2010 TRI/PRINCETON CONFERENCE 227 Table XVI Shampoo Formulation: Two-in-One Shampoo (Coacervate) FH183D Description (Supplier) INCI Name Weight % A D.I. water Aqua 22.000 Carbopol Aqua SF-1 polymer (1%) Acrylates copolymer 2.500 TEA 99% Triethanolamine 0.200 Na2EDTA Disodium EDTA 0.100 Sodium laureth sulfate Sodium laureth-2 sulfate 27.500 Cocamidopropyl betaine Cocamidopropyl betaine 6.000 B D.I. water Aqua 18.000 Sodium laureth sulfate Sodium laureth-2 sulfate 5.500 Cocamidopropyl betaine Cocamidopropyl betaine 4.000 Ninol COMF Cocamide MEA 1.200 EGDS Ethylene glycol distearate 3.000 C Silplex J2-S (Siltech LLC) Silicone quaternium-20 2.000 Cosmosurf CE-100 (SurfaTech Corporation) Octyldodecyl citrate crosspolymer Wheat protein Wheat protein 0.500 Hemp seed oil Cannabis sativa (Hemp) Seed oil 1.000 Nipaguard DMDMH DMDM hydantoin 0.500 D Decyl glucoside Decyl glucoside 3.000 Amphosol 2C Disodium cocoamphodiacetate 3.000 Citric acid (40% aq) Citric acid q.s. Sodium chloride (if needed) Sodium chloride q.s. Crothix (Croda) (if needed) PEG-150 pentaerythrityl tetrastearate q.s. Fruity Herbal Fragrance q.s. Total 100.000 of test material was used and 100 ml of distilled water was added to dissolve the test material in a 250-ml beaker. After the test material was totally dissolved, the solution was transferred into the cylinder. An air pump was sited on the bottom of the cylinder to generate the bubbles. After recording the foam height within 20 seconds for each test material, each material was evaluated three times and their averages were docu- mented. The scale for foam height of 1000 ml is outstanding and 100 ml is very poor. The type of foam was also noted as tight or loose. Bubbles were generated by an elec- tronic air pump. Sample [Bubble for 20 sec] Initial reading [average, ml] Two minute reading [average, ml] Five minute reading [average, ml] FH183D 700 690 670 Foam was tight and uniform.

JOURNAL OF COSMETIC SCIENCE 228 WET COMB All products were evaluated on 10-inch virgin brown hair. Two x 2-gram swatches were used for each material tested, all from the same lot. All swatches were wet with 25°C water and one gram of test material was used for each swatch. Swatches were washed and then rinsed for at least one minute per swatch. Wet comb evaluation was then performed. No blow-drying of hair was done. All swatches airdried then the dry comb evaluation was performed once hair was completely dry. Scale used is 1 to 5, 5 being the best. Used for wet and dry combing. Sample/Evaluation Wet comb Rinse-off Clean feel (Scroop) Shine Residual feel Average Control water only 1.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 FH183D 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.0 3.0 3.9 DRY COMB Sample/ Evaluation Dry comb Dry feel Clean feel/ look Shine Fullness/ manageable Fly-away Residual feel Static Average Control water only 3.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.750 FH183D 4.4 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.4 4.2 3.5 4.0 4.125 SALT TOLERANCE, PH, VISCOSITY, EASE OF FORMULATION, AND EFFECT ON FORMULATION STABILITY The scale used is 1 to 5, 5 being the best, only for salt tolerance, ease of formulation, and effect on formulation stability. Viscosity was tested by using a Brookfi led, LVT, #4 spindle, 12 rpm. Formula/ Evaluation Salt tolerance pH Viscosity, cps Ease of formulation Effect on formulation stability Average FH183D 2.5 5.70 12,000 4.0 4.5 3.67 REFERENCES (1) R. G. Pearson, J Am Chem Soc., 85, 335 (1963). (2) E. Lucassen and D. Giles, J. Colloid Interface Sci., 81(1), 150–157 (1981). (3) A. J. O’Lenick, J. Surfact. Deterg. 3(2), 229 (2000). (4) G. Kume, M. Gallott, and G. Nunes, J. Surfact. Deterg., 11, 1–1 (2008).