Home Cosmetic Science Talk Formulating Hair Which Magnetic Stirrer to Choose?

  • Which Magnetic Stirrer to Choose?

    Posted by arizona1az420 on May 9, 2016 at 10:31 am

    I plan to purchase a lab quality magnetic stirrer with heat from http://www.labdepotinc.com/c-593-magnetic-stirrer.php …or another suggested site. I would like a suggestion on which mixer will likely work the best for the list of ingredients provided?

    I will be using liquid ingredients for mixing. I’m hoping to buy a very quality stirrer that will make shampoo/conditioner comparable to any big name brand. I’m not trying to compete with any of the main company’s, just would like shampoo/conditioner to use for myself. The ingredients I want to mix with this mixer/heat are…..Water 58%, sodium laureth sulfate 18%, cocamidopropyl betain 5%, glycerin 3%, decyl glucoside 2%, DMDM hydantoin 1%, glycol distearate 3%, Polyquaternium 7 3%, laureth-4 2%, citric acid .5%, tetrasodium EDTA 1%, panthenol 3%, fragrance  and a few coloring dies .5%.

    I will have two problem ingredients below. The rest should be water soluable.
    Laureth 4 and Glycol Distearate to be mixed separately at 70-75 Celcius and then add to the rest of listed ingredients at same temp.

    Which mixer would you suggest I use, and how difficult will this be to accomplish? Thanks!


    arizona1az420 replied 7 years, 10 months ago 7 Members · 16 Replies
  • 16 Replies
  • Bill_Toge

    Member
    May 9, 2016 at 11:27 am

    you’d be better off with a paddle stirrer

    as your product gets more viscous, a magnetic stirrer will become totally inefficient

  • Bobzchemist

    Member
    May 9, 2016 at 2:27 pm

    You need to realize where the weak point in using a magnetic stirrer is - it’s the connection between the magnet attached to the motor, and the magnetic stir bar doing the stirring. Using an overhead stirrer eliminates that weak point.

    There are some magnetic stirrers specifically designed to somewhat overcome this problem, but they require specialized stir bars made with high magnetic strength rare-earth magnets. If you have bunches of money, look at IKA:

    http://www.coleparmer.com/Product/IKA_RET_control_visc_Stirring_Hot_Plate_115V/WU-04671-29

    http://www.ika.com/owa/ika/new_ret?ch=emb0515

    If you have less money to spend, you can go outside the scientific area and get acceptable performance, but without the bells and whistles. Heating will need to be done seperately:

    https://www.kjmagnetics.com/blog.asp?p=stir-bars

    http://www.stir-plate.com/BlackMAXX.htm

    http://stir-plate.com/BlackMAXX_XL.htm

    Not sure of the prices here:

    http://www.vp-scientific.com/mega_stirrus.php

  • PharmaSpain

    Member
    May 9, 2016 at 5:32 pm

    @Bill_Toge agree. 

  • Bobzchemist

    Member
    May 9, 2016 at 6:01 pm
  • thebrain

    Member
    May 11, 2016 at 12:29 am

    @arizona1az420 I recently purchased a Scilogex MS-H280-Pro. It’s sold on that website (you’ll need to buy the stand and support clamp as well). I’ve been using it for small 100g shampoo samples, and it handles the viscosity just fine. I agree with the others that an overhead stirrer would be better, but a magnetic stirrer might be an economical option for you if you don’t need large quantities.

  • arizona1az420

    Member
    May 11, 2016 at 8:31 am

    Thanks for all the good advice! Bobzchemist if I purchase the variable speed Electric overhead Lab agitator with controllable Uniform hotplate below (the one on your last post). I would add all my main ingredients including distilled water and start mixing while leaving out the laureth-4 and glycol disterate? Or would I heat those two ingredients separately @75c then add them in later? Does anybody have experience with this type of mixer, and if the quality of the shampoo/conditioner compares to a big manufacture?

  • Bobzchemist

    Member
    May 11, 2016 at 3:26 pm

    We all have experience using variable speed overhead mixers with a heat source below the mixing container - it’s the standard lab configuration for cosmetics.

    Determining how your procedure should be run is best determined with experimentation. There are some shampoo formulations that can be produced by dumping everything in at once, then stirring. Some formulas need heating on top of that. Other formulas need two separate phases mixed together.

    You will want to start by using a sample formulation from a reputable website, and follow the manufacturing directions PRECISELY. Once you’ve made a successful batch that way, you can start changing things around.

  • arizona1az420

    Member
    May 24, 2016 at 8:09 am

    Ok sounds good and thanks for the info. I plan to buy a mixer like the one you posted, just undecided on which one I want to go with… 

  • arizona1az420

    Member
    June 8, 2016 at 11:12 am
    After looking around and researching mixers more I have some questions. I’ve noticed that the name brands are probably better to go with, than a cheaper overhead mixer. Some suggested brands were IKA, biospec, and LabX. I will spend in the area of $1,000 if needed, but I need something I know will work and will guarantee a shampoo/conditioner mix without much trouble. Will it be a High Shear from LabX to do it, I really have no idea but it seems like it would be a good option? I also will need heat for this mix. The ingredients are…Water, sodium laureth sulfate, cocamidopropyl betain, glycerin, decyl glucoside, DMDM hydantoin, glycol distearate, Polyquaternium 7, laureth-4, citric acid, tetrasodium EDTA, panthenol, fragrance, color dies. It seems so easy to mix ingredients, but just thinking about how to go about this without my wife killing me for experimenting too much with it. I would also pay someone if they could mix these ingredients successfully into a quality shampoo/conditioner soap and show me how they did it. Pay would depend on agreed on price for what’s provided. So I really need this to work, and need a mixer that will give me the best opportunity to guarantee a solution the quickest. Thanks again for all the help with everything so far, I just want to be very confident in the mixer selection I’m making before buying.  

    Also does anyone happen to know if there is a solution somewhat close to these ingredients where I can see how they went about mixing/heating them? I’m just guessing by what I’ve read, but I’m thinking it’s going to be a three step mix. Part 1 set of ingredients, part 2 heat glycol disterate 75c with laureth 4, then mix with part 1, then mix in part 3 ingredients. Unsure, but just trying to figure out how to go about it. 
  • Bobzchemist

    Member
    June 8, 2016 at 2:01 pm

    80-90% of what overhead stirrers do in lab shampoo formulations is automating a manual process, i.e. stirring your batch with a stirring rod. Any kind of variable speed stirrer will do. Shampoo stirring is always done at low speeds, so there’s a minimum of foam/air in the batch. Heating is not typically used, except in some cases for a small portion of the batch, so that shouldn’t be a problem.

    If you’re just doing this for yourself, and you’re not going to get into this deeply as a hobby, make your wife happy and buy a Kitchen-Aid mixer . Buy a bowl and stirrers just for shampoo, and another set for food. That way, it can be a multi-purpose tool.

    Use the Point of Interest! website for formulations and manufacturing instructions.

  • arizona1az420

    Member
    June 8, 2016 at 7:03 pm

    Ok thank you I’ll look into that. Being this is a 3 in 1 shampoo/conditioner and body soap formula with glycol disterate shouldn’t there be some heating? I tried mixing this batch before and could never get the white flakes of the glycol distearate to disappear? I also use all liquid ingredients, besides the glycol distearate and citric acid.

  • belassi

    Member
    June 8, 2016 at 7:16 pm

    I tried mixing this batch before and could never get the white flakes of the glycol distearate to disappear?
    Wrong process procedure. Melt the distearate separately, raise the temp of the primary surfactant to the same temperature, mix well.

  • Bobzchemist

    Member
    June 8, 2016 at 8:02 pm

    “this is a 3 in 1 shampoo/conditioner and body soap formula”

    Why do people keep trying to do this?

    If you want a shampoo, make a shampoo. If you also want a conditioner, make a separate conditioner. Trying to do both at once means that you will do neither particularly well.

  • OldPerry

    Member
    June 8, 2016 at 9:47 pm

    I once worked on a project to make a 3 in 1 shampoo / conditioner / styling product.  It didn’t do any of the three things well.

    But 2 in 1 shampoo / conditioners can be good.  The Pantene formula is a 2 in 1. It still doesn’t work as well as if you used a shampoo and then a conditioner but many people like it.

    Incidentally, I use regular shampoo as my body wash too.

  • arizona1az420

    Member
    June 9, 2016 at 8:23 am

    Thanks for all the comments and suggestions! I will try raising the temp of the primary surfactant to 70-75c, which I’m assuming will be sodium laureth sulfate. I was also told (pm) to separately mix the glycol distearate and laureth 4 at 70-75c, then mix into the rest of the mix with it at the same temp?

    Belassi I will try your suggestion at raising the temp of the sodium laureth, then raising the temp of the glycol distearate, then mix together. Do you think I should have the laureth 4 with the glycol distearate when I raise the temp?

    Bobzchemist I like your suggestion of doing the shampoo and conditioner separately. I will probably do that eventually, because I will most likely fail at this, but will try the shampoo/conditioner first. If I do go to the option of separating it into a shampoo and conditioner I would like to use the same ingredients, just need to figure out which one’s are shampoo ingredients, and which ones are conditioner. I have it wrote down somewhere just need to find it.

     

  • arizona1az420

    Member
    June 10, 2016 at 10:59 am

    Thanks for the advice on using the point of interest website! A lot of good info there!

Log in to reply.