# reheat soap paste?



## Claudsoap (Sep 1, 2017)

Hello!
I stayed up late the other night to make a batch of soap.  It was 2am when it was time to test for clarity and clear it was not.  It needed another 30mins or so.  I was so tired that I decided to pack it in.  I put it away in a glass container.  

Can I reheat it in the crock pot and keep cooking it?  
Anyone done this before?

Cheers!


----------



## BattleGnome (Sep 2, 2017)

Arguably, yes. 

Personally, I'd say test it first. I make CP liquid soap using IrishLass's method. It's pretty much: bring everything to trace then walk away. You might find that the soap did its thing without you and you can save yourself some time.


----------



## Susie (Sep 2, 2017)

You can, but why?  Once you get that mixture to full emulsification, it will process itself the rest of the way.  No need to cook at all.  You may want to post your recipe up here for us to help you troubleshoot, because lack of clarity is more about oil choices than cooking.


----------



## Claudsoap (Sep 2, 2017)

I haven't tried IrishLass's (glycerin) method yet.  Im still true to the traditional way.  It works for me right now.

When it comes to testing it, if its cloudy then I end up with a white sludgy film floating on top.  I always wait for the test to come clear then I feel confident my batch will become crystal clear.  

I ended up reheating anyway.  I tested it before I did and it was cloudy. After some time I got the test clear.  I was pretty happy!


----------



## cmzaha (Sep 2, 2017)

I would not say anyway is "The Traditional Way", it sounds like you are using Failor's method and there have been definite improvements over her way. She was considered the pioneer of LS from some postings I have read, but like everything soapmaking methods have evolved. When I make LS I either use IL's glycerin or cp paste method. The key as with bar cp is saponification and the oils you use. I first started with LS using the mix it to trace, cover and let it alone per instructions in the book https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00AR19K0I/?tag=skimlinks_replacement-20. But to your question I am sure you can reheat it, but I doubt the results are going to be any different.


----------



## Claudsoap (Sep 2, 2017)

Thank you!  Ive never read this book before, Ill check it out.  I have Failors book and Jackie Thompsons. 

Failor's method is the way I was taught in a local class so it's all Ive done.  It works for me.  However, maybe I should broaden my horizons if its going to save me time. :0)  Its always scary trying to a new method cause I dont want to waste my money on ingredients if it doesn't work.


----------



## Susie (Sep 3, 2017)

It will save you time, electricity, angst, and not a few headaches.  And it works.  I have yet to find a recipe it does not work on.


----------



## Claudsoap (Sep 3, 2017)

Hi Susie,

I had a quick look over your CP LS method you posted.  So are you saying  I just need to prep oils and lye/water stick blend until thick glue paste and test ( I use pheno)?  As long as it tests okay Im good to dilute?  No heating oils to 160c?  No heating crockpot and stiring every 30mins for 4 hours??  And if I want a crystal clear soap let it sit longer in a "off" crock pot?  

This sounds like magic! LOL


----------



## IrishLass (Sep 3, 2017)

I'm not Susie, but she uses the 'zap test' to test her paste (as do I and many others on the forum). Another word for the 'zap test' is the *'tongue test'*. The paste is ready to be diluted when it tests out tongue-neutral for zap...... 

By the way- heating and/or stirring for hours is _*not*_ necessary to bring the batter to the paste stage. 


The following info I'm going to share might be a little more than you asked for, but I just thought I'd let you know (because you mentioned phenolphthalein _and_ because it _will_ come up eventually  ) that using the zap or tongue test is a much more reliable way of detecting the presence of excess alkali in your paste rather than using phenolphthalein, which only detects the range of pH (the presence or non-presence of excess alkali is the actual thing you need to know before moving on to dilution, not the pH). 

As stated above, phenolphthalein will detect the pH range of a substance (as long as it is first dissolved in a proper 1% solution first), but it will not tell you whether or not there is excess alkali in your paste. Many folks understandably, but mistakenly, lump the two together as being the same thing, but they are actually unrelated to each other. Here are 3 very recent posts that help to explain and clear up the difference between the two:

http://www.soapmakingforum.com/showpost.php?p=660554&postcount=15 ; 

http://www.soapmakingforum.com/showpost.php?p=660579&postcount=16 ; 

http://www.soapmakingforum.com/showpost.php?p=660669&postcount=17 

I know that there are several soapmaking videos out there that show folks testing the readiness of their paste by dropping a few drops of phenolphthalein directly onto it, but besides that fact that phenolphthalein will not tell you if there is excess alkali in the paste (the actual thing that you really need to know), dropping it directly on soap paste is an incorrect way to use phenolphthalein- one must first make a proper 1% solution out of the soap paste in order for the drops of phenolphthalein to be able to work properly/give reliable pH results. 

Here's something else about phenolphthalein to keep in mind, especially when it comes to soap: its color range for 0 to 8.2 pH is clear; for 8.2 to 12 pH is various shades of pink; for greater than 12 pH it goes clear again. Most soapmakers that I've seen on Youtube using phenolphthalein (whether in an improper or proper manner) to test their soap state that as long as it comes out clear, the pH is on the low end and all is well. Seeing as how phenolphthalein also goes clear above pH 12, I don't know that I would trust the absence of color as being an absolute guarantee that the pH is for sure hovering around 8. 

For what it's worth, the pH of a properly-made, well cured soap (i.e. free from the presence of excess alkali) can range anywhere from a pH of 8 to as high as 12.4 and still be perfectly safe and non-irritating to use (see the info in those links I gave above), so if I were actually going to rely on pH as being an indicator of anything supposedly good about my soap (which I never do, btw), I actually would most likely rely more on the various shades of pink instead of the absence of color. 


IrishLass


----------



## Zany_in_CO (Sep 4, 2017)

Claudsoap said:


> Im still true to the traditional way.  It works for me right now.


Me too. However, it's fun to at least try GLS (sub glycerin for all or part of the water to make the lye solution.) Once the lye is added to the oils and you start stick blending, it goes through all the phases of becoming soap in 2 minutes or less!!! Right before your eyes. Here's a link to Carrie's video tutorial. ETA: There are a few cautions to be aware of before attempting this method. So you might want to start a new thread when you're ready to do it.:
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6brP--yQpU[/ame]


Claudsoap said:


> When it comes to testing it, if its cloudy then I end up with a white  sludgy film floating on top.  I always wait for the test to come clear  then I feel confident my batch will become crystal clear


That's correct. That's why I feel testing to making sure there is no excess lye is critical. If you rush it, you end up with that white sludgy film on top. It's the same with the pheno test for me. I stick a knife into the batch, pull it out, then put a drop of pheno on the blade. If it's clear, I'm good to go. Just like you, I also feel confident that my batch will be crystal clear after dilution. NOTE: When I test with pheno right after making glycerin LS it's always bright fuschia. I wait an hour, just like Carrie shows in the video, to test it again and it's clear. I'm always amazed when that happens. LOL


Claudsoap said:


> I ended up reheating anyway.  I tested it before I did and it was  cloudy. After some time I got the test clear.  I was pretty  happy!


Good for you. I know experienced LS'ers who reheat in the crockpot -- turning it off after reheating and letting it set overnight. Repeating the process  for 2-3 days, until it finally tests clear.


----------



## Susie (Sep 4, 2017)

Claudsoap said:


> Hi Susie,
> 
> I had a quick look over your CP LS method you posted.  So are you saying  I just need to prep oils and lye/water stick blend until thick glue paste and test ( I use pheno)?  As long as it tests okay Im good to dilute?  No heating oils to 160c?  No heating crockpot and stiring every 30mins for 4 hours??  And if I want a crystal clear soap let it sit longer in a "off" crock pot?
> 
> This sounds like magic! LOL



I use IrishLass' method in post #8 of this:  http://www.soapmakingforum.com/showthread.php?t=46114 now.  But I get it to full emulsification (when the oils no longer float to top, and you see no streaks in the mix), or paste if I am impatient, then put the lid on and walk away.  No heating, no cooking, no stirring after that.  I usually go check for gel in half an hour or so, and normally find it.  Zap test, then if zapless, start dilution.  I can have a batch completely done from start to finish in about 2 hours.  And considering that I clean up everything I can while waiting for gel, clean up consists of rinsing the soapy pot, spoon, and stick blender.

It is better to use a 3:1 ratio of water/glycerin to KOH for this process.  I think it helps give you a more workable paste.

It is not magic, it is soapy physics.  We'll have to wait for the more sciency types for explanation.  But once I learned that you did not have to cook and stir for hours, I will never go back.


----------



## Claudsoap (Sep 4, 2017)

What if I don't want to use glycerin? Does it work the same?


----------



## Zany_in_CO (Sep 4, 2017)

Claudsoap said:


> I had a quick look over your CP LS method you  posted.  So are you saying  I just need to prep oils and lye/water stick  blend until thick glue paste and test ( I use pheno)?  As long as it  tests okay Im good to dilute?  No heating oils to 160c?  No heating  crockpot and stiring every 30mins for 4 hours??  And if I want a crystal  clear soap let it sit longer in a "off" crock pot?  This sounds like  magic! LOL


First of all, there are as many ways to make LS as there are LS-ers! LOL The advantage of cold process LS is that it takes all of 1/2 hour,  including clean up. Then you just wait for the soap to "do its thing". 

In your situation where you are experienced in the Failor method, for cold process, you simply bring your batch to trace in your crockpot and stop there. Keeping the oils warm @ 160°F (70°C) while SB-ing (on and off) helps the batch to reach trace quicker. Cover the pot and let it sit until it tests clear. This may take 1-2 weeks, which is fine for some (patient) folks, but you also have the option of re-heating once a day, (just as you did earlier in this thread) and letting it sit over night and repeating that process until it tests clear.  This way should be ready to dilute in 1-3 days. 


Claudsoap said:


> What if I don't want to use glycerin? Does it work the same?


No, water won't work the same. Subbing glycerin for the water in your KOH solution is the key to lightning fast processing. When heated, the glycerin KOH solution gets VERY hot -- 200°F (93°C)++ The second time I made glycerin LS, I took the temp of the KOH -- it was 210°F and rising when I added it to the warmed oils (160°F).

If you decide to try Carrie's GLS (or Susie's or Irish's) process, be sure to use a stick blender with a stainless steel shaft... plastic melts! Don't ask me how I know. LOL

More importantly, be sure to keep an eye on the glycerin. When you see "a waft of heat" rising from the pan, remove it from the heat so it doesn't scorch. (First timers often complain about their lye solution turning yellow. ACK!)

But the second answer to your question is that you can use some water and some glycerin and still get the same result.  Since Carrie's glycerin LS made the rounds to various groups and forums, many of us figured out that we could dissolve the KOH in a portion of the water required to make the lye, and use glycerin for the rest of the amount of liquid needed. 

For example, I recently made LS by dissolving the KOH in water for half of the liquid; then added hot glycerin for the rest of the liquid amount required. (Susie, Irish, and others use varying ratios.) Instead of taking 2 minutes to make the paste, it took 5 minutes! LOL I always get a big kick out of that!  "Magic" indeed!  Once again, it tested clear with a drop of pheno about an hour or so after processing. 

One more thing I'd like to add FWIW. I think GLS works exceptionally well for all liquid oils, i.e., 100% OO, Almond, Flaxseed, etc.  and 80-85% liquid oils + 15-20% coconut. My best recipes contain at least 50% coconut or PKO, and I don't use the glycerin method for those, mainly because glycerin LS isn't as crystal clear as LS made without it, and, my LS recipes with saturated fats come to trace in 12 minutes or so and are ready to dilute the next morning, after oven-processing overnight.
HTH   :bunny:​


----------



## Claudsoap (Sep 4, 2017)

Ahhh, thank you for clearing that up. I felt like I wasn't getting difinitave answer.

The Failing method works great for me now but I'll definitely try this glycerin method in the near future.

This forum has been full of fabulous info, thank u to everyone!


----------



## DeeAnna (Sep 4, 2017)

Claudsoap said:


> What if I don't want to use glycerin? Does it work the same?



Yes, despite what Zany says, it works the same.

A water-only batch will tend to saponify somewhat slower, but you can still use the same method as described by Irish Lass and just understand it will take somewhat longer. But you can use the same general method as she does.

If you want to jump start the saponification of a water-only batch, make sure your soap batter is around 170 to 180 degrees F (75-80 C) to start. Otherwise follow the method described by Irish Lass -- no additional heat is required.


----------



## Susie (Sep 4, 2017)

^^What DeeAnna said!


----------



## Zany_in_CO (Sep 4, 2017)

Claudsoap said:


> Ahhh, thank you for clearing that up. I felt like I wasn't getting difinitave answer.


You're very welcome, Claudsoap. Happy I could help.  

Keep up the good work!​


----------

