. Although there is not nearly enough research on coacervation my opinion, despite the works of Robert Lochhead and the late Des Goddard, you can bank on salt reducing deposition of cationic guar or Polyquaternum-10 or dimethicone. The ratio of anionic to amphoteric is important also, closer to 1:1 solids for these shampoos. Nobody has repeated these experiments on dilution-deposition with glucosides, glutamates, glycolipids, and all the other shiny new saccharide-based surfactants. What a shame. Perhaps you or I will someday get time to do so. Cheers.
-
I have made sample whith CAPB and another with replacing 50% of CAPB with APG and compared them. Samples had cationic guar and amodimethicone emulsion.
The sample with CAPB+APG had less conditioning effect than CAPB alone as co surfactant.
That is why this chart that shows amphoacetate+APG as co surfactant is better than amphoacetate alone was interesting to me.
-
Log in to reply.