[emma1985]

Yes good question, I’m interested as well.

I love the skinfeel of lecithin especially in cleansing products, but can’t deal with the odor and color, so I’m wondering if the powdered version removes some of these issues.

[emma1985]

ggpetrov said:

This attachment is homogenizer by itself. There are different homogenizing attachments by their design. MiniPro is targeted as a food homogenizer, but it can be used by homecrafters. I think, the homogenizer take place at the beginning of the emulsification, where the viscosity is still low. After that you should switch to a propeller mixer, until cooldown. I think that’s the proper workflow to make an emulsion. It doesn’t make sense to use a homogenizer in high viscosity emulsions.

Yes, that is the proper workflow, but the MiniPro is capable of working as a low shear device at speed settings 1 and 2 (it’s what makes it super unique amongst immersion blenders.)

Sometimes I don’t feel like getting out my propeller so I’ll just use the MiniPro in cool down at low speed.

See my response above if you’re interested in my experience with the MiniPro homogenizer attachment so far. 

Thanks for the comment!!

[emma1985]

suswang8 said:

It’s a homogenizer — keep in mind that even if you go to IKA’s Web site, you will see that some of their homogenizer tips look different than others.

Keep in mind you can only use the Dynamic up to a certain viscosity (I forget the max, to be honest), and I think the max suggested run time is 90 seconds.  The other downside (for some) is that the head is quite big comparatively, so you would struggle to use it for quantities under about 200ml.

Which homogenizer do you have now? 

FSH-2A is the one I have.

So update on the MiniPro homogenizer attachment.

It’s absolutely great. 

It still struggles with higher viscosity, but if I adjust for viscosity with angle of insertion and speed setting, it still works.

Certainly able to accommodate viscosity MUCH MUCH better than the FSH-2A.

I can even use it at very low speed for up to 60 seconds as a stirrer (I do this occasionally when I don’t feel like getting out my overhead stirrer, the MiniPro is capable of working really really slowly at speed settings 1 and 2, it essentially becomes low shear.)

It also introduces less air into emulsions when compared with the regular immersion blender attachment that the MiniPro comes with.

It emulsifies an emulsion very quickly.

And I feel like I get whiter emulsions.

It works just fine with 100 g batches, though of course I do experience some product waste. 100 g is usually my batch size while I’m working on product development.

So even though it was more expensive than the MiniPro itself, I think it’s totally worth it. 

I’m going to test the stability of an emulsion made with the homogenizer attachment vs one made with the immersion blender attachment using a centrifuge. I will keep you guys posted.

The last thing I want to test is if I can make a COMPLETELY CLEAR gel with the homogenizer attachment. When I use gelling agents with immersion blender, for example, it introduces air bubbles which makes the product opaque.

I can make a pretty clear gel using the FSH-2A, but I’d like to just put it away since I won’t be using it for emulsions now that I have the MiniPro homogenizer.

[emma1985]

Anecdotally cationic works best for hair, especially beard hair. But you could always use a nonionic emulsifier, if you really wanted to, and combine it with cationic ingredients like Honeyquat or Polyquat.

[emma1985]

PhilGeis said:

This is not about performance but an adulterated product.    Even without that considertion, it’s hardly reasonable to assume the  supplier salted the mine only for ONLY for its antimicrobial efficacy.

Thanks for the feedback, I’m waiting on a CoA from the supplier. I have to wait for the actual delivery to provide batch number to obtain CoA.

[emma1985]

Cinema said:

Hi all,
      Has anyone had any experience with tremella powder- I have used it in a facial cream - first hydrating it as a 5% solution and then utilizing a percentage of it. I have had some good reviews from friends and family and has seen in a few products as well- but wasn’t sure if this is the right way of doing it. Thoughts ? 

No research on tremella mushroom as a topical as far as I know. Marketing will tell you it’s as effective as Hyaluronic Acid as a humectant.

If you are making skincare for yourself, I wouldn’t bother and just use Hyaluronic Acid. 

If you have a skincare line, it might be worth using because it is seen as a valuable ingredient in the Kbeauty consumer community.

[emma1985]

Abdullah said:

You can add NACL to o/w emulsion and make it unstable and call it bi phase. Or don’t use any emulsifier and call it bi phase.

What i want to know is that are you making bi phase Product in expense of the quality because it is a trend or it has any benefit too that stable emulsion doesn’t have? 

I have made several bi phase Products in my practices not by intention but because i wasn’t able to stabilize the emulsions as @PhilGeis said. And in my experience the composition of ingredients will be different at the beginnings and ends of the bottle and you can feel it. At beginning what you are using will have more of the oil phase ingredients and at the end it will have more of water phase ingredients.

I’m not sure what you mean by in expense of quality. This product is an intentionally bi-phase product using high quality ingredients. It’s not a failed emulsion. There is no emulsifier.

[emma1985]

Abdullah said:

You can add NACL to o/w emulsion and make it unstable and call it bi phase. Or don’t use any emulsifier and call it bi phase.

What i want to know is that are you making bi phase Product in expense of the quality because it is a trend or it has any benefit too that stable emulsion doesn’t have? 

I have made several bi phase Products in my practices not by intention but because i wasn’t able to stabilize the emulsions as @PhilGeis said. And in my experience the composition of ingredients will be different at the beginnings and ends of the bottle and you can feel it. At beginning what you are using will have more of the oil phase ingredients and at the end it will have more of water phase ingredients.

I am making it because I have used bi-phase leave on products and really liked them, and conceptually it’s in line with the rest of my skincare line (focus on plant oils, various humectants and extracts.)

I know that the ratio can change over time, which is one of the reasons I went with 50/50 distribution. Even if uneven dispensing occurs, it will likely not move the distribution much further from 40/60 or 60/40, based on my tests.

Plus, the product is packaged in a dropper bottle, which means that even if the user doesn’t shake the bottle at all, they will still end up with a relatively even distribution of oil and water. I have tested this using both of the different dropper bottle designs I have (one round, narrow, one rectangular, wider.)

Experientially, the dropper bottle is different from the pour/spray bottle like the ones I linked.

Using a bi-phase product is completely different from using an emulsion in terms of the user experience. And also, I’m guessing, different from using a separated emulsion. It’s like a mixture between using a serum and a facial oil.

[emma1985]

ngarayeva001 said:

@emma1985 I made a couple of makeup removers in this format. What worked pretty well is using non polar oil (in my case I used D5 and isododecane in another formula) and add 1-1.5% of NaCl to the waterphase. My water phase was rather simple (preservative, some basic humectants, salt and dye). You probably can do something similar just keep oil phase low. In makeup removers it’s close to 50/50. I saw surfactants in some of those formulas but in my experience they might partially emulsify and you will end up with cloudy product. Also type of bottle you use matters. Some types of plastic ‘catch’ droplets and it doesn’t look nice

Did you include a preservative in your oil phase?

[emma1985]

ngarayeva001 said:

@emma1985 I made a couple of makeup removers in this format. What worked pretty well is using non polar oil (in my case I used D5 and isododecane in another formula) and add 1-1.5% of NaCl to the waterphase. My water phase was rather simple (preservative, some basic humectants, salt and dye). You probably can do something similar just keep oil phase low. In makeup removers it’s close to 50/50. I saw surfactants in some of those formulas but in my experience they might partially emulsify and you will end up with cloudy product. Also type of bottle you use matters. Some types of plastic ‘catch’ droplets and it doesn’t look nice

Yes, my phase distribution is 50/50 but I’m willing to go down if I have to.

I was inspired by this product, you can see the phase distribution is closer to 80/20.

I’m not using surfactants as it’s a leave on product.

Thank you so much for the feedback!!

https://ohlolly.com/products/sioris-time-is-running-out-mist

[emma1985]

PhilGeis said:

emma - have you challenged phases separately and through cycles of shaking?
Think you’re approach preserves the oil/water interface more so than the preserving the oil phase per se. 
Don’t presume the product is biphasic by intent.  They may not have been able to establish stable emlusion.

Abdullah said:

That is good as @MarkBroussard said. 

In your serum one phase is water and water soluble ingredients. What is in another phase? 

Hi! 

The oil phase is using plant oils, Coco Caprylate Caprate, Phenonip and antioxidant (Rosemary Oleoresin.) I haven’t had any issues thus far of oil phase separation due to non-compatible polarity. 

I haven’t done any kind of microbial testing yet because I only made my “final test” versions a week ago, but in 3 weeks I’m going to test for contamination using my microbial testing kits.

I have done shaking cycles. Here are my observations.

My first attempt at making this serum did not contain a preservative in the oil phase. I was always planning on using an oil phase preservative, just hadn’t decided which one yet, and I was just experimenting at this point. I did have Germall in the water phase.

Throughout cycles of shaking, the oil phase became less and less transparent. I think because of drops of water being trapped in the oil phase, I’m not 100% sure but it seemed to get worse every time I shook the bottle.

Here’s the interesting part. Since adding Phenonip to the oil phase, I haven’t had any loss of transparency through cycles of shaking.

Not only did Phenonip not impact transparency itself, it also seems to make my oil phase brighter. I’m using some colorful oils to have a colorful oil phase layered on top of a clear water phase for visual effect. So for example one of my serums uses Sea Buckthorn Berry Oil.

Before I added Phenonip to my serum, I tested a small amount of it in pure Apricot Kernel Oil. I swear that overnight, the color of the Apricot Kernel Oil became brighter, and I could verify that by looking at the preserved and unpreserved Apricot Kernel Oil side by side the next day.

Any thoughts on what might explain the slight change in color?

Thank you so much for your feedback!! ????

ETA: sorry about the messy responses.

[emma1985]

MarkBroussard said:

@emma1985

Yes, that is a good approach … separately preserve each the water phase and the oil phase with preservatives with the appropriate solubility for each phase.

Thank you so much. That makes me feel better about my approach. ???? 

[emma1985]

Abdullah said:

That is good as @MarkBroussard said. 

In your serum one phase is water and water soluble ingredients. What is in another phase? 

Hi! 

The oil phase is using plant oils, Coco Caprylate Caprate, Phenonip and antioxidant (Rosemary Oleoresin.) I haven’t had any issues thus far of oil phase separation due to non-compatible polarity. 

I haven’t done any kind of microbial testing yet because I only made my “final test” versions a week ago, but in 3 weeks I’m going to test for contamination using my microbial testing kits.

I have done shaking cycles. Here are my observations.

My first attempt at making this serum did not contain a preservative in the oil phase. I was always planning on using an oil phase preservative, just hadn’t decided which one yet, and I was just experimenting at this point. I did have Germall in the water phase.

Throughout cycles of shaking, the oil phase became less and less transparent. I think because of drops of water being trapped in the oil phase, I’m not 100% sure but it seemed to get worse every time I shook the bottle.

Here’s the interesting part. Since adding Phenonip to the oil phase, I haven’t had any loss of transparency through cycles of shaking.

Not only did Phenonip not impact transparency itself, it also seems to make my oil phase brighter. I’m using some colorful oils to have a colorful oil phase layered on top of a clear water phase for visual effect. So for example one of my serums uses Sea Buckthorn Berry Oil.

Before I added Phenonip to my serum, I tested a small amount of it in pure Apricot Kernel Oil. I swear that overnight, the color of the Apricot Kernel Oil became brighter, and I could verify that by looking at the preserved and unpreserved Apricot Kernel Oil side by side the next day.

Any thoughts on what might explain the slight change in color?

Thank you so much for your feedback!! ????

Sorry Abdullah, I don’t know why I thought you had also asked Phil’s question.

[emma1985]

Abdullah said:

It is unstable emulsion and creaming is happening. 

leaf water as first ingredient and not stable emulsion. preservatives don’t work correctly in my experience in unstable emulsions. How much is the shelf life of this product? 

I’m working on a bi-phase serum right now, and I’m using a water soluble preservative in the water layer (Germall) and an oil soluble preservative in the oil layer (Phenonip.) I don’t know if that’s what they’re doing here as well, but that is a good question.

[emma1985]

Sapogel. As ngarayeva pointed out, it is a nightmare to work with. Takes absolutely ages. If you have the patience, it creates an oil gel that absolutely nothing else compares to in my experience. I have tried different concentrations of the C waxes as well as Cera Bellina. All feel very waxy compared to Sapogel. Sapogel products feel like a proper oil gel. If you do want to experiment with the waxes Candellila was my favorite. Carnauba is grainy and more smelly.

[emma1985]

Yes biphase products have been around, but now they are tReNdInG. ????????

[emma1985]

ifamuj said:

ngarayeva001 said:

Hi, I suggest that you keep it like in L’Oreal’s patent (which is ok as long as you are not selling it)
https://patents.google.com/patent/US7179841B2/en

It translates into this:

INCI	%
Aqua	34.00%
Ethoxydiglycol	30.00%
Propylene glycol	10.00%
Glycerin	5.00%
Ferulic Acid	0.50%
LAA	15.00%
Tocopherol	1.00%
Ceteareth-20	4.00%
Hyaluronic acid HMW	0.20%
TEA	qs

It still oxidizes with time, but slower than other options. You don’t need a preservative with this one.

What is the purpose of ceteareth-20 here?

Ceteareth 20 is a solubilizer/emulsifier, it would take the place of Polysorbate.

I don’t recommend making a base formula and adding Ascorbic Acid over time. That just sounds like a huge hassle, and like others have pointed out, you would need to pH test every time and adjust. Or your base formula would have to have a quite high pH, so you would have to use a preservative that is effective at such an alkaline pH. I recommend Liquid Germall Plus.

If you do decide to go this route, you really don’t need the Vitamin E or Ferulic Acid, because their function is to extend the shelf life of Ascorbic Acid.

I use Timeless Vitamin C & E & Ferulic and I would recommend looking into the formulation as it is EXTREMELY stable. Like, unbelievably stable. Lasts 3+ months easily without any outward signs of oxidization. 

They achieve this level of stability by significantly reducing the water content and using glycols in place of water.

[emma1985]

Graillotion said:

I can not begin to help….

But I am curious….directions say… Shake well before using…. Do you know what happens when you shake well….Does everything temporarily whiten/emulsify for a moment….like a salad dressing that has been shaken?  Or do they stay separate?  I am assuming…..they combine for a moment?

Seems like over time….the ratios change, unless one is a very savant shaker. 

Yes, that is exactly what happens. Temporary “emulsification” (if you can call it that.) Exactly like salad dressing. Here is a picture. Biphase products are a huge trend in Kbeauty right now. 

[emma1985]

Paprik said:

Hi,

looking at your formula, I think you need to reduce low melting point ingredients. Lauryl Laurate - melting point 23-30°C. + Shea and Mango butter. In total, you have 25% of those. Keep those under 10%, to give your product good climate stability. 

I think what you are experiencing is called “Syneresis”. Please check polarity of those waxes. And the oils. Mixing non-polar and polar ingredients usually results in this issue.

Hope that helps  

Thank you so much, I will definitely reduce low melting point ingredients. I’ve been having a hard time finding a comprehensive list of the polarity index of oils but I will try. Thanks again.

[emma1985]

Okay, I will experiment. ???? Thank you!! 

[emma1985]

Thank you!! I read that PEGs can help. So I was thinking about adding a few % of Glyceryl Stearate and PEG 100 Stearate. Any thoughts on this? 

Thanks again.

[emma1985]

Thank you so much Matt!! ????

[emma1985]

Thank you for clarifying ???? I noticed that my cream pilled less when I added 2% Cetyl Esters the other day.

[emma1985]

What I should have said was, it works better than literally any other conditioner, mask, etc. Way better. Very noticeable difference in hair health and strength.

[emma1985]

I’ve used Olaplex extensively for several years. It absolutely works to prevent breakage and repair damaged hair. Anecdotal of course.