[ketchito]

@Leo Usually bar soaps from saponification of either tallow or vegetable oils, are the ones that are basic (alkaline). If you have a liquid soap, you could actually have it at a pH closer to the skin (roughly around 4.5-5.5). If you want to stay at that pH range, isothiazolinones are very effective, same as formaldehyde-releasers (like DMDM hydantoin, Diazolidinyl urea, etc.), but that is if you’re ok with that type of preservatives. 

I do believe your liquid Castille soap needs since you need quite some watter to haved in a liquid form. 

[ketchito]

@AndrewSeel No, I meant that PQ-10 performs a bit better than CGuar at depositing oils/silicones. There’s a very nice Dow Corning study about that (http://www.nononsensecosmethic.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/silicones-deposition-on-hairs.pdf).

[ketchito]

AndrewSeel said:

ketchito said:

@ngarayeva001 Hi! Regarding your questions:

1) I believe it’s there to increase the ionic strenght of the water phase, precisely so that oil droplets (like those from cyclomethicone) don’t get trapped in the water phase…you could actually either increase the sodium chloride or add/replace it by magnesium chloride

2) all of those preservatives are actually fairly soluble in water…the parabens you see at the end are all part of a blend (phenoxyethanol, methyparaben,…), although even water phase is what you aim to preserve, being a biphasic product, it would be advisable to ad some oil soluble preservative to the oil phase as well

3)  you could actually reduce your Butylene glycol from your starting formula, since being a solubilizer, it’s the only thing there that makes the two phases combine brifely when shaking them…don’t ad a surfactant, since you’ll create an emulsion instead

I have tried increasing salt but it make the water phase turbid!

Then, you can try reducing the Butylene glycol a little.

[ketchito]

@AndrewSeel That’s tricky. Generally speaking, Polyquaternium-10 might have higher deposition than Cationic guar, but it all depends on the charge density. Nowadays, you have Cationic guars of different charge densities (the higher the charge density, the more deposition). Also, Cationic guar is a bit easier to remove from hair than Polyquaternium-10. Keep in mind that they also help oils to deposit (like silicones), and on that, again PQ-10 performs a bit better than Cationic guar. One strategy to reduce chances of buil-up is to use both polymers instead of only one.  

[ketchito]

@ngarayeva001 Hi! Regarding your questions:

1) I believe it’s there to increase the ionic strenght of the water phase, precisely so that oil droplets (like those from cyclomethicone) don’t get trapped in the water phase…you could actually either increase the sodium chloride or add/replace it by magnesium chloride

2) all of those preservatives are actually fairly soluble in water…the parabens you see at the end are all part of a blend (phenoxyethanol, methyparaben,…), although even water phase is what you aim to preserve, being a biphasic product, it would be advisable to ad some oil soluble preservative to the oil phase as well

3)  you could actually reduce your Butylene glycol from your starting formula, since being a solubilizer, it’s the only thing there that makes the two phases combine brifely when shaking them…don’t ad a surfactant, since you’ll create an emulsion instead

[ketchito]

Even though I love soaps and cosider them rather complex systems (I’ve seen many phase diagrams during my soap making years, whose phases depend not only on formulation but also on shear during extrussion, for instance, making some glycerol migrate from one phase to another only because of mechanical stress), I also believe that permeation of molecules like glycerol from soap through the skin is very difficult. Deposition of oils is more likely to happen. 

Penetrating enhancers would help glycerol if conditions like contact time are met. Also, even though there are some aquaporins that help water soluble substances to go through the skin (there is actually one for glycerol), there are still so many barriers to overcome, like: 1) solvation (glycerol as being so hydrophilic is highly solvated by water molecules), 2) mechanical solvent flux (water will mechanically move solution while bathing), 3) little contact time (because of solvent flux, reducing contact time), 4) osmolarity (high excess solvent outside the skin would not favor skin permeation), 5) detergency (this is more for added oils in soaps, which mostly will be solubilized inside detergent micelles, although some could actually reach and remain on the skin). Things are different when glycerol is used in a cream, serum or gel, frem where it can migrate and permeate more favourably.

The residues that deposit from soap are some oils that escaped from detergent micelles, but mainly, calcium and magnesium salts of soap fatty acids (like calcium stearate), which actually give a soft touch to the skin (that’s why some soap manufacturers use mixtures of free fatty acids in their formulas). But, if you use this as a shampoo, these calcium salts plus natural sebum will leave hair heavy, greasy and dull, and this is why soap (made from tallow) was replaced by synthetic detergents in shampoos. 

And in the case of shampoos, the residues are not meant to be unpleasant; for instance, cationic polymers deliver a thin flexible and soft film on the skin. Silicones on the other hand, when not properly formulated (especially non functionalized silicones), can give great conditioning at the start but build up on hair, making it heavy and non “natural”, but not dull as calcium fatty acids, since silicones have a high refractive index.     

[ketchito]

@Aanchal Pure Formaldehyde is banned in cosmetics. Its presence in household items actually depends on each country’s sanitary office: if they use for instance EU’s Cosing database, they will not give you a license for a product that contains Formaldehyde.

In my country, we have two different offices, one for cosmetics (which uses Cosing database as reference) and the other for household products (that doesn’t use Cosing since they consider it’s for cosmetics only), being the latter still permisive with the use of Formaldehyde as preservative. Nevertheless, doses of Formaldehyde are very low, and you’d still need lab equipment and reagents to identify its presence (unless they declare it in the label), or you could find that information in the product’s MSDS (if they posted it).   

[ketchito]

@ngarayeva001 you’re right! I’m familiar with formulas up to 10% of LAA, but I believe I was outdated with that info, since I found some studies with higher doses. Good to know, thanks 

[ketchito]

@Abdullah Sarcosinates foam very well even in the presence of oil. Amine oxides work synergistically with anionics to fight sebum more thoroughly. 

[ketchito]

@ajw000 You actually have a very high content of surfactants in there. I’d start to check for the pH (you might need to reduce your Apple Cider Vinegar quite some)…try it to be above 5 (some anionics foame better at higher pH). You can include a chelator, since the isethionate can be impaired by water hardness. Also, you definitely need to reduce your Glycerin, since it depress foam at some point, and being a very water soluble molecule, it’d tend to go away with water rather than doing anything to your skin/hain in a rinse-off system. If you want even more foam, I’d replace a couple of glucosides, but I think you can improve foam without doing that.

[ketchito]

@Abdullah You can check a couple of very nice books: “Liquid detergents” and “Handbook of detergents part E: formulation”. There are some sites where you can download them for free like Genesis library.

You can also find papers like this one: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/7756634_Mixed_Solutions_of_Anionic_and_Zwitterionic_Surfactant_Betaine_Surface-Tension_Isotherms_Adsorption_and_Relaxation_Kinetics. Seach for the terms “synergy” and “mixed surfactants”. 

[ketchito]

@Abdullah I understand, but every formula has specific needs, and the ingredients you are listing as preservatives are actually preservative boosters rather than preservatives. Companies nowadays sell them as green or natural preservatives, but most of them lack of activity against specific strains. In very simple formulas, they might work more or less combined, but if you have extracts, proteins, starches, not only you’ll need higher amounts of some of them, they might fail to protect against certain microbes (not to mention that adding them in the wrong way to an emulsion, when you have solubilizers or emulsfiers, could get them out of your water phase, which is the one you want to focus on), so again, it depends on your formulation needs. 

[ketchito]

@Blue_Lavander A chelator not only traps unwanted metal ions, but it also improves the performance of preservatives, so yes, I’d recommend adding one. I believe your vitamins are way too high, especially the ascorbic acid. Propylene glycol is also definitely high, considering also that it’s not only an penetration enhancerm but also a known allergen beyond 4-5%. Polysorbate is also high, and I’d check first what is it that’s causing the loss of clarity (maybe even the very low pH could contribute, and actually, it’s lower than the skin pH which is roughly in between 4.5-5.5…reducing the amount of Tocopherol could also help). 

[ketchito]

@Mel55 I’d reduce the BTMS (6% could weight down hair since it’s very substantive and has long chain…go for something around 2-3%). Add some non ionic emulsifier (non-ionic are better than cationic emulsifiers, like ceteareth-20…try it between 0.2-0.5%, depending on the thickness you want for your product). Panthenol is a bit too high, and it’d probably go away through rinsing, so you can also reduce it. You could also use cetearyl alcohol instead of cetyl alcohol, to get more thickness (again, depending on the amount you want for your conditioner).  

[ketchito]

@Aanchal Formaldehyde is no longer used in cosmetics as a preservative and you only have ingredients that release formaldehyde as a by-product (like some preservatives).

The thing is that the amounts of formaldehyde being released are very small, so small that they can only be detected with lab equipment and specific reagents and techniques.  

[ketchito]

@filiz I believe your betaine is still too low (keep in mind that it’s usually 30% active)…bring it close to 4%, and you might also have to increase the NaCl, but do that after you checked if the betaine increased worked. Also, pH should preferably be over 6, both for better interaction between betaine and SLES and to prevent turbidity (betaine behaves as a cationic at low pH). 

[ketchito]

@Abdullah I believe there should be no problem with that preservative system. As a side note, check for the efficacy to see if there might be lack of activity against some specific microbial organism, and that the pH is adecuate for it to function properly.

[ketchito]

@mhart123 I’ve seen emulsions where Menthol is added in the oil phase, so it’s always nice to try. Maybe you could add it as the last ingredient of the oil phase, so it doesn’t stay “hot” for too long. 

[ketchito]

@chemicalmatt you’re absolutely right, and I remember some papers pointing out that Aloe vera and some emollients might actually reduce the antimicrobial potency of alcohols…there’s even an FDA warning, I believe. 

[ketchito]

@1501 Maybe that level of sodium cocoamphoacetate might not be enough to keep some of your “oils” soluble. Can you try increasing it, replacing it by Laureth-7 or 9, or adding a solubilizer?

[ketchito]

@zacchaeus In your formula, I don’t see anything to solubilize your Allantoin. Glycerin might help you incorporate it into the mixture, but to keep it solubilized, you might need something. You can try with PEG-40 hydrogenated castor oil, some polysorbate, or something of the kind. 

[ketchito]

@Abdullah As a general rule, yes…but it depends on many things like the lenght of the alkyl tail (it it’s too long, hydrophobicity will push the molecule “down”, making it interact more with the tail), size of the polar group (that could also alter packing of the micelles), pH (which can actually be detrimental if pH is too low, forcing the amphoteric to behave as a cationic). 

A good ratio for a mixture of SLES/CAPB would be 3:1 or 4:1. But be careful especially if you’re using salt in your system, because it can turn to gel very easily depending on the amounts of surfactants you’re using.

[ketchito]

@Abdullah That would actually depend on your system. But as a starting point, I remember the best interaction (synergy) of SLES/CAPB is around 3:1, and of CAPB/DEA around 2:1. I actually found a brochure for Amidet N (which is very similar to Cocamide DEA) where the best foaming effect is achieved at SLES/CAPB/DEA 3:1:0.5 (https://www.kaochemicals-eu.com/sites/default/files/dz/amidetr_n__in-cosmetics12.pdf). 

[ketchito]

amitvedakar said:

Thank you @Perry , @ngarayeva001 .

I got sample blend of  amodimethicone and Cetrimonium chloride and Trideceth-12. going to try.

@@amitvedakar be careful when adding amodimethicone/cetrimonium chloride to a formula that has LESS since depending on the dose, cetrimonium chloride could interact with LESS forming a precipitate. You can insteade DC 8500 which is a polyether amodimethicone which is designed for anionic clear surfactant systems.

[ketchito]

@Abdullah Cocamide MEA and MIPA have very low risk of nitrosamine formation compared to DEA. If you’re worried about it’s possible formation, avoid preservatives as Bronopol or Bronidox which under certain conditions can act as Nitrosating agents that convert free diethanolamines (present in DEA derivatives) into nitrosamines. Formaldehyde can also catalyze the reaction. You can use some substances in your formula to also prevent is formation such as Ascorbic acid (other organic acids are weaker at preventing nitrosamine formation). This last technique is used in bakery and it’s recommended by COLIPA. So, generally speaking, you need all the “wrong” ingredients so it happens, and that’s why Cocamide DEA is still approved in cosmetics, as long as there are no nitrosating agents.