[ketchito]

@Anna_Maria There’s a small window of opportunity of including CTC in a shampoo, even in the presence of SLES, bute you need to also use an amphoteric surfactant and at definite ratios. If you want to add CTC, I recommend you to test first your surfactant mixtures only, so you can see of there’s precipitation, or you manage to get a gel phase (the latter is what you want). Once you did that, you can start adding other ingredients.

[ketchito]

@Newtoformulating If you heat your product and it turns clear again, it might be due to the kraft point of your system. Perhaps you could remove Ceteareth-25 (which is waxy) and increase your PEG-40 HCO if needed.

[ketchito]

@Palucho You’ll have nightmares truing to incorporate a more oil soluble fragrance into a shower gel without making it turbid (betaine won’t help, and you’ll have to add too many surfactants and/or solubilizers). More water soluble (or dispersible) fragrances have solubilizers, and are more suited for that type of products.

[ketchito]

@rina Do you see the color and fragrance change under stability conditions (high T, UV light) or at room conditions? During stability, especially if the T is high, it’s normal to have some fragrance and color change. The amounts of BHT and/or BP-4 are OK, so, if the change is significant, there might be something else going on (pH drift in the case of your shower gel, water quality, heavy metal presence in some extract, ease of oxidation of your fragrance). You could try using Tinogard TL in your shower gel and Tinogard TT in your fragrance.

[ketchito]

@DeedeeUkulele Are you heating your mixture when adding the PEG-120…? I recommend you to follow the way of addition recommende by Lubrizol in this example formula: https://www.ulprospector.com/es/la/PersonalCare/Detail/1813/741507/Daily-Intimate-Wash-Formulation-CL-B0123AandB%5BAP%5D?st=20

[ketchito]

@rab9 Inorganic salts are pretty stable in solution. What would happen in the pressence of an organic acid (as @PhilGeis mentioned) is that the Mg2+ counterion would interact with the carboxylic part of the acid. Nevertheless, at enough low pH, you’ll have the free acid back. 

What is more worried as mentioned before, is that you might be using a weak preservative system, although as @MarkBroussard mentioned, high amounts of MgCl2 might reduce water activity enough to give you some protection, but that might not be beneficial if you’re making an O/W emulsion.

You’d be better off making a W/O emulsion, but the  your MgCl2 will be “trapped” within the water phase of your emulsion and won’t be available for whatever you need (not sure there are specific aquaporines for Mg2+ transport). 

[ketchito]

@nhatnguyen10 I believe that silicone is already available from some suppliers.

[ketchito]

@Nazarene I believe the first thing you need to consider is that Borax is not permited in cosmetics: 
https://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools-databases/cosing/index.cfm?fuseaction=search.results

Unless you’re not designing the formula for cosmetic purposes.

If you want to reduce shine of your paste, reduce waxes and increase powders.

[ketchito]

@Ahlmeyer When you mention “normaly ist just a Little Slip and a clean feeling after wash”, what are you comaping this blend to? Did you have a different surfactant system before?

[ketchito]

@CzarXavier I suspect that either Guar and/or fragrance can cause the issue. If you want to use Guar in a clear product, you need to use the version for clear products, like N-Hance CCG 45. Also, your frgrance might not be colpletely soluble, and you might need a solubilizer. Do a knock out test removing either of those, to see which one is the one to blame.

Also, if that Phenoxyethanol is pure, you’re using way too much and you need to complement with another preservative to cover mold and yeast. And lastly, you are using way too much Glycerin (water soluble, will go down the drain and impair foam).

[ketchito]

drjayseesunish said:

drjayseesunish said:

ketchito said:

Robert said:

@Abdullah @ketchito 
Do not you think that anionic surfactants lower than 9% as an active material is un acceptable as a shampoo?
Also 1501 will definitely separated, 
as a suggestion i am adding cetrimonium chloride combined with SLES in the shampoo some how is good on hair but not perfect, I am disappointed with shampoos becuase I tried everything to make shampoo for soft and smooth effect on hair but all the time failed

waiting any suggestion

@Robert You just need to add a cationic polymer and silicone(s) to your shampoo, and play around the percentages till you get the effect you want. 

@ketchito playing percentages meaning repetitive experimentation, am I right? But can’t understand you all are well known formulator so is it difficult for you too to fix one’s %?

@ketchito please tell me a universal polymers to thicken  cleaning products? 

HEC and HMPC are good options.

[ketchito]

drjayseesunish said:

ketchito said:

Robert said:

@Abdullah @ketchito 
Do not you think that anionic surfactants lower than 9% as an active material is un acceptable as a shampoo?
Also 1501 will definitely separated, 
as a suggestion i am adding cetrimonium chloride combined with SLES in the shampoo some how is good on hair but not perfect, I am disappointed with shampoos becuase I tried everything to make shampoo for soft and smooth effect on hair but all the time failed

waiting any suggestion

@Robert You just need to add a cationic polymer and silicone(s) to your shampoo, and play around the percentages till you get the effect you want. 

@ketchito playing percentages meaning repetitive experimentation, am I right? But can’t understand you all are well known formulator so is it difficult for you too to fix one’s %?

@drjayseesunish Those levels will depend on your consumer needs, silicones you’re using, etc. That’s why there’s not a fixed amount. You could start for instance, with 0.2% of Cationic guar, and 1% of dimethicone fluid (350 or 1000 cst). This is just a starting point, those levels could be incteased, you could choose to add a silicone gum, replace the cationic polymer, etc. You’ll also need to add a suspending agent like a carbomer. 

[ketchito]

@Anna_Maria Coco- sulfate and Lauryl sulfate are very close in structure and functionality. Lauryl sulfate was used in the past as main anionic, but due to its hard water sensitivity and harshness, was replaced by exthoxylated versions (like SLES). I’d stay with SLES and mix it with surfactants with different functionalities (amine oxides, betaines, sultaines, isethionates, etc).

[ketchito]

@Red_Head The final effect depends on how you formulate your product (what other ingredients you use, the level of silicone, etc). You’d need to pick up the same base and add each silicone to make a fair comparison.

Amodimethicones deposit more selectively, and form a more even film on hair (covering more area and avoiding overdeposition). That is an upgrade in performance compared to non charged dimethicones. But that doesn’t mean you cannot have a well performing product using only a dimethicone (P&G in the past only used dimethicone, till the BA propyl dimethicone was developed for them, and kept as a patent for some years).

[ketchito]

Robert said:

@Abdullah @ketchito 
Do not you think that anionic surfactants lower than 9% as an active material is un acceptable as a shampoo?
Also 1501 will definitely separated, 
as a suggestion i am adding cetrimonium chloride combined with SLES in the shampoo some how is good on hair but not perfect, I am disappointed with shampoos becuase I tried everything to make shampoo for soft and smooth effect on hair but all the time failed

waiting any suggestion

@Robert You just need to add a cationic polymer and silicone(s) to your shampoo, and play around the percentages till you get the effect you want. 

[ketchito]

@Red_Head Why would you think Dimethicone deposits better than Bis-aminopropyl dimethicone? Amine functionalized dimethicones deposit at some level through interaction with binding sites on hair. Bis-aminopropyl dimethicone has two binding sites (compared to single amino dimethicones), helping it deposit better and more selectively. Also, when positively charged, it also helps form a more even film on hair, avoiding overdeposition.

[ketchito]

@tecnico3vinia You don’t need heat to incorporate CDEA (unless you are using MEA or MIPA instead of DEA). You need to heat to melt PEG-150 distearate though.

[ketchito]

@TheSocksTooBig @Squinny is right. Alumina usually comes as a blend with TiO2 as a stabilizer, to reduce its catalytic potential. 

[ketchito]

@Ahlmeyer What’s your manufacture method (order of addition, mixing speeds, times, etc.) matter when using polymers of different charge.

Also, have you tried a simple dimethicone fluid instead of that amodimethicone microemulsion? Maybe you’re looking for a sensorial that that microemulsion won’t give you.

[ketchito]

@tecnico3vinia CDEA and CAPB are compatible. Perhaps your issue can be related to the kraft point of your formula. Are those number in your formula the order of additio (I hope not)? You are actually using way too much CDEA. Perhaps you could increase your PEG-150 or include a polymeric rheology modifier (like Chrotix Liquid). 

[ketchito]

ggpetrov said:

Euxyl PE 9010 is one of the most popular preservative blends in both homemade and industrial cosmetic products. Since it’s very uncomplicated to use, I can’t understand why you have these issues with the viscosity. Usually if you’d like to get a proper answer of your question, you should share the formula and the workflow. I’ve been using the BTMS 50 and Euxyl PE9010 in combination, and i’ve never had any problems. Also I don’t think BTMS is suitable for sensitive skin (since it’s cationic).

About the Gliceryl Stearate SE which have been mentioned above, as far as I know it’s anionic by nature, so it’s incompatible with the BTMS.

@ggpetrov Both molecules in GS SE are non ionic (esters) and don’t have a formal charge.

[ketchito]

drjayseesunish said:

Can Anyone tell me is viscosity based on the  ph of any solution? Sometimes when I  make handwash, I didn’t get desired viscosity through salt.  So anyone can tell me required things to get  the viscosity by salt.

drjayseesunish said:

Can Anyone tell me is viscosity based on the  ph of any solution? Sometimes when I  make handwash, I didn’t get desired viscosity through salt.  So anyone can tell me required things to get  the viscosity by salt.

@drjayseesunish This is just an example, but if you have both SLES and CAPB, different pH will modify the way they interact with each other, thus modifying the resulting viscosity.

[ketchito]

@Abdullah DMAPA and LAPDMA for instance…you could ask your supplier for technical info about it.

[ketchito]

ESChemlover said:

ketchito said:

@ESChemlover In general, the preservative system in your formulas might not be robust enough, especially with the type of extracts you’re using. Also:

1) not sure how much glycerin you’re using, but you use it in a cleanser only as claim ingredient, also, so your foam is not impaired  

2) amidoamines are not usual in skin leave-on products; maybe you could switch to a non charged emulsifier?

3) why are you writing Vitamin A in your Pistacia? If you meant it as a source of it, you better mention that, since the INCi of vitamin A is different. Also, don’t use much of Aloe Barbadensis, sin it can increase the risk of microbial contamination of your product.

ketchito said:

@ESChemlover In general, the preservative system in your formulas might not be robust enough, especially with the type of extracts you’re using. Also:

1) not sure how much glycerin you’re using, but you use it in a cleanser only as claim ingredient, also, so your foam is not impaired  

2) amidoamines are not usual in skin leave-on products; maybe you could switch to a non charged emulsifier?

3) why are you writing Vitamin A in your Pistacia? If you meant it as a source of it, you better mention that, since the INCi of vitamin A is different. Also, don’t use much of Aloe Barbadensis, sin it can increase the risk of microbial contamination of your product.

Hi @Ketchito Thank you for your response, I appreciate your input. 

Why do you feel like my preservative system for there 3 products are not adequate enough and what would you choose as a more effective alternative here and why? - i appreciate you input!

1. I am using a little glycerin in the formula to help gently removes dirt, oils and make-up from the skin. Also as a humectant to help cleanse without leaving the skin feeling dry and stripped. 

2. Amidoamines (Stearamidopropyl dimethylamine) in this formula - i am using it as an alternative to silicones in the formula since it’s derived from vegetable oil, and like silicones can be used to keep oils and waters properly blended in this oil free formula, is considered vegan, and it feels very nice - is there a more effective alternative you would want me to consider?

3. @Pharma is right about the gum mastic - either way it’s not an ingredient in my marketing plan for this product. Because this is more of a peptide moisturizer product i am thinking of  adding 3 % of peptides intsead of 1% in this peptide moisturizer, and reducing the alpha arbutin from 5% to say 2% to avoid sensitizing users and regulatory issues + solubility issues.

Also, is ethyl ascorbic acid (vitamin c) a great addition or can i just go without it here?

Thank you

@ESChemlover Unfortunately, since glycerin is very water soluble, it won’t do much in a surfactant-based cleanser, but impairing your foam. It will mostly go to the drain before being able to perform.

SAPDMA is not an alternative to silicones. I mean, it can be a good ingredient to use, but they have different mechanism to perform. Silicones are more emollient and give more lubricity. There are many fair reolacement for silicones in leave on products, depending of what you want. You could reach out Inolex, Clariant, Oxiteno or BASF for silicone replacements tailored to your needs.

[ketchito]

Pharma said:

@ketchito In that particular case, it makes absolute sense to use is. IMHO cationics are underrated in skin care. They behave differently which makes them more difficult to use (HLB for example utterly fails. It does so in many cases anyway but with quaternaries…) and there’s also a regulatory side to the story. However, stearamidoethyl diethylamine by itself isn’t even a charged molecule and can be used for diverse types of emulsion (and they can feel really nice).

Regarding gum mastic: THIS may an explanation.

@Pharma Thatnks. As always, your experience and knowledge are very helpful ????. Perhaps I acted out of too much caution (my wife has very sensitive skin, so she’s always a point of reference for me). And yes, stearamidoethyl dimethylamine can bare only transiently a cationic charge, so it might be worthy to try it.

It still rings a bell that natural “alternative” to vitamin A, but maybe that was just a reference in the post, and not an intended INCI declaration that would go on the label.