Emulsified Sugar Scrub - where to start?

[Dahila]

I finished my Emulsified Sugar Scrub, scented with Be Delicious Blossom.............I do not want to brag about it,...............well I deserve to brag about it. I just want to show the real emulsified sugar scrub so , I took a pic of two of it

 

[shunt2011]

That looks lovely. Nicely done!

 

[Dahila]

Snappy posted that video, emulsified sugar scrub in not mixing wax and beeswax together with the spoon and just adding sugar, It needs some work to be properly emulsified

 

[snappyllama]

Those look lovely, Dahlia!

Sorry, I'm going to disagree with you though on definitions. The emulsified part of scrubs comes from adding an emulsifier into a scrub recipe such as an ewax. During use, the products will emulsify into a lotion-like consistency when the oils in the product come into contact with water. The ingredients themselves do the emulsifying while it's being used - no whipping required.

In an emulsified scrub, the product just needs to contain oils + an emulsifier. The oils and waxes can be whipped before adding scrubbies (sugar/salt/whatever), but that's personal preference. I like a less fluffy scrub since I'm used to a wet sand type consistency / get a weird thrill out of watching the the transformation of oils and water combining on my skin. I cannot see that as well with whipped scrubs. But that's just my own goofiness.

 

[sudsy_kiwi]

I've made plain ol' sugar/salt scrubs before, and even made some with an emulsifier added (more to help prevent slippery shower stall syndrome) but hadn't tried making an actual "emulsified scrub". This was something new for me to try

I've made a really nice Blood Orange emulsified sugar scrub, I'm happy with the way it feels and smells...but not so much with the appearance. It's got a layer about 5mm thick on top that is soft and more oily than the rest of it. I'm not 100% sure what caused the separation, and figured I'd ask here for pointers to cut down on the trial end error (and wasted ingredients lol). Did I pour while it was still too warm? Would more sugar have helped? (O suspect not, it's already pretty sugar-heavy and scratchy).


Sugar 274g
Sunflower Oil 67g
CO 23g
E-wax 15g
FO 14g
OO 12
Stearic 11g
Hempseed Oil 9g
Soy Wax 7g
Pres 3g

 

[Dahila]

Sudsie this is why I whip it, My kitchen aid does the job beautifully,
Snappy I made ones the sugar scrub without wiping, and I was not happy with it. My daughter is so critical that when she likes the product, it must be good. So far she likes the sugar scrub, Body Butters and soap withCoconut milk and oatmeal. I wish she would try more of it.

 

[BlackBoar]

I'm sorry to be a bother but I'm so confused right now.

I'm really frustrated trying to figure out what preservative to use. Liquid germall plus and optiphen plus seem to be not suited for anhydrous products. I'd like to use optiphen but it doesn't have mold and yeast activity and bacteria are the least likely to grow in a water sugar solution. So I'm left with phenonip as the main option and it has parabens.

I'm also trying to figure out why people are using the amount of e wax they are and I know it's a self emulsifier but I'm trying to find patterns in recipes that work. I found an HLB program for excel. http://www.makingskincare.com/hlb-calculator/

The pattern I've noticed seems to be hard oil % x 2= soft oil %, soft oil % x 3= water and soap together (in any proportion).

The amount of e wax people are using seems to be similar to the total amount of both primary and secondary emulsifiers in the HLB calculator by % of weight.

I read that fractionated coconut oil has an HLB of 11, then I read it was 5. There is a recipe in the forums that, when put into the HLB calculator, seems to be operating under the assumption that the HLB is 11.


What I don't understand is why e wax has an HLB of 14.9 when the target of most of these recipes is about 8-10 or why part of the e wax is something that could be used by itself in the oil phase (cetyl alcohol). Do you even have to increase the % of e wax NF when the HLB target is higher?

In the recipe I've been using the 24 percent total for soft oils could be split up between soft oil, water and liquid soap (like the BB recipe)

 

[DeeAnna]

This kind of product breaks the rules. What's perhaps confusing you is the scrub in the jar isn't emulsified at all. It's an anhydrous product so it can't be emulsified -- you need oil phase and water phase to create an emulsion. The emulsifier honestly serves no purpose when the scrub is in the jar. It is when you put the scrub on your skin and add water that causes the emulsifier to become useful and form an emulsion.

As far as the preservative goes, there are two ways to think about it. First is -- add an oil soluble preservative to protect the anhydrous product. Second is -- add a water soluble preservative so it will be able to migrate into any water-borne contamination from wet fingers and control any microbial growth there. I'm of the second school of thought.

E-wax is a complete emulsifier system, so HLB doesn't apply. If you're trying to use HLB for formulating this product, you are over complicating the problem like using calculus to solve an algebra problem. If you wanted to use just cetyl alcohol, for example, then sure you'd need to use HLB to find a suitable co-emulsifier, but you don't need to do that if using e-wax.

I determine the amount of emulsifier based on skin feel of a test sample. I want the emulsifier to leave a thin lotiony film of fats on my skin when the product is used with tepid to warm water. I absolutely don't want any visible traces of fat, but I don't want my skin to feel dry either. So my goal is to determine what % of emulsifier with a given blend of fats will provide that kind of skin feel. That's my criteria, plain 'n simple -- no HLB or math involved. In the recipe I currently am happy with, I went through about 7 trials to find the right emulsifier %. See http://www.soapmakingforum.com/showthread.php?t=58468 post 18.

 

[The Efficacious Gentleman]

It is actually an odd name for it - it is an emulsifying sugar scrub, only emulsified when used

 

[DeeAnna]

Yeah, you are right, Gent. I suppose it is technically accurate to say "emulsifying sugar scrub" because it has the future tense ability of being able to emulsify at the moment when water is added. But that misleads people into calling it an "emuslified sugar scrub" which has the past tense meaning that an emulsion has already been formed in the product. The English language is slippery.

 

[BlackBoar]

Yeah, you are right, Gent. I suppose it is technically accurate to say "emulsifying sugar scrub" because it has the future tense ability of being able to emulsify at the moment when water is added. But that misleads people into calling it an "emuslified sugar scrub" which has the past tense meaning that an emulsion has already been formed in the product. The English language is slippery.

I joined a facebook group and read through some conversations about this and they said the same as you about the water soluble preservative plus emulsifier. I assume the emulsifier pushes the preservative into the introduced water when it does actually emulsify.

I asked them what I'd ask here which is would there be value in adding an expected amount of water to the product and then doing a home microbial test/leaving it out to challenge test it with liquid germall plus?

 

[DeeAnna]

"...adding an expected amount of water to the product and then doing a home microbial test/leaving it out to challenge test it with liquid germall plus? ..."

Maybe we're saying the same thing, BlackBoar, but I'm not quite sure I'm following your words here ^^^ so I'll share my point of view --

If an anhydrous product can be used in a way to ensure no water or other contaminants will be introduced to the product during its lifetime, then a preservative is optional. If you cannot ensure that the user will strictly keep the product sanitary and anhydrous, then IMO a preservative is mandatory. Water + fats + no preservative => microbial growth.

 

[BlackBoar]

Maybe we're saying the same thing, BlackBoar, but I'm not quite sure I'm following your words here ^^^ so I'll share my point of view --.

What I'm saying is that you can buy home microbial tests to test that your preservative works and I can't see a reason to test the product while 100 percent dry after making as it is only a danger when water gets in by accident. If water isn't introduced, obviously the product would pass the microbial test (unless the test introduces water). I use my test scrubs in the shower. I'd think it'd be better to test after "typical use" ie, with a bit of water in it, to make sure the preservative works in a typical bathroom situation.

I'll have to research how the home tests work (do they test for already established colonies in your product or to they test the potential for growth? Do you test after making, or after typical use) It could be that the home microbial tests introduce water to the samples themselves.

edit: nvm the home tests are not challenge tests. I found a link that explains it but it's more for business level stuff.

 

[BlackDog]

Thanks everybody for helping me out! I made my first batch tonight. It's scented with BB Juicy Couture, something I got in a sample and liked but there wasn't enough to make a batch of CP soap. I was happy to have something to use it up with! Also added some pink mica because reasons

I can't wait to try it out; I'm looking forward to much exfoliation.