[Benz3ne]

Galaxy1111 said:

I cannot ask what kind of pigment to use without offending you sir?

Benz3ne said:

Galaxy1111 said:

what the best pigment to put into the liquid sir?

Try out the advice given first instead of reiterating your question. You have asked this question a few times in various forms and have not provided sufficient information.
You have said yourself that the mixture is not fully emulsified, so it is less likely to be white versus a complete emulsion.
Also, mixers are inexpensive. You can try mixing emulsions with a hand blender which costs around £10 here in UK for a cheap one.
Please provide more information going forwards or you will not receive any valuable answers. You have to help us to help you.

There is no offence taken. It is imperative that you provide useful information, what you’ve tried/what you haven’t and acknowledgement of people’s suggestions instead of asking questions repeatedly. It is part of the forum rules. https://chemistscorner.com/cosmeticsciencetalk/discussion/1070/how-to-use-this-forum-rules-and-advice#latest

Your response above is a good example of just that. I advised on things worthwhile trying and suggesting you include information and you read it only as me being offended and still not taking my advice, which helps no one.

[Benz3ne]

tinas said:

Is there any “as natural as possible” hydrating/defatting ingrediens I can put in my DIY face cleanser that kind of “stick to the skin” even after cleanser is washed away with water?

You might want to have a look at the natural certification bodies near you. There’s some lists available of chemicals that are registered as natural:
http://www.cosmos-standard-rm.org/verifmp.php
There are plenty listed as emollients and humectants. Finding one that will stick around will be harder, but you’re probably looking at things like sodium lactate (which I noted features on the list) or glyceryl oleate as featured in Lamesoft PO 65.

[Benz3ne]

Abdullah said:

We locally paint the oxidizable metals with this paint as it prevents the oxidation.
The english name is “Primer based on alkyd resin and iron oxide”. If i paint the iron vessels and fittings with this it will prevent the oxidation but should i do it?
Is it safe?

I have purred some of this Shampoo on a metal which was painted by this and haven’t seen any reaction. 

No, you really should have fit for purpose equipment. Trying to find a temporary fix which may or may not be sufficient is not a suitable substitute for correct equipment.

[Benz3ne]

Naveed said:

Emulsion is going to separate after few hours, when we shake the bottle it gets settle , but after few hours it again gets separate. I am using silicon emulsion 220cc np-9 150cc tea 2 cc and water to complete 1 liter along with fragrance and color   

I’m guessing the ‘Silicone Emulsion 60%’ is the type as sold by, e.g., Mistralni here in the UK? https://mistralni.co.uk/products/silicone-emulsion-60pct
I have no idea why it would be separating in that case. It’s described as completely miscible in water, the Tergitol/NP-9 is water soluble as is TEA.
Talk me through your choices for the chemicals you’ve chosen. I’m guessing silicone emulsion is for water repellence, NP-9 for wetting, TEA for adjusting pH maybe? Fragrance and colour should be miscible enough also, especially with NP-9 present so I’m confused as to what’s separating. Have you tried isolating the two fractions and examining them more closely?

[Benz3ne]

Abdullah said:

@Benz3ne thanks 
We don’t have access to such laboratory that can determine it here. 

Stainless steel tank is not available here as much as I have searched. I would have to purchase one and import from another country which with shipping and other costs it would become very expensive. 

I would try to find a way to remove that iron part in the future. 

Is iron oxide harmful in Shampoo? 

Abdullah, search for a laboratory with ICP-MS capabilities, they should be able to determine the presence of iron oxide(s) in solution.
Alternatively, you could try searching for qualitative tests for iron oxide(s). E.g. formation of Iron hydroxide complexes which will show as a change in colour, or formation of Prussian blue. Neither will define as accurately as laboratory methods which should be readily available. 

[Benz3ne]

Just an FYI, this is a cosmetic forum so car polish discussions aren’t typically relevant. 
That said, you’d also need to provide more information. Silicon emulsion 60% doesn’t give any indication really to how much you’ve used, considering you’re using units of cc and litres aside from that.
I’d guess that you haven’t got enough of, or a suitable enough, surfactant/dispersing agent to create a stable emulsion with water and your silicon emulsion 60%. Have you determined which phases are separating?

[Benz3ne]

You could use other conditioning agents? Try PQ-10 and PQ-7 for instance, or cetrimonium chloride? Sodium lactate is also an option for imparting moisture.
You can get soluble variants of oils also which may give some conditioning but will likely wash out.
As Crillz mentioned, lower concentrations would be beneficial - considering you’re using them in a surfactant mixture, they’ve a potential for washing out anyway.

[Benz3ne]

The red portion might be from the iron part. Have you got any laboratory contacts who can determine presence of iron oxide(s) in there? That’ll give you an idea whether the equipment you’re using is unsuitable or not.
Do you mind me asking why you’re not using stainless steels or coated parts?

[Benz3ne]

Dr Catherine Pratt said:

1501 Hi you can use perfume fixatives like Glucam P 20, also use bottom notes like Sandal wood & resins. 

Good luck Catherine Pratt

+1 for this comment. Oud and Vanillin are also pretty ‘fixative’ in their olfactive profiles.

[Benz3ne]

Very good, many thanks @Perry for this detailed run-through. Given I’ve reasonably limited experience with marketing claims this is quite useful for me to see what could be construed as evidence.

[Benz3ne]

Perry said:

I don’t really think they do work which is why they vary so much between manufacturers. However, there are two strategies.  First, as you surmise you put a film on the surface of the hair fibers. Theoretically, the film insulates the hair from the heat thereby preventing damage. Some of the damage is the result of water from the interior of the fiber boiling off which creates bubbles in the cuticle which when combed lead to more damage. The film prevents the water from escaping thus inhibiting damage. Oils or silicone can both do this.

The second strategy is to include conditioning agents. So, you don’t really prevent damage but you cover it up such that consumers don’t notice it.  This is really all that’s required.

In the scheme of things, heat damage is relatively minor compared to all the other damage that can be done to hair (combing, getting it wet, coloring, perming, relaxing, etc). But it seems intuitively important to consumers.

So, marketers exploited this minor problem. Their R&D departments invented science based “solutions” for the problem, and a new product category was born.  Whether it works or not doesn’t really matter. What’s important is that consumers think it’s a big problem and they need products to solve it.

Interesting stuff, thanks for the response. I think hydrogels/films have a lot of influence on it from what I’ve seen. I’d like to know whether it’s purely the presence of hydrogels or silicones or the combination of both that gives rise to some (if any) heat-protection effect.
 
I definitely agree, however. For years people have gone about perms and the suchlike without particular attention to heat, and recently (especially a couple of years ago from what I’m aware) it was all the rage that heat treatments were hitting the market. I think you’ve hit the nail on the head with that one.

One last thing - wouldn’t a company have to evidence their claims? If they’re selling it as a heat protection treatment, or that is ‘reduces damage caused by straightening/blow-drying’, they’d have to have tested it somehow?

[Benz3ne]

Am I missing something here, or overthinking it?
If you’re to the left of the peak of the salt curve, then wouldn’t drying increase the effective concentration of salt and subsequently cause additional gelling?
Could being to the right of the peak in the salt curve, so having gone past peak viscosity, mean that during drying the effective salt concentration will rise towards the peak, so not cause additional gelling of the SLES/CAPB mixture? At least, for long enough for it not to gel at the nozzle between uses?

[Benz3ne]

Provide more detail about what you have tried (e.g. formulation, percentages).
You have provided essentially no detail other than some chemicals you own.

[Benz3ne]

What viscosity hydroxyethyl cellulose have you got? There are a variety of viscosities available for it, same goes for hydroxypropyl methylcellulose. Find that bit out as it’s easy to change it out or reduce as necessary. 

[Benz3ne]

filiz said:

@EVchem
hi 

I want the product to be thicker. The turning point of the salt curve gives the maximum amount of salt I will use. and this ratio is not enough for thickening. I can’t add more, the reaction is reversed.

You hadn’t mentioned that you are using the maximum amount of salt for the salt curve.
Is betaine, as you mention above, CAPB or similar?
If the above %’s are the actives %’s (as e.g. CAPB is supplied as 30% active), then I’d be surprised that you cannot thicken it. There might be something else in your formulation that is reducing viscosity. I say this as a 3:1:1 ratio of SLES:CAPB:Coco Glucoside is very easy to thicken to gel-like levels with salt.
If the amounts you’re specifying are as you’ve received it, then consider the concentration of the raw materials you’re using, e.g. SLES at 28% active vs SLES at 70% active.

[Benz3ne]

omer said:

@chemicalmatt
I am referring to conventional methyl ester. 
I used cellulose ether based gelling agent but i give bad after application effect.
I don’t have many gelling agents choices. 
So i am looking to solve the problem if possible. 
What i am thinking about is:
Use buffer ph 6_7(unfortunately carbomer 940 electrolytes senstive) 
Looking for suggestions 

Which conventional methyl ester? 
How are you neutralising the carbomer? It should be controllable to around pH 6-7 fairly easily with TEA at 40% ethanol.
I agree that it is electrolytes sensitive, which is not ideal, but it is manageable.

[Benz3ne]

It’s the combination of LABSA and NaOH that causes thickening, from my understanding.
I’ve not tried it myself, but do a quick search on LABSA and NaOH and you should see some results about it.
Edit: Further reading is showing that it is pine oil in addition to neutralised (with NaOH) LABSA. 
Have you tried the combination of all three ingredients? Have you checked your pH?

[Benz3ne]

Andraous said:

Helo, 
How we can formulate a hand sanitizer foam

Something that is sufficiently foamy in the presence of alcohol (ethanol or isopropanol) or to go down the aqueous route using other actives such as, but not limited to, benzalkonium chloride plus surfactant plus a foaming nozzle.

[Benz3ne]

jemolian said:

Without the formula, i’d assume it’s a common lack of humectant(s), or that the product has dried due to the low humidity, or a combination of both since you mentioned crust around the tube cap. 

I reckon the same.

[Benz3ne]

ngarayeva001 said:

I think it’s all different questions and you need to post them separately. Re: hyaluronic acid serum, what is in that formula? HA forms clear gel, it’s something else that contributes to cloudiness 

P89 said:

Yes, i’ve too much things in the head in these days!!! 
I know that Hyaluronic acid  make translucent the serum, but it’s not nice to see… i would to make bubbles in it or make it shiny because it’s opaque. HA is 1% low weight and 0,6 High weight.

These two statements are conflicting. I was under the impression that HA is clear, as ngarayeva001 stipulates.

[Benz3ne]

Belassi said:

Drop the pH to 5 and sodium benzoate is perfectly adequate. 

I agree, plus I’d be surprised if the product was that far off pH 5 anyway.

[Benz3ne]

What sort of ingredients have you got in there now? Ultimately, adding/substituting in some of the other ingredients might affect how it feels in the hair.
Humectants such as 1,3-propanediol and/or glycerine will help retain moisture. Sodium lactate I’ve seen crop up a few times in hand-washes for humectant properties, too.
Triglycerides will be emollient, and there are other modified oils that are water-soluble that might benefit available on the market.
Polyquat-7 is cationic so gives some slip. It’s also used as a film-former in some leave-on products so might provide added benefit in that regard. 

Keep going! One of the products (non-cosmetic) I helped with reached formulation #54 before it was reproduceable, fit-for-purpose and commercially viable. It sounds as though you’re nearly there and just need some tweaking.

[Benz3ne]

Pharma said:

Benz3ne said:

…It’s more focussed on the lipid arrangement of the skin surface so helping provide a barrier which, I guess, could aid wound healing as the barrier would be ‘accounted for’.
I guess if you couple that with wound healing drugs then there’s potential to speed up wound healing further.
…

Lamellar gel networks are a type of architecture (likely abundantly) present in cosmetic formulations, they aren’t the emulsion like a micellar water is in fact micelles in water. A lamellar gel network is usually just part of a product, like bones being just a part of what holds our body together.

These lamellae may look similar to the cement and mortar between keratinocytes but most have noting to do with it and will not interact with it other than petroleum jelly does. If you want to mimic these skin structures, you need similar constituents e.g. a mixture of ceramides/fatty acids/cholesterol or other synthetic/plant based analogues thereof. There’s scientific evidence showing that such products speeds up would healing but only if there is stratum corneum present (simply because these lamellar structures are only part of the SC, not deeper skin layers).

Different types of formulations can help with drug delivery, AFAIK lamellar gel networks are commonly not regarded as such simply because they aren’t a vehicle like micelles nor do they show any advantage or depot effect like microemulsions or solid lipid nanoparticles and what not. If you were to investigate pharmaceutical creams you’d likely find out that quite a few of these actually contain such lamellar gel structures but nobody ever cared. You can’t package/load a drug into a lamellar gel structure like you can into liposomes. It’s just a 3D network spanning throughout a cream like xanthan or carbomer to thicken the water phase.

BTW I’m well aware of the study you cited: It’s one of those basic
research investigations right now completely useless for end users. It
may help understanding and planning the future but right now, only a
fool would create an oil-free cream using only water, SDS and cetyl-
and/or stearyl alcohol. Add oil or an active and the whole system tilts
towards an unpredictable state.

Thanks for the detailed response Pharma. I think the approach I was taking was more along the lines of ‘if the body recognises the structure as a barrier for skin, does it afford less time/resource to rebuilding a (possibly) non-existent barrier’. This does go somewhat against the evidence you mention regarding wound healing only if there is stratum corneum present, but this could be sufficient for addressing small wounds, perhaps?
I think we’re also deviating from the original question when going deeper into which more common/researched drug delivery methods are viable versus a hypothesis of a drug-containing lamellar structure being viable. The ‘would it help wound healing?’ question doesn’t really go into deep/extensive/muscular vs surface wounds vs burns type questions, but is a very broad question.
Xanthan and carbomer do have the potential to aid delivery though, right? If the thickening agent is also film forming then there’s scope for prolonged delivery of actives, or reactivation in contact with water, or similar. In these cases there potential for assistance from an otherwise benign ingredient.
Agreed regarding the unpredictable state - it’s a suggestion rather than anything made with concrete evidence on my part. In the same vein, I doubt it would be impossible to create a doped lamellar structure, even if the basic, ‘foolish’ mixture + active would be unstable/unpredictable. The specifics are beside the point here.
The study does allude to things like fatty acids being included which touches lightly on your comments about actually mimicking the skin’s topology.

All-in-all, I’m enjoying this discussion! 

[Benz3ne]

Galaxy1111 said:

what the best pigment to put into the liquid sir?

Try out the advice given first instead of reiterating your question. You have asked this question a few times in various forms and have not provided sufficient information.
You have said yourself that the mixture is not fully emulsified, so it is less likely to be white versus a complete emulsion.
Also, mixers are inexpensive. You can try mixing emulsions with a hand blender which costs around £10 here in UK for a cheap one.
Please provide more information going forwards or you will not receive any valuable answers. You have to help us to help you.

[Benz3ne]

You should be able to tell to some degree whether the stirring method is incorporating air or not.
I’m guessing that the emulsion is otherwise stable, that it isn’t separating over time and therefore that the bubbles are just air?
Usually you don’t want any air/product/stirrer interface as that’s the most likely route for air to be incorporated. Deeper is usually better to avoid the stirrer dispersing air that is being ‘funnelled’ through the vortex.
You’ll still want it fast to ensure an emulsion is being formed effectively.