Is this partial gel?
- Thread starter Georgeandstella
- Start date
Help Support Soapmaking Forum:
JuLeeRenee
Well-Known Member
It is not partial gel. Looks like something I had happen to me when I used the default water content that soapcalc has before I knew that that number is for hot process. In my case it was soda ash. I cut it before it should have been cut for the water content that I used so it literally went throughout the whole bar of soap.
It looks like the soap has gelled, but you have some stearic swirls or spots in your soap (or a combination of that and glycerin rivers). Did you use TD? Was your recipe high in stearic fatty acids? It will be fine to use. Here's a soap of mine with glycerin revers to compare:
Last edited:
Hello, thank you for sharing the picture, it looks just like this. I didn’t use TD, here is my recipe, any comments are welcome
Hi,Hello, thank you for sharing the picture, it looks just like this. I didn’t use TD, here is my recipe, any comments are welcome
Aargh, I have some more on these-I’ve done some research, perhaps I didn’t mix the fragrances in enough? I’m always afraid of fast trace so I hurry stirring in the fragrances at the last minute. Or I need a water discount ? Thank you!!
Attachments
I agree, looks like a combination of stearic spots, and also some air holes from cutting with a wire. The holes can be planed off, and the stearic spots don't affect the soap quality. Honestly, those soaps look terrific to me - love the colors and swirls!
Hi, is there a way I can avoid these? Maybe I cut too soon? Or water discount? I’m so anxious to see the inside that I usually cut within 24 Hrs
Thank you. I cut with a knife, but probably too early (within 24 hrs). I was having problems with the master batch tracing too soon for swirls so I added Rapeseed oil (reformulated using the lye calculator) to move the soft to hard oil %. This moved the longevity low. I’m thinking of adding a chelator (edta).
How fast an oil traces doesn't depend on whether it is hard or soft. Lard is considered a hard oil and is the slowest tracing of all oils except plain OO. Tallow is a hard oil; while it traces faster than lard, it isn't fast at all compared to pomace OO - which is a soft oil that traces super fast. Castor (a soft oil) definitely speeds up trace, whereas I find palm (a hard oil for sure) to be more middle of the road.
ETA: I think sometimes the confusion in that area arises because the hard oils, except for CO, have higher melting temps. If you soap at those higher temps, without letting the oils cool down, that extra heat is the cause of the faster trace - not the hardness or softness of the oil.
Thank you!! There is sooo much to learn and understandHow fast an oil traces is not related to whether it is hard or soft. Lard is considered a hard oil and is the slowest tracing except for plain OO. Tallow is a hard oil; while it traces faster than lard, it isn't fast at all compared to pomace OO - which is a soft oil that traces super fast.
this is a fascinating hobby!
I usually cut my soap within 8 - 10 hours, and never once have it cut it at 24 hours. Not sure that this would make any difference to your issue. It's more likely to be recipe/temperature dependent. I'm not an expert - but I would inclined to say that you might want to try soaping a little warmer (if you are currently soaping at room temp). The times when I have got stearic swirls is when I tried to soap too cool for my particular recipe. Your recipe is very different to mine though - so you may have to do a bit of trial and error.
Hi, I have just started experimenting with master batching lye and oils so I am now soaping at room temperature (please let me know if others master batch warmer, and how) I never had these issues when I soaped at 90-100’.
You are so helpful, I really appreciate this, thank you
Aha! So there is your answer. It is temperature dependent. However, I always gel my soap and that's when i get glycerin rivers so it could be damned if you do/damned if you don't....
Soap do what soap do!
Last edited:
I benefited from advice here that advised me to heat my oils to at least 150F. As long as I hit that temp for heating, I can cool them down to below 90 and still not get stearic spots. ETA: I also gel my soaps on a heating pad, which does help.
Looking at your photos, I'd say it's an unusual case of "glycerin rivers" where the soap cools down slowly enough so soap bits that are more opaque migrate together to form bigger opaque clumps. The congregation of opaque soap leaves areas of more translucent soap behind.
"Rivers" often look more like the example @KiwiMoose shared earlier in this thread, especially if there is a pigmented color in the soap (titanium dioxide is often the culprit). But other patterns of mottling can happen and you don't absolutely have to use a colorant like TD to see these "rivers" or mottling.
It might be that the solid confetti bits interfered with the usual "river" pattern, so you got fluffy "clouds" instead.
"Rivers" often look more like the example @KiwiMoose shared earlier in this thread, especially if there is a pigmented color in the soap (titanium dioxide is often the culprit). But other patterns of mottling can happen and you don't absolutely have to use a colorant like TD to see these "rivers" or mottling.
It might be that the solid confetti bits interfered with the usual "river" pattern, so you got fluffy "clouds" instead.
I have struggled with “internal ash.” I get this white look throughout the inside of my soap - i was advised that it might be from pouring too soon and or too cool when I was at a thin emulsion. I am learning that if I force gel with a heating pad in a cooler overnight it gets past this ugly stage. I don’t know if it’s the same as your issue or not - just throwing this in for discussion purposes.
Thank you!!
Thank you!
Oooh there’s that pretty octopus!! Thank you for your advice, I’ve been probably pouring too early at a cool emulsion, as I’m struggling to figure out the right formula and process for a liquid pour for swirls. I think I’ll stop master batching for a bit and go back to the basics…
