Supper fatting for lather?

[boyago]

So I was reading a book and the author suggested supper fatting with castor to increase lather. I've just started playing with HP so having more control over the SF is newer to me. Anyway in the book she suggest supper fatting with castor to add lather. While I knew that saponified ricinoleic added to fluffy and stable lather does the non sapped oil also help? I was under the impression that SF mostly countered lather.

 

[xraygrl]

You are right that In order for castor to bring more bubbles that it has to go through the sap process. You can't always believe everything you read in a book (or on the internet :razz: ). Unfortunately, there are some soap making books out there that contain a lot of outdated information, or just plain misinformation.

 

[Lindy]

What xraygrl said

 

[Susie]

^What they said. Plus, you can't trust half the videos on YouTube, either. How to tell the difference? Just what you did, you came here to ask.

 

[DeeAnna]

Could the author have possibly been talking about water soluble castor (aka turkey red)?

 

[The Efficacious Gentleman]

......How to tell the difference? Just what you did, you came here to ask.

I love this!

 

[IrishLass]

Ditto what Xraygrl and Susie said.

IrishLass

 

[boyago]

Could the author have possibly been talking about water soluble castor (aka turkey red)?

I don't think so, also went back to make sure I hadn't miss-read it. Under the heading Some oils are excellent superfatters, such as:
"Castor Oil: Used for shampoos, transparent soaps, and for supperfatting cold- and hot-process opaque soap; the best superfatting agent for boosting lather."

This is from The Everything Soapmaking Book by Alicia Groso. It's one of my favorite soap books (well, top five anyway) so I kinda hope there is something to this. I think a Geraldo style expose is order.
Yet another reason that triple dipper crock pot should be in my life.

Hold the presses, she subscribes to the school of thought calling throwing in your "supper fats" before pouring. So I guess there's that.

 

[boyago]

You are right that In order for castor to bring more bubbles that it has to go through the sap process. You can't always believe everything you read in a book (or on the internet :razz: ). Unfortunately, there are some soap making books out there that contain a lot of outdated information, or just plain misinformation.

I like that poster:
"Don't believe everything you read on the internet."-Abe Lincoln

 

[DeeAnna]

Thanks for the feedback about the type of castor. So just plain ol' castor oil then.

I agree with the others. As the % of superfat goes up, the lather is going to go down. Castor is an unusual oil compared with other common soaping fats ... but it is still a fat.

 

[Moody Glenn]

Hello! Lye is an indiscriminate reacting agent; the NaOH molecule will react to any oil or fat molecule it comes near to (.... sounds like a soapmaker screen play script...) so adding extra amounts of target yummy oils will not totally succeed. In fact, super over-fatting tends to decrease fluffy lather. I learned that adding castor, PKO and coconut oils in any percentages will make lots of lather. The addition of sugar or honey will also bump-up the bubbles - but also heats up the batter so pay attention when molding.

 

[DWinMadison]

The whole concept of superfatting "with" a particular oil is controversial at best. You can clearly "superfat" which is basically using more fat than a given amount of lye can saponify, thereby leaving extra fat, as conditioner, in the finished soap. You can also increase the overall percentage of a particular fat in your recipe, and yes, castor is one of the few oils that creates bubbles. But, to my knowledge there is no way to superfat with a given oil or fat. Some people say if you wait to add it after your other oils have been added, that a larger percentage of those fats have already reacted with the lye leaving more of your superfat unsaponified, but personally I think it all goes in the proverbial pot and becomes the same soup. If be interested to know what others think. Of course, this is mostly an exercise of faith like saying "do you believe Jesus was the Savior?" I don't know that there is much science to back up the concept, but I'm all about faith as "the evidence of things not seen."

 

[DeeAnna]

"...Of course, this is mostly an exercise of faith..."

Actually, no faith is required. The fatty acids left after saponification can be measured if you choose your fats carefully and have the right lab equipment to do the testing. Kevin Dunn did just that in a series of experiments. He looked at three different soaps: (1) coconut oil with 10% olive, (2) palm with 10% castor, and (3) palm with 10% grapeseed. He chose these combinations, not because they made great soap but because he could differentiate between the fatty acids provided by one fat vs. the fatty acids from the other.

He made soap from each blend in two different ways -- (a) the fats were mixed together before adding lye and (b) the "superfat" was added at trace. If adding a fat at trace protects that fat from being saponified, then there should be more fatty acids from that fat in the finished soap than are in the starting blend of fats.

Looking at blend (2) for example: Palm, for example, has mostly palmitic and oleic fatty acids with a smidge of stearic. Castor has about 90% ricinoleic acid with a smidge of linoleic and oleic. So you can test the starting blend of fats for % ricinoleic acid content and test the finished soap for the % free ricinoleic acid content. If adding superfat at trace really does protect the castor superfat from being saponified, then there should be more ricinoleic acid in the finished soap made with method (b) than with method (a).

What he found was there was essentially no difference between the soaps made with method (a) and method (b) for all of the three fat blends.

 

[Soap Techniques]

The fatty acids left after saponification can be measured if you choose your fats carefully and have the right lab equipment to do the testing.

DeeAnna, do you know what the superfat in cold process soap consists of? Would it be mostly some whole triglycerides, or every oil gets broken into free fatty acids during the saponification process?

 

[DeeAnna]

I don't know the answer for sure. My guess is that the superfat is likely to be a mix of fats with some fatty acids.

 

[Soap Techniques]

Thank you!

 

[The Efficacious Gentleman]

Of course, adding a particular oil after the cook in hp is a different thing than trying to add a 'superfat' at trace in cp

 

[xraygrl]

Of course, adding a particular oil after the cook in hp is a different thing than trying to add a 'superfat' at trace in cp

Yes, adding a superfat oil/butter after the cook in HP is the only way that you can be sure that your soap is superfatted with that particular oil/butter. Still I take at least a 3% discount on the lye upfront to make sure that all of the lye is gone just for my own piece of mind. Then I add what ever oil/butter I want to add after the cook, which is usually shea butter or cocoa butter.

 

[boyago]

Of course, adding a particular oil after the cook in hp is a different thing than trying to add a 'superfat' at trace in cp

Yes, adding a superfat oil/butter after the cook in HP is the only way that you can be sure that your soap is superfatted with that particular oil/butter. Still I take at least a 3% discount on the lye upfront to make sure that all of the lye is gone just for my own piece of mind. Then I add what ever oil/butter I want to add after the cook, which is usually shea butter or cocoa butter.

This is where I'm curious. I'm not sure of the terminology but could the weird kid at the party (castor) be adding to the tensile strength of the bubble film?

The part of the book that comes from is in a create your own recipe section that is separate from the CP and HP sections. If she is talking about the trace CP SFing thing she is kind of right in that she is just adding castor to the party as that's what castor does, but I don't think that's what she meant or at least shouldn't be referring to it as SF. After further reading she does say in the CP part of the book that doing the trace SF "some soapers" believe you will save the properties of the expensive luxury oils by adding the oil at trace. I suppose this could be referring to non-sapafiables is the oils. I'm not qualified to say wither a more diluted lye solutions will or will not kill the secondary benefits of something like Shea. As always all of the collectives insights eagerly welcomed.
I first read this book when I was brand new and now that I know a little more there are other things I've found that I don't agree with. One that I found last night in the HP section was she suggests testing your cook with phenolphtalein by dropping it into the pot. Though it's just a drop in a big pot PhenolP is a skin and eye irritant and sensitizer it's carried in alcohol and I imagine huffing the fumes would be bad.

 

[Lindy]

Unfortunately Boyago the science doesn't support this assumption. Consider this, you are going to be just as badly burned by soap that hasn't reached trace as well as soap that has reached trace. The lye doesn't care what oils are in there, or when they were added as long as it remains active which it will until saponification is complete.