Bobzchemist
Forum Replies Created
-
The SCS has a good, relatively inexpensive, 1-year course that focuses on cosmetics. Whether or not you learn anything new, it would be good to have even if it’s just for the credential, since you’re going to have to run at least the first part of your job search online. You need to have some way to indicate that you’re serious about this as a career.
As @Perry has said before, Cosmetic Science involves aspects of chemistry, physiology, microbiology, physics, and chemical engineering on the science side, and marketing, psychology, sales, and business finance on the non-science side. Not all of this will be on a course summary, even if it’s in the course itself.Join the SCS group on LinkedIn, and hook up with the Australian society also. -
Sigh. I’ll try explaining again.
Denatured alcohol (Ethanol) is regular alcohol that has poison added to it to keep people from drinking it. There is no other difference. There are a great many different poisons that can be added, depending on what the poisoned alcohol will be used for. Denatured alcohol can come in different strengths, just like drinkable alcohol can. The strength of the alcohol has absolutely nothing to do with it being denatured or not. There is no chemical difference in how denatured alcohol will behave in a formula as opposed to how drinkable alcohol behaves - unless you are making something that can get into the body somehow.Just try to remember: Denatured = Poisoned -
As I’ve said before - EVERYTHING needs a preservative, always.
-
The SCS diploma is not quite the same, but thanks for pointing that out. There’s a lot of controversy about it within the industry, but I think a professional Cosmetic Chemist certification would be extremely useful.
Having thought this out for a bit, I realize that the Food Science is not the best analogy. Because the potential for harm to the users of our products is greater, what we do is closer to being a compound pharmacist than it is to being a food scientist. And yes, someone could learn to compound their own medicines, just as folks can formulate their own cosmetics. I’ve been trying to help amateur formulators, on the theory that some guidance is better than none. But the attitudes I’ve been seeing more and more lately, that the profession I’ve spent the last 30 years perfecting is something that can easily be learned in no more than 90 minutes or so of reading on the internet, is rapidly changing my mind. I do not at all like hearing that all of my hard won knowledge and experience is thought to be worthless.Many of my professional colleagues are deliberately ignoring the home formulating movement. When I’ve asked why, what I’ve heard generally is the assumption that eventually enough people will be badly hurt that the FDA will have no choice but to step in and make homemade/artisanal cosmetics just as illegal as homemade pharmaceuticals are, if not more so. They think giving advice and/or trying to prevent mistakes is only delaying the inevitable disaster. I’m really starting to think that they have the right idea.Yes, distance learning technology has improved to the point that you can learn everything you need to do any one of the three jobs over the internet. But…there’s a huge problem with doing so. -
The important thing to remember is that denatured alcohol is produced for tax reasons, and not for any chemical/technical purpose. Anything that you make with USP ethanol can also be made with denatured alcohol.
The only reason to use denatured alcohol is because it’s cheaper, and the only reason it’s cheaper is because the US government taxes the hell out of drinkable alcohol. The FDA doesn’t care if you use pure or denatured alcohol, as long as your formula is safe. -
Cooking is probably a good analogy here.
Learning how to formulate is a lot like learning how to cook - it can be learned over the internet, but it’s not going to make too much sense unless you have your own kitchen to practice in, and it’s been equipped properly.Once you’ve mastered the basic techniques and recipes, you can go on to learning how to adapt and improvise. Over time, you can become a very competent cook.BUT…this does not make you a chef, and you are in no way going to be capable of cooking in a restaurant without a lot of direct experience. AND… there’s almost nothing you can do in your home kitchen that can prepare you for that experience successfully. Watch some of the restaurant cooking shows if you doubt me. It is possible, although very difficult, to move up into this position.HOWEVER…being a competent, home cook does not make you a food scientist. Neither, for that matter, does being a chef. Yes, it is theoretically possible to learn everything you need over the internet - but it’s not going to save you any time over taking in-person classes. Being able to devise a recipe that is able to safely and profitably be manufactured in a factory is an almost entirely different skillset.This is a great analogy for one other thing - Food Scientists, unlike Cosmetic Chemists, have a professional certification available. The body of knowledge needed to be a professional cosmetic chemist is very similar: http://www.ift.org/certification.aspx -
There are good natural substitutes for mineral oil. Check with AAK, for example, or Barnet.
For direct replacements of Parafin Wax…not so much. Probably going to take a combination of Beeswax, Carnauba, and Candelilla. Many other natural waxes exist, some more expensive than others. Koster Keunen has a good selection - you should try asking their technical service department for a suggestion - but have a budget in mind first. Getting a great performing substitute that costs $20/pound more than you can afford is very, very frustrating. -
I don’t have any advice for you other than to keep doing research and talking to manufacturers.
The companies I’ve dealt with for color cosmetics that I consider reasonable are: Mana, Lady Burd, and Kolmar.Probably the easiest thing to do is to hire a consultant to help you find a manufacturer. Yet - doing so would also keep you from gaining valuable knowledge about these contract manufacturers - knowing how they deal with prospective customers should give you an indication of how they’ll deal with you going forward.This is a good reference site:as are HAPPI, D&CI, and the SCC national site. -
Also, as @mikethair describes, you don’t really need an overhead stirrer, although your batch does need to be stirred.
What you’re doing with an overhead stirrer is actually automating a manual process. Soap was made for centuries by folks with paddles stirring kettles - using the overhead stirrer just means that you can use it to stir instead of having a human do it - freeing up that human to do something else (mostly, anyway - you still need to check your batch occasionally) -
I find that the food industry is usually a great place to source small to medium-sized pilot equipment, especially if you don’t worry too much about expensive scale-up.
This 2-gallon blender, for example:Scales up to this 6.5 gallon one fairly well:But going much past that costs significant amounts of money to get the same ratio of power to batch size. -
The LUM machine is a combination centrifuge and real-time particle size analyzer. The combination gives of profile of how an emulsion breaks down during centrifugation, which is much more useful than a centrifuge result alone
But.. the reason it hasn’t been widely adopted (aside from the expense) is that there’s no easy and/or direct correlation between the LUM result and the standard accelerated stability tests. Getting to where you can rely on LUM results alone to predict stability takes an enormous amount of work.It’s worth it if you have formulas that rarely change, but for cosmetics, not so much. I have worked with one, but not for cosmetic formulas. -
BHA/BHT
-
The research I did for the discussion we’ve just been having here: https://chemistscorner.com/cosmeticsciencetalk/discussion/1905/scaling-up-liquid-soap-production-do-i-really-need-a-machine#latestand @David08848‘s answer in it about his soap-making method showed me the answer to your problem also - I think.You can make your soap in a one-pot process if you stop mixing and heating once your batch is thick but still fluid. Allow this to sit overnight to saponify, which will make it a paste. Then, dilute it with very hot water before you start up your mixer in the morning - this should thin your paste out enough that it will mix easily.
-
OK, I think there’s some confusion over terminology, and maybe over what’s going on chemically.If you have everything hot enough, getting the oil/water/KOH mixture to a certain thickness (called ‘trace’) takes 10-20 minutes of high-speed mixing.Chemically, “trace” is the point where enough of the KOH has reacted with the oils (making soap) to both emulsify the remaining oils and thicken the batch significantly. The emulsification is stable enough that you can stop high speed mixing at this point. The remainder of the oils and KOH will now react on their own without the need for external energy.If you continue to heat and stir the batch, however, the soap reaction will run to completion in 3-4 hours. If you turn off the heat and mixing, the way @David08848 does, then it will take 8-10 hours, or overnight. If you’ve run the reaction to completion (all the oil has turned to soap) you really don’t need to leave it hot in the double boiler overnight - that’s just a precaution.So, now that I know your batch size and process, here’s what I suggest for expanding production.Buy this tank: $822This blender: $395This Clamp: $92This overhead mixer: $693Or possibly this whisk attachment (if your budget’s tight): $250If you get the overhead mixer, you will want to cut a hole in the tank lid for it, and you may need to open up the support ring a little.Total cost =822+395+92+693 = $2,000 (US)I’d strongly suggest following David’s method - it will keep from burning out your mixer.
-
What size are your batches?
-
You could soak things in hot mineral oil first, to dilute the petrolatum, but that’s an extra step that’s usually only required if you get residue in nooks and grooves, etc.that won’t come out with normal cleaning.
Ultrasonic cleaners work really well for small parts. -
Here’s the problem.
I am a professional cosmetic chemist. If I (or any of the other professional chemists on this forum) tell you how to do this (especially since you clearly have no experience), and you hurt yourself or others following my instructions, you could sue me for damages, even if I just gave free advice. This would cost me money, and hurt my reputation, neither of which I can afford.There are courses available for you to take, and books that you could read, that will help you with this. As much as I’d like to, I can’t help. -
Gemma,
Essex, Connecticut? Or are you in the Essex in Maryland, Massachusetts, Missouri, Ohio, or Vermont? Or are you in the UK? -
As a professional chemist, I have to very strongly recommend that you do not do this at all.
Lipsticks (and mascaras) are the two color cosmetics where safety has to be paramount - lipsticks because they will be ingested, and mascaras because they could get in eyes. If you do not know what you’re doing, you could seriously harm yourself, or any others you give your lipstick to. Please, please leave this to the professionals. -
Have you determined the %water/%solids in your target formula?
-
I strongly suspect that the level of surfactant in the target product is something critical that you left out
-
There’s absolutely nothing wrong with using hot water or steam to heat a kettle, and it scales very well - it’s the double boiler part that’s dangerous. Simply put, you have to make very sure that the hot water/steam is safely contained, and has no chance of escaping to burn someone - that’s impossible to do with a double boiler setup.
Kettles can be heated in any number of ways - where the heat comes from really makes no difference to the batch as long as you can avoid hot spots.Something like this, for example, can accept hot water or steam, and do it safely:Something like this, on the other hand, has heating elements permanently submerged in water - it’s a double boiler, but with no chance for the water to get out: -
Yes,it would. You need a slow stirring mixer for your dilution step.
But…double boilers are intrinsically unsafe, because of potential steam/hot water burns. There are safer ways of heating batches. -
I’ve mentioned some of this stuff before on here, but probably not all in the same place, so here goes:
For a “stick blender”, what you actually need is a “Commercial Immersion Blender”. Without knowing the size of your batches, I can’t suggest a size, but Waring has a good reputation for durability:For a stainless steel crockpot, something like this one:For an overhead stirrer, and for a lot of pilot/small-scale production equipment, look here:or here: