johnb
Forum Replies Created
-
Despite my apparent non-appearance on these pages, I do look in on a regular basis – almost daily, in fact.
I stopped posting to Chemists Corner because I felt that I was regularly being unfairly attacked by people who had a total misunderstanding of what I was trying to put across and I thought that it’s just not worth my while in continuing.
Since that time, I’ve observed a very marked deterioration in the quality of the questions posed and the quality of the questioners themselves.
A significant proportion of questions could easily be answered by the most basic of Internet searches and/or a perusal of manufacturers literature (almost the entirety of which is available online). This indicates to me a fundamental laziness and, quite frankly, anyone with that approach to their work (or hobby) is not worth pursuing.
Coupled with that are those that have no clue about what they are doing but expect an instant response to what is, very often, just basic general knowledge. Then there are those who request a similar instant response to a question that is at the ‘cutting edge’ of research and the answers are only known to those carrying out that research.
Then there are the perennial questions on the lines of how to neutralise LABSA coupled with modified dishwashing liquid formulations. I’ll tell you this for free: you can never hope to market a dishwashing liquid that can compete with the well known brands so, in essence, you are wasting your time. Worrying about trivialities such as the product not being completely clear or that its colour is not quite as was desired regularly take precedence over whether the product actually does as it is supposed to do - and that is to clean dishes.
That’s only a small sample of my recent site irritants.
In answer to Dr Catherine Pratt
It is not a boat in Monaco that I have bought but a villa in Le Bar-sur-Loup on the French Riviera https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Bar-sur-Loup
This was not from the proceeds of being a cosmetic chemist but from royalties paid to me from licencing patents I own concerned with the preservation of wood. These are licenced to a Canadian company and the products are used almost worldwide.
This may not seem very profitable at first glance but, just think of the number of telegraph poles and the like there are in the world – billions! There are numerous other wood preservation applications as well.
-
I have said all I intend on this. I will now keep my own counsel.
-
If I Google the words “bottle filling equipment” (couldn’t be much more simple or direct than that) I am met with an extremely large number of potentially useful hits. If I scroll to the bottom of the first page I see links to:
manual bottle filling equipment
bottle filling machine
small liquid filling machine
table top liquid filling machine
manual hand operated liquid bottle filling machine
liquid filling machine
manual bottle filling machine
second hand filling machine
Each of these opens a vast opportunity for further investigation. I don’t think my earlier response was unreasonable considering the current equipment seems to comprise a “frosting bag”. What it does do is offer links to a number of sources of numerous types, capacities and sizes of fillers which should provide a lot more information to the enquirer than any of the other offerings.
I do try to be helpful here and my suggestion to use the facilities of Google was offered seriously and with the best intentions. Questions like:
does anyone know of an efficient, commercial and large scale method
invite, indeed beg, the use of a search engine (Google or any other) to provide a suitable, comprehensive answer. Commercial and large scale may mean anything from, say, a couple of litres per hour up to many tonnes in the same period.
-
I am not a Chemist but I love make-up so I decided to google
Or perhaps a thread on how to Google.
-
Bath cubes were/are compressed blocks of an equimolecular mix of sodium carbonate and sodium bicarbonate. This is/was sold as Crex. A double salt of a similar constitution but recrystalised in the form of silky needles is known by the name of Sesqui and comprises sodium sesquicarbonate. Sesqui is the normal form of material for bath salts.
The cubes contained starch and talc as processing aids, fragrance and occasionally colour. They were pressed on specially designed Manesty tablet presses.
Not for the small manufacturer. The presses, being specially made, were stupidly expensive.
-
Does Google (or other search engines) not operate in your part of the world?
-
Before embarking on the removal of pesticides (or any other contaminants) from your ethanol you must analyse the material to ensure the contaminant is actually present.
As I mentioned previously, I think you are looking for problems which don’t exist. It is much more likely that there will be much more pesticide residues in the vegetable matter you are extracting than there will ever be in ethanol.
-
This is a new one on me.
I cannot see any reason why either of those materials, glyceryl caprylate/caprate or glyceryl oleate, would be considered as ingredients of a hair wash formulation (shampoo) sulfate free or not.
Both are lipids and it is the function of a shampoo to remove excess lipid from the hair. By including lipidic materials into the shampoo reduces its functionality.
Have I missed something?
-
I am thinking that your fragrance is pre-diluted with something which is most likely acting as a solubiliser. It is very uncommon for fragrances to be soluble to that extent in, what is effectively, just water.
pH 8 is somewhat high for a leave-on skin product. Try reducing the TEA level.
Do also try making some serum without the fragrance.
-
That level of fragrance is very high for a product of this type. Commonly 0.1% or less is used.
Is this a clear product? If yes, what solubiliser is being used?
Have you tried a fragrance free version to check on the suitability of the fragrance you are using?
-
I am still of the opinion that lactic acid would be a better choice over citric acid. The amount necessary to lower the pH will be extremely small and I very much doubt that the quantity it would cause the irritation that seems to be of so much concern to others here.
After all, lactic acid is a normal component of the vaginal secretions. I don’t think the same could be said about citric acid.
-
Cotton buds are not sterile, nor are they designed to be. To obtain any meaningful information it is necessary to have all equipment sterile. Cotton or rayon swabs for bacteriology are readily obtainable from laboratory supply houses, even Amazon https://www.amazon.co.uk/neoLab-2-1019-Sterile-Cotton-Handle/dp/B01AWE8R26/ref=sr_1_15?s=industrial&ie=UTF8&qid=1498117544&sr=1-15&keywords=swabs
(OK that is Amazon UK but I’m pretty sure that similar things are available anywhere).The reason you obtained a “clear” result from your deodorant is most likely because these products are usually designed to be antimicrobial with an immediate activity. Preservative materials often take some time to act so, presented with a fresh source of infection (your cotton bud), it is overwhelmed resulting in apparent lack of activity of the preservative.
-
- - - and the formula is?
It is not possible to offer a reasoned answer with the sparse information given.
-
I think you are looking for problems that don’t exist.
If you do have particular concerns you could pass the alcohol through a bed of charcoal.
-
Emcol E 607:
http://www.chemindustry.com/chemicals/970381.html
http://www.molbase.com/en/name-Emcol%20E-607.html
CAS 6272-74-8 -
What is the purpose of the NaOH now that you have removed the Carbomer? I don’t see the point of the citric acid either.
What is the constitution of the spheres? If plastic, have a rethink. They are to be banned (if not already).
-
What I meant in using lactic acid was have that as the pH adjuster if necessary.
I am still concerned, as is Mark, about the advisability of menthyl lactate in an intra-vaginal product. Are there specific claims/reasons for its inclusion? Are we getting involved in “kinky” products here?
-
Re-reading my post above, I can see a cause of confusion.
What I suggest is a lactic acid/lactate combination - lactate being
sodium or ammonium lactate. You adjust the ratio of the two in order to
achieve the desired pH.What I mean there is adjust the ratio of lactic acid and lactate, not the two lactate salts.
-
As I pointed out, the 940 grade is a special modification intended for crystal clear products. Your pictures indicate a preparation which is far from clear so, that being the case, you are possibly unnecessarily sacrificing product stability, ease of manufacture and cost.
I know my comment was off-topic. Just trying to make things easier for you.
-
Now you’re rid of Carbopol there are a number of moisturisers that would be compatible. What I suggest is a lactic acid/lactate combination - lactate being sodium or ammonium lactate. You adjust the ratio of the two in order to achieve the desired pH. The best thing about lactic/lactate is that it is a normal component of the vaginal secretions.
In addition, a lactate buffer/moisturiser will offer the best compatibility with the menthyl lactate in the Covafresh IV - that is if you feel this ingredient is necessary. I am not blessed with a vagina but I shudder (figuratively) at the thought of an icy cold body cavity - the figurative qualification could well become real in actual users.
-
Rather than patch up some pre-existing mix, you may be far better off starting afresh - without the fairy dust (in this instance any ingredient below 0.1%).
I have always found that Hydrovance is very difficult to stabilise and I don’t think that, at that level, it is doing much good.
Another thing - are you sure that the rheology of Carbopol type materials is what you want? OK, they are fine for uses where breakdown of their gel structure is of little or no importance but these materials very quickly lose viscosity when subjected to more than minimal shear and, in the presence of ionic substances (such as might be found in the vagina - lactic acid, salt etc) a competely liquid product can be formed.
I have noted previously that a lower viscosity grade of Natrosol may be advantageous, if that is what you decide to go with. It will certainly be more stable than carbomers.
-
Why are you using Carbopol 940 in this?
Carbopol 940 is a grade specifically designed for extra clear compositions. In order to do this, some other properties of the product type are sacrificed - e.g intolerance of other materials especially ions.
It may not be of particular significance in your current problem but it is something to be aware of.
-
80/20 soap base was the major output of the works but there were numerous other products in addition. The relatively small quantities of shaving soap and shaving creams could not justifiy the use of a dedicated auto process and were made by traditional kettle methods in quantities of between 1 tonne (minimum) and 5 tonne batches. There were also two 50 tonne kettles used mainly for the recovery of out of spec. soap.
The plant also produced glycerine and also used that still to purify glycerine from other soapers. At the time there were only two glycerine producers (rectifiers) in Europe - this plant being one of them.
The second major product (and the one I was mainly involved with) was industrial soaps and detergents. The company was another one of two (the other being Unilever) manfacturers of laundry products in Europe.
Another significant product was bath cubes. These have amost disappeared now but, at that time, about 100 tonnes of cubes per week were made. Weighing in at 45 grams each, you can work out how many cubes that was. These cubes were exported world wide. I remember Max Factor was a customer and they had fruit fragranced cubes. They always placed their order at the height of autumn (fall) for the Christmas market and it was extraordinarily difficult to prevent wasps being attracted to the factory and being squashed into a bath cube.
There was a small(ish) soap finishing plant at the site but the main finishing unit for the company was some distance away. About one fifth of the soap output was used “in-house” the remainder sold to soap finishers in the UK, Europe and Africa.
This now all history. The plant was closed in 2005 and all manufacturing moved the Thailand.
Whether anything of mine is still being marketed - who knows? It was in the 1970’s that I worked there.
-
Another thread exhumed (2014)
But with a new twist!
The new section ought to have a new thread but I have made a reasoned response, I think.
-
One point I could make about preservatives in soap in those days (makes it sound like a history lesson - which I suppose it is really).
Remember that this was in the early 1970’s and was before the days of INCI and CTFA names and ingredient declarations.
The preservative commonly used in soap at the company where I worked was magnesium silicate formed in situ by the addition of magnesium sulphate and sodium silicate to the soap mass immediately after formation. Other companies used different preservatives like Colgate added stannous chloride to their soap base. Soaps containing free fatty acids (so called superfatted soaps containg coconut fatty acid) were preserved with Sopanox which was Monsanto’s name for 1-(o-Tolyl)biguanide. You could always tell when Sopanox was being used as it had a very powerful sneezing activity in almost everyone that came near it in its powder form. This was, of course, all trade secrets at that time. Personally, I was unable to understand why this Mg silicate or SnCl2 system acted as a preservative and I did demonstrate, to my own satisfaction at least, that neither method had any real effect.The real preservative was the high pH of the soap itself together with the osmotic pressure exerted by the soap and its strong solutions when sitting in a soapdish drawing water from any contaminating micro-organisms. For information thare are some members of the genus Arthrobacter which are tolerant of these conditions and which are responsible for the black streaks which appear in soap which has been wetted and then allowed to dry and crack. These black cracks are not dirt as many people think.
The factory used two purpose built (with Alfa Laval) automated centrifugal systems for manufacture, not the traditional kettle and was, at the time, one of the most advanced soap making facilities in the world producing 1,000 to 2,000 tonnes of 80/20 soap base per week as well as traditionally made speciality soaps such as we have been discussing here.
