[Aanchal]

Thanks @Bill_Toge.

Yes. Exactly! Now, how to make Newtonian fluids? 

[Aanchal]

https://chemistscorner.com/cosmeticsciencetalk/discussion/137/need-formulating-services-here-are-some-contacts#latest 

[Aanchal]

Correction 
Stream not steam I meant above.
Settles not settless. 

[Aanchal]

Correction- stream not steam 
Settles- not settless 

Typos.

[Aanchal]

Judging the stream not steam I meant above.

[Aanchal]

Thanks @DAS ! 
 I looked up thixotropy. Just a few notes so far.

So this phenomenon is not just my observation but is much in practice . 

Now , I prepared a dishwashing liquid which was very very thick. When I stirred it in a bowl, I could see the viscosity and again while I poured back the liquid after filling it in a 10-15 ml spoon, it was very  viscous. 

The same liquid , when put in a dishwashing dispenser bottle (those with a nozzle) didn’t appear as viscous as it was in the bowl. I believe the first calculation of viscosity a consumer shall have will be by judging the steam of liquid that falls off dispenser, and second by the way it settless on the surface on which it falls.

So how do I achieve that? 

[Aanchal]

@Chemist77

Thanks. The text in the link I shared above says that more than 10% active matter (surfactants is the word there) calls for addition of hydrotropes. 10% is easily crossed while trying to achieve better performance and viscosity.

I do not see any turbidity or difficulty in achieving solubility while mixing the contents and getting product ready. But this statement got me thinking ! 

[Aanchal]

@Perry Thanks for your reply. So the application of hydrotropes is in achieving clear, homogenous product? The solubility or rinsing off after the product is used on surfaces like metals do not need Hydrotropes, may I conclude? 

[Aanchal]

So my query was ,

“dishwashing  detergents with surfactants concentration exceeding 10% need auxiliary components like Hydrotropes which increase the solubility of surfactants in water and ensure clear, homogenous and storable, stable product.”

How true is the above statement?

[Aanchal]

Pharma said:

Just a side note: You mean hydroTropes, not hydrotopes. A hydrotope is a landscaping expression for water containing habitats such as ponds and fountains .

Oh, I have misspelled it  ! 

Yes, Hydrotropes ,I meant 

[Aanchal]

Use a pH meter to test pH

[Aanchal]

@Perry
Hi Perry ! 

Thanks for your answer despite my obscure query. 

I am talking of household cleaner with a mix of surfactants that exceed 10% active ingredients. (It has Labsa and caustic soda as the primary components)

I am attaching an image with a red mark where I want to point to read and link to the same. This I came accross while randomly searching for some other query. 

It mentions about hydrotopes. 

https://books.google.com/books/about/Surfactants_in_Consumer_Products.html?id=SjvtCAAAQBAJ

[Aanchal]

Anyone?

[Aanchal]

Herbnerd said:

The lower the assay the more you need to supply the ingredient you are after.

The maths is simple: What you want, divided by what you have, multiplied by 100.

So, 69 %/28% x 100 = 246.4% which clearly will not work.

Thanks Herbnerd. 

[Aanchal]

Thanks again Perry .

[Aanchal]

Perry said:

If you need 69% SLES in your formula and the raw material is supplied as 28% you won’t be able to do it. You would have to evaporate off some of the water to increase the concentration of SLES.

For every 100 grams of a 28% solution you put in, you are only putting in 28 grams of SLES.

Thanks Perry. 

I understand that evaporating is a sure shot solution.

Can adding additional amount help too?

My formula states 10 % of 69% SLES (it is a water based formula) 

So, 10*69/28 =24.6 % _ That is, 28% SLES in the amount 24.6 % 

Here, I am adding additional water with the 28% SLES so I shall deduct water in the formula proportionately. 

Can this be done? 

[Aanchal]

Chemist77 said:

Please look for Glutaradehyde IG 50 

Got it. Thanks a lot. 

[Aanchal]

Chemist77 said:

Well I believe that an effective pH of around 8 will be optimum though it works in both the media. Rate of kill is higher at a higher pH compared to acidic pH. I generally use around 0.10% effectively and never had any issue. 

Thanks. Glutaraldehyde is available in 50/70 % or lower concentrations 
Fixing Glutaraldehyde as the sole preservative in a pH of 7 to 9 , pls share what commercially available concentration you use? 

[Aanchal]

Glutaraldehyde is effective in what pH range? What percentage is to be added?
Sodium benzoate is not effective in high pH range.

[Aanchal]

Anything else apart from formaldehyde? 

[Aanchal]

CDEA is available in liquid form at most vendor’s. Can it be used in liquid state instead of solid? How? 

[Aanchal]

ozgirl said:

Aanchal said:

Hello

Can CDEA be replaced by some other chemical? I found that it is deemed as unsafe, carcinogenic, and hence even banned in some places. FDA hasn’t declared it unsafe but cancer research institute has

@Aanchal - We have replaced Cocamide DEA with Cocamide MEA with very little adjustment to the formula. It is the free DEA in the CDEA that is the issue with respect to carcinogenicity.

Thank you  ! Noted. 

[Aanchal]

Gunther said:

Please stop spreading misinformation

Cocamide DEA was never really proven to cause cancer by itself.
Their findings couldn’t be readily replicated so its believed cancer was caused by a by-product, not CDEA itself.

The Cancer Research Institute doesn’t test chemicals at all. They just fund some experimental therapy studies.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer does test chemicals.
For CDEA it 

68603-42-9

Coconut oil diethanolamine condensate

2B

101

2013

https://monographs.iarc.fr/list-of-classifications-volumes/
Its monograph fits in the Group 2B: The agent is possibly carcinogenic to humans.

There is limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and less than sufficient evidence in experimental animals. It may also be used if there is inadequate evidence in humans but sufficient evidence in experimental animals. Occasionally, an agent (or mixture) may be placed in group 2B if there is inadequate evidence in humans and less than sufficient evidence in experimental animals but there is supporting evidence of carcinogenicity from mechanistic and other relevant data. An agent or a mixture may also be classified in this category solely on the basis of strong evidence of carcinogenicity from mechanistic and other relevant data

Ginko Biloba extract, Kava extract, magnetic fields, Medroxyprogesterone acetate, metronidazole, Nickel metallic and alloys, Oxazepam, Phenobarbital, Progestins, Radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, polygeenan (carrageenan derivative), goldenseal root powder belong to the same group, are widely used, some of them even taken by mouth, some are even FDA approved meds, and not proven to cause cancer.

Thanks for your inputs. Glad that my doubt is cleared and nobody will be misinformed by my comment. 

[Aanchal]

 Perry said:

There isn’t any one-to-one replacement. We used Cocamidopropyl Betaine as a replacement but had to make significant adjustments to rest of the formula.

Incidentally, the best science does not show Cocadmide DEA causes cancer and is safe to use in products at levels as used in cosmetics. 
https://www.dropbox.com/s/l964yzctytwsro1/cocamiddea-safety.pdf?dl=0

Noted ! Thanks Perry  ! 

[Aanchal]

Hello

Can CDEA be replaced by some other chemical? I found that it is deemed as unsafe, carcinogenic, and hence even banned in some places. FDA hasn’t declared it unsafe but cancer research institute has labelled it as a carcinogen.