aperson
Forum Replies Created
-
Cough. Considering your nick/handle.
LOL.
—
https://chemistscorner.com/the-best-formulation-software-options-for-cosmetic-chemists/
^^ update from Perry.
—
… and a comment; the real problem isn’t the technology/system; its the regulatory and security concerns. that is; what is your primary record, and how do you intend to protect your trade secrets (from hackers, disgruntled employees etc).
moving from paper/simple worksheets, to something more complex, introduces business complexity that must be explicitly examined, and addressed.
-
(reopening for following links):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VR2z4QDgdX0
^^ video of procedures (ex: ASTM D6252 for 90 degree label peel testing).
https://www.astm.org/Standards/D6252.htm ^^ sample sop (generic)
https://www.iopp.org/files/public/LabelQualplan.pdf ^^ “Label Qualification Plan” (why this comes into play).
carry on.
-
Just an FYI, for lab equipment/heating equipment, you are looking for borosilicate glass.
in the 1950’s pyrex was the brand name for a borosilicate glass of cookware; about 15 years back, Dupont sold the retail rights to a chinese company, that flooded the retail market with cheap tempered glass under the Pyrex brand.
Hence, no shock resistance to temperature changes, as the glass is not borosilicate glass, but rather, tempered glass.
I believe if you buy “Pyrex” labware, it is still, borosilicate glass.
You always, want to make sure, you are buying borosilicate glass. NEVER, buy tempered glass. Particularly important for the “home” cosmetics (or cooking!)
(thats the reason why I reopened this old discussion).
—
the correct way to break tempered glass cleanly, is to fill a bottle with oil, and microwave it - the heating of the oil actually introduces a stress at the surface, which allows you to make a clean break (used to convert wine bottles into “beakers”).
-
@Perry
> But the value they provide vs the amount of work required is unmatched by other experimental approaches.
I agree
> Especially, if you lack significant experience in a formulation type.
Indeed. As I lack significant experience in formulation, much less a formulation type, knockouts present a singularly useful method for refining formulas.
-
sure, the split between a formulations performance characteristics (formulators perspective), and the sensorials of the final product (customers perspective). the true black arts is linking one, to the other — with respect to an “uncertain” customer (oily skin, dry skin; curly hair, straight hair; young vs old etc) i.e. how to make tradeoffs in formulations so that your product has broader appeal or better performance with respect to a specific segment.
that is, the aesthetics *utilities* (not dimensions!), while linked to the formulation, are not necessarily the same utility depending on which customer is using your product.
There is no “perfect” formula, with respect to the general public, because the general public, has mutually exclusive needs. So this then depends on which segment of the population you are targeting with your cosmetics; in order to quantify the tradeoffs in sensorials.
This is where “niche” products come in; not to do everything ok, but to do one thing, particularly well. @perry I think has mentioned this several times. That the best place to start with introducing a new line is to determine who your customer will be (“formulate the story”) then formulate the formulation to match that customer segments needs.
> To the best of my knowledge, there is no paper about the use of DOE in improving the feel or eliminating the stickiness from a formula
There is nothing inherent in DOE that precludes it use from handling sensorials; I would look for a book (or a paper) that first sets up the dimensions (categories) for sensorials, then look for methods of quantifying that sensorial either scientifically, or by survey.In fact I think this is precisely where DOE would shine; as it forces you to consider, how your population target, affects the “realizability” of optimal design. Much like the color space model limits the reproduction of colors outside its gamut — some characteristics simply cannot be achieved simultaneously.
-
knockouts good for diagnosing problems (by removing an ingredient), this gives you the resulting formulation without the ingredient.
… but it doesn’t work, to quantify how pairs of ingredients, actually cause the problem; and what there “additive” effect does, thats beneficial.
for example:
take a formulation with ingredients A through E; where the underlying problem is a conflict between ingredients B, or C, and where B interacts beneficially with A, D and C interacts with beneficially with D, E.
knocking out B, or C, will clearly finger at least one of the culprits.
and if you do the full range of knockouts, it will (eventually) finger the other culprit.
… but it doesn’t quantify how removing B or C, actually affects the rest of the formulation. Perhaps the formulation, with the “problem resolved” is actually worse (B or C removed, or substituted), than if the formulation had B and C in it, with the addition of a third ingredient (F) to specifically resolve the conflict between B and C.
simply removing B or removing C, even with a substituted ingredient, may result in a worse formulation, simply because you fail to study the actual negative interaction between B and C vs the beneficial interactions of B or C.
this I think, is where the skill of the formulator comes into play. going through these forums, there are countless substitutions, and sometimes additions, to address specific types of problems.
if you like rigor, I think experimental design is a good way to go about developing this expertise, in a structured way, for the subset of formulations you may care about.
-
… and I was just wondering whether or not you could use a shear-thinning fluid to suspend when I ran into you comment
very useful tip! -
LOL.
> First attempt at hydrolysis was not very productive.
I read (in passing, I haven’t studied it yet) that pea protein is processed using acids.Not sure how you are getting your “protein” base, but if the material is primarily plant I would expect a fair amount of cellulose to be present.
I note in passing, something interesting:
“Cellulase is used for commercial food processing in coffee. It performs hydrolysis of cellulose during drying of beans.” (wiki:cellulase).
I think the byproduct, is simple sugars (which for coffee, and beer, makes sense to do!). There are also more exotic enzymatic reagents that may yield something preferable to sugar.
-
> Regulatory and Documentation.
Got you.> If you are using your own undocumented product….In the end, the fallacy that “we use our own harvested material” is a false economy
I agree with your overall points with respect to the “false economy”, as well as the distraction. If your primary business is making cosmetics, why would you really want to deal with it, if you don’t have to.I was wondering if there was some sort of technical (cosmetics-specific) bar I was not aware of. can not, implied a finality that left me curious. Hence the request for clarification. Nothing more.
Thank you for answering.
-
original discussion at:
https://chemistscorner.com/cosmeticsciencetalk/discussion/2106/colloidal-oatmeal-shampoo
Hydrolized proteins can be done with acid, a base, or an enzyme. What you get left over, depends on your method. Unless you act to isolate it, protein is not the only component. Sugars as I recall, usually survive. I do not think carbohydrates make it through as-is. Starches in particular, are usually modified.
Depending on what your source material is, there is usually one method favored; usually for practical reasons (wrong material for breakdown turns it into a gel, typically).
If I end up reading up on this topic, I’ll come back and post here.
-
> Even though the Hibiscus grows there, it is a false savings as you CAN NOT use it.
Not withstanding the cost effectiveness argument (which I totally agree on); why would you characterize this as “CAN NOT”? Trace pesticides? lack of stabilization of the fragrance? Or something else (i.e. regulatory, trade certification etc)? -
http://www.dweckdata.com/Published_papers/Lipstick_moulding_C&T.pdf and more particularly:
http://www.dweckdata.com/Published_papers/Sweating_Lipsticks.pdf … might indicate the reasons for the hardening of the outer surface, with respect to pour temperature, and formulation.
-
“coconut milk shampoo”; now a thing