Bobzchemist
Forum Replies Created
-
I’ve worked on these before. It is really tough to get a perfectly clean phase separation after the product has been used a few times. I’d recommend against it.
-
You need more absorbent materials than triglycerides. Diisopropyl Adipate, or Neopentyl Glycol Dicaprylate/Dicaprate, for example.
-
When making powdered makeup, a small amount of oil is needed to act as a binder. The best results are achieved when that oil is spread out evenly throughout the entire batch. The dilemma has always been finding the best way to accomplish those results, since the binder oil wants to absorb strongly on to the powder particles as soon as it contacts them, and too much oil is just as bad for performance as unevenly distributed oil is.
The traditional way to do this has been to spray the oil onto the batch while it’s being stirred in a ribbon blender, and then to pass the powder + oil mixture through a pulverizer several times.
This is a time-consuming process, as one might imagine.
What the folks in that video are doing instead is making an emulsion with the binder oils and water, adding the makeup powders until the mixture becomes a paste, extruding then molding that paste, and finally, drying the water off in an oven. The emulsion and stirring the paste mixture insures a perfect distribution of binder oil onto the powder particles. Since water is bad for pressed powder product stability for a number of reasons, the drying (baking) step is critically important. It’s brilliant to turn that production step into a marketing tool.
Interestingly (at least to me) is that the “baked makeup” process didn’t become feasible until it became unacceptable to use parabens in makeup. Prior to that, parabens were the best (and cheapest) preservatives to use in powders, and since they were soluble in water, the water-based process that you see in the video above would have destroyed the preservative system. The cost difference between parabens and oil-soluble preservatives was enough to kill the potential use of this process. Now, since we can’t use parabens anyway, that cost consideration has gone away.
-
I think I spotted your problem. You need to mix your oil with poly80 in one beaker, stop and clean your mixing blade, then in a second beaker, add your water, start mixing, and add the poly80/oil mixture drop by drop. This can’t be done with a mixing rod, either - you need a prop mixer, or a reasonable substitute.
When you added water to the poly80/oil mixture, you made a w/o emulsion, which at some point, stopped accepting more water - hence the “blob”. The heat broke the emulsion, but then there wasn’t enough solubilizer to make it clear.
-
@Candace hit it out of the park on this one. You need to have the concealer film ultimately left on the face be as “sticky” and have as much powder as possible - but that would be almost impossible to spread initially, So, you need some components that will improve initial slip, and then go away. If you can’t use water or any other volatile that will go away into the atmosphere, then you have to use ingredients that will go away in the other direction - into the skin.
-
They actually gave away virtually their entire process in that video. I’m really kind of surprised. Also, more than a few laughs at the beginning.
What scale are you planning to operate on - batch size, etc.? What purpose are you trying to achieve - commercial sale or home crafting?
Oh, and by the way - “baked makeup”? Most brilliant idea of making a necessary production step into a marketing tool since “micronized pigments”.
-
You can modify Perry’s worksheet to do this.
-
It is possible that you could make a bodywash with surfactants, and use your soap scraps to thicken it, instead of using salt, but it seems like a lot of work for minimal reward.
Why not just make soap powder from your scraps?
-
I did say that my method was a trick, right? It’s a gimmick - a way of saying that you have a pH-neutral soap without actually having a pH-neutral soap.
I think I need to get into basic chemistry for a bit so I can explain. “Natural” soap is what you get when you react a plant or animal oil (triglyceride) with a strong base, usually Potassium and/or Sodium Hydroxide (Lye). It’s a two-step reaction. First, the triglyceride gets broken up by the base into 4 pieces - 3 fatty acid molecules, and 1 glycerin molecule.
The second step is the reaction between the fatty acid and the base (lye) to make a salt (soap). The problem you are having is that this step is reversible - if the pH of your soap drops much below 9-10, the reaction goes the other way, and it turns back into fatty acids. Fatty acids are just pieces of oils, remember, and they do not clean at all.
This is why we keep telling you that you can’t do what you’re trying to do. At a pH of 6.5 - 7.5, it is not chemically possible for soap to exist. It simply can’t be done, not by you, not be me, not by anyone.
If you dissolve too much citric acid in anything during your soapmaking process, you will destroy your soap (as you’ve seen).
You are correct when you say that we don’t know the answer to how much citric acid you can use before your soap reverts to fatty acid. That’s because the answer is different for every single oil and combination of oils out there - they only way to find this answer out for your particular formula is to experiment with different acid levels yourself.
-
There’s a trick to (sort-of) doing this, that depends on how pH is measured. Since pH only exists in an aqueous solution, most people measure the pH of a soap by melting/dissolving 10% of it into water or water/alcohol. If you mix your citric acid granules with a non-saponifying oil, and then stir that mixture into your soap just before you pour it, what you wind up with is high-pH soap that has undissolved granules of citric acid in it. Now, here’s the trick - when you dissolve that soap into water to measure the pH, the citric acid dissolves also, lowering the pH down to 6 or 7 by the time the pH is taken.
I’m not sure how much citric acid you should use, you’ll have to determine that yourself by experimentation. I also don’t know how badly this will affect the lather or the stability of the soap while in use, you’ll have to test that yourself also.
-
Water
-
PEG-40 HCO is Castor Oil that has first been hydrogenated, making it a wax, and then reacted with PEG-40, which turns it into a powerful solubilizer and surfactant.
If you want your mixture to go into water, you’ll need something like this. Otherwise, like all oils, it will not mix with water at all.
-
search for wax melt tanks.
These, for example.
-
I’ve had this argument with analysts before - I put the correct amount of the ingredient in the batch, I made the batch and no residue was left over, but the assay shows less of the ingredient than I put in.
My feeling has always been - if the ingredient isn’t volatile, and there’s no evidence of it crystalizing or dropping out, then the analysis must be wrong - ingredients don’t just vanish.
-
Are you checking for Sodium Salicylate?
-
Don’t forget the Sodium Phytate acting as a strong chelant. This could boost the preservative system considerably, if they used enough of it.
-
You can get around the sticky residue problem by adding modified starch - something like Dry-Flo.
Also, you might want to look into adding high-slip water soluble polymers, if you can get them. Polymer JR, for example.
-
If you get the right kind of Iron Oxide, maybe. It’s very possible to magnetize Iron Oxide (so much so that it used to be a processing issue), so It could work that way, BUT…Most Iron Oxide particles are so small that they easily get entangled in clothing fibers, which makes for a somewhat permanent stain that’s difficult or impossible to remove completely. As you might imagine, that’s not a property that salons or consumers would appreciate.
It’d be interesting to see if this worked with spherical iron particles. These are used primarily as ingredients in pharmaceutical/OTC preparations for making Iron dietary supplements. They were promoted at one time as being replacements for spherical silica, etc., but the density and cost made them not really suitable for cosmetic formulations at the time.
Unusual bit of (probably unclassified by now) trivia. Spherical Iron Oxide is the “active ingredient” used in the radar-deflecting/absorbing paint the US Air Force uses on it’s B-2 Stealth Bomber and later F-35 Stealth Fighter. I’ve always wondered why it didn’t make it’s way into car paint…
-
You need to get in touch with the people who manufacture Magnesium Silicate.
-
You might also want to look into PEG-40 Hydrogenated Castor Oil
-
Well, actually you can…but not in the lab, and not cheaply. It’s much, much more cost-effective to not get the air in there in the first place. But if you can’t avoid aeration, and the air has to come out - you need one of these plus a strong pump:
-
You need to talk to the folks at finishing.com. We don’t deal with paint at all.
-
The same is true for lipsticks…
-
I’m sorry that I misunderstood. What kind of advice are you looking for?
-
To get bubbles out you can use a vacuum pump and vacuum jar:
But the best way is to make sure they don’t get in in the first