61 Oleo-Furan Sulfonates
Fabric wetting kinetic tests of the surfactants was tested according to ASTM D2281-10.
The tests took place inside a 500 mL graduated cylinder using a solution with a surfactant
concentration of 0.25 wt%. Testing did not begin until all the bubbles below the surface
had risen to the top. A skein was twisted into a figure eight and the top and bottom where
hooked. The top of the skein loop was cut with scissors and the skein was drawn through
the fingers in order to be compacted. Time measurements began when the skein and anchor
were released into the solution. Once the skein lost buoyancy and sank, the time was
stopped.
Hard water tolerance of surfactants was determined by preparing a 0.5 wt% solution of
each surfactant and titrating with a calcium chloride solution. If a precipitate formed after
titrant was added, the surfactant solution was allowed to mix for a minute to determine if
the solid re-dissolved. The calcium chloride concentration at which a persisting precipitate
formed was indicated as the hard water tolerance of the test surfactant.
Zein testing of surfactants to approximate dermal irritation were performed by adding 1 g
of Zein to 50 mL of a 0.5 wt% surfactant solution with a magnetic stir bar and stirring the
mixture at ambient temperature for 1 hour at 300 rpm. After this time, the insoluble Zein
remaining was filtered and dried overnight in a vacuum oven at 40°C. The mass of dried
insoluble Zein was used to calculate the percent Zein remaining compared to the starting
amount.
FORMULATION PROPERTY TESTING AND PERFORMANCE REVIEW
Formulation Preparation. To assure minimal water content, OFS surfactant, salt, and all
cosurfactants purchased and used as powders were dried in a vacuum over at 40°C for
24 hours prior to use. Liquid formulations featuring OFS were prepared according to the
following procedure.
The OFS surfactant, selected cosurfactant or emollient, and salt were combined in the desired
ratio, then added to water to achieve the target total surfactant loading. These ingredients
were agitated using a Vortex Genie-2T mixer to dissolve and provide a clear solution. If
needed, applying heating in the range of 30-40°C was found to hasten dissolving for higher
surfactant volumes. Next, ingredients to improve texture and skin conditioning properties
were added to the solution, such as aloe vera and hydroxypropyl starch. A hazy appearance
was noted with addition of some additives and emollients such as hydroxypropyl starch
for ingredient combinations deemed compatible in this report, this was observed to be a
stable suspension, and did not result in phase separation or formation of an inhomogeneous
precipitate. Preservatives, typically comprised of potassium sorbate and sodium benzoate,
were then added, with heating in the range of 30°C–40°C for up to 30 minutes as needed
to dissolve. The resulting solution was adjusted to the target pH between 4 and 6 with
addition of citric acid depending on the intended product format formulations intended for
use as body wash were adjusted to pH 4.5. Solid format (powder) formulations were prepared
using the same order of addition as was followed for the liquid format formulations, with the
omission of water in the preparation process. The combined solid ingredients were blended
together in a food processor and either hydrated directly for product testing or loaded into a
sachet, which was subsequently heat sealed to minimize moisture accumulation.
Viscosity measurements of formulations featuring OFS surfactants were measured with
a Brookfield Ametek rotational viscometer (DVEELVTJ0) equipped with a LV-1 spindle
62 JOURNAL OF COSMETIC SCIENCE
at ambient temperature with a rotation rate of 30 rpm and applied torque in the range of
34.9 and 98.9%.
Product performance reviews of solid format body wash formulations featuring OFS
were collected by mailing powder formulation samples to a pre-screened user group,
focusing on users who already used standard body wash gel on a regular basis. Sample size
kits were mailed to users and contained a reusable bottle, one sachet of body wash powder,
instructions for use, and a QR code for providing feedback via an online survey. Questions
focused on rating the product viscosity, the creamy texture of the product, the level of
foam/lather generated during use, their rating of the fragrance, and the skin feel after
rinsing. Across all metrics, users were asked to compare the sample with their favorite body
wash gel product on a scale from 1–5. In addition, users were asked to select adjectives to
describe their experience preparing the hydrated body wash gel, their experience washing
with the product, the visual quality of the product, and the overall user experience. A total
of 14 survey respondents were considered in the OFS body wash product reviews.
CARBON EMISSION REDUCTION ESTIMATES
To determine the approximate reduction in carbon emissions for OFS surfactant
manufacturing compared to the start-of-the-art, Sironix contracted an environmental
sustainability consultant to provide a screening life cycle analysis for the OFS production
process, with direct comparison to the current commercial sodium lauryl ether sulfate
manufacturing process. For this study, the objective was to determine climate impact and
identify environmental hotspots for OFS in comparison to SLES system boundaries were
cradle-to-gate with impact categories including climate change [kg CO2 eq.], acidification
potential [mol H+ eq.], eutrophication freshwater [kg P eq], non-renewable energy resource
depletion [MJ], land use [points], and blue water consumption [kg]. LCA FE/GaBi software
was used. Secondary data from standard LCI databases Sphera Managed LCA content and
ecoinvent 3.8 Data gaps are closed with proxies. Geographic constraints were for surfactant
production in the US, though European or Global datasets were used in some cases when
US specific datasets were unavailable.
FORMULATION COMPATIBILITY AND BENEFITS OF OFS SURFACTANTS
Consumers interact with personal care products most frequently and closely, with shampoo,
body wash, and facial cleanser as prime examples. Anionic surfactants serve a central role in
formulating these products. They provide the foam consumers enjoy during application, a
balance of cleaning power to remove soils and a positive sensory experience for the consumer.
Formulators have relied on SLS for personal care products to achieve an optimal balance of
these properties using fully bio-renewable anionic surfactants.19Asmentioned,thissurfactant
has poor performance in hard and cold water, and as a dermal irritant, use in applications
involving direct skin contact can be challenging for product formulators.20,21 Ether sulfate
surfactants, such as SLES, have long served as a reasonable substitution, providing high
performance and less irritation in personal care.22 Should the implementation of more
stringent regulations continue to decrease the allowable dioxane content in consumer
products, the combination of increasing production costs and regulatory restrictions may
curtail use of SLES by personal care product formulators.
Previous Page Next Page