Note: Descriptions are shown in the official language in which they were submitted.
- 1 - C3424
TOI~ SOAP BARS
The present invention relates to toilet soap bars,
particularly to mild toilet soap bars comprising blends of
soap with one or more coactives.
For very many years soap bars have been manufactured from
fats by conversion of triglyceride components of fats into
fatty acids and the formation of these 'soaps' into bars.
Traditionally, the most important fats used in soap
manufacture have been tallow (a palmatic/stearic fat
rendered from animal carcasses) and coconut oil (a lauric
fat). For the purposes of this specification the words
~oill and 'fat' are considered interchangeable except
where the context demands otherwise. The use of other
palmitic/stearic fats such as palm oil and alternative
lauric fats such as palm kernel, babassu or macauba oil is
known.
In general the longer chain fatty acid soaps, particularly
the less expensive C16 and C18 soaps (as obtained from
talIow and palm oil) provide structure in the finished
- , ,; .,
,
'
. .
2~3~
- 2 - C3424
soap bars and prevent or retard disintegration of the soap
bar on exposure to water. The more expensive, shorter
chain, lauric fat-derived, ie. lauric acid and other
soluble soaps (as o~tained from coconut and palm kernel
oil~ contribute the lathering properties of the overall
composition. A general problem in the formulation of bar
soaps has been that of finding a balance between providing
structure (as obtained from the cheaper component) and
maintaining lathering properties (as obtained from the
more costly component) at a practical overall cost.
The fatty acid chain length distribution of a range of
soap components is given below:
Chain length ~allow Palm Coco~ut Palm
Rernel
0.1 0.0 15.1 6.4
12 (lauric) 0.1 0.3 48.0 46.7
1~ 2.8 1.3 17.5 16.2
16 (palmitic) 24.9 47.0 9.0 8.6
18 (stearic) 20.4 4.5 9.0 8.6
1.8 0.3 0.0 0.4
18:1 ~oleic) 43.6 36.1 5.7 16.1
18:2 4.7 9.9 2.6 2.g
18:3 1.4 0.2 0.0 0.0
Poly unsat 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0
~ 3 ~ 2~ C3424
From the table it can be seen that the coconut and palm
kernel fats (together known as the lauric fats) are
particularly rich in the C10-C14 saturated fatty acids,
particularly fatty acid residues derived from lauric acid
itself. For convenience these fats containing saturated,
relatively short chain fatty acids will be referred to
hereinafter as the lauric fats. This definition includes
the palm kernel, babassu or macauba oils as mentioned
above. In contrast, tallow and palm oil per se are an
industrial source of non-lauric fats, especially those
containing C16 and C18 fatty acid residues: both saturated
and unsaturated residues being present in almost equal
quantities. The C16 and C18 fatty acids, together with
the longer chain fatty acid are referred to herein as non-
lauric fats.
A standard measure of the degree of saturation of a fattyacid residue, or more usually of a blend of fats or fatty
acids, is the so-called iodine value. The iodine value of
a fatty acid residue is determined by the ability of the
residue to bind iodine expressed in Mole%. Iodine binds
to unsaturated fatty acids in proportion to the extent of
the unsaturation and does not bind to saturated fats.
Consequently, saturated fats have low iodine values, mono
unsaturated fats bind around 100 Mole % iodine and have
iodine values ('IV') of around 100. In contrast di-
unsaturated fats bind around 200 Mole % and have iodine
values approaching 200. The 63rd Edition of the CRC
Handbook (CRC Press) gives the iodine value of beef tallow
as 49.5, and for coconut oil gives an iodine value of
10.4.
In typical commercial formulations, soap bars contain from
90-50~ fatt~ acid soaps obtained from tallow (ie. non-
lauric fats) and 10-50% of fatty acid soaps obtained from
3?..~
- 4 - ~3424
coconut (ie. lauric fats). In particular, in countries
where tallow is acceptable to consumers, most commercial
soap formulations comprise 80% tallow and 20% coconut oil.
In countries where tallow is unacceptable other oils and
fats, such as palm oil, replace tallow.
The conventional 'toilet-bar' soap making process is well
documented in the literature. In outline the process is
as follows. In conventional 'wet' soap making, fats, ie.
tallow and coconut oil blends, are saponified in the
presence of an alkali (typically NaOH) to yield fatty
acids as alkaline soaps and glycerol. The glycerol is
extracted with brine to give a dilute fatty acid soap
solution containing around 70% soap and 30% aqueous phase.
This soap solution is dried, typically by heating in heat
exchangers to circa 130~C and drying under vacuum, to a
water content of around 12%, and finished by milling,
plodding and stamping into bars.
A principal drawback of compositions containing fatty acid
soap is harshness, a property which is determined by a
number of tests as will be elaborated upon hereafter.
Known solutions to the problem of harshness include
reduction of the level of soap present and replacement of
the balance of the composition by so-called co-actives. A
recognised problem engendered by the presence of co-
actives is a loss of product structure in the resulting
soap bars.
In order to overcome the problem of loss of structure soap
bars which comprise co-actives have been manufactured by a
process which increase the cost of the eventual products.
Several such processes are knowm.
. .
:, . ; .
~.
.
. :
~r~
~ 5 ~ C3424
GB 2182343-A (Procter & Gamble) discloses toilet soaps
comprising a fatty acid soap, a synthetic surfactant co-
active and a water soluble polymer. In order to reduce
the softening effect of the co-active it is necessary for
some of the soap to be present in the so-called beta-
crystalline phase and crystallisation in this phase can
only be achieved by the application of high shear (ie.
energetic working) in an additional processing step after
the drying step and prior to finishing.
EP 363215 (Colgate) discloses the production of toilet
soap bars from soap and an ethoxylated surfactant co-
active. This soap composition needs to be dried to below
a critical 5%wt moisture content in order to harden the
material sufficiently for processing into bar form using
conventional soap making/forming equipment. This drying
step requires additional equipment in the form of batch
drying trays to be used prior to soap finishing.
EP 311343 (Procter & Gamble) discloses the combined use of
a beta-crystalline phase, an ethoxylated non-ionic
surfactant co-active and a water soluble polymer. As
described above, these compositional modifications require
modification of the soap processing line to provide for
the energetic working needed to form the beta-crystalline
phase.
It can be seen from the foregoing that each of the known,
alternative processes for the production of soap bars
containing co-actives require the provision of further
processing apparatus, particularly in the form of drying
and/or energetic working apparatus and the additional
processing step which makes use of this apparatus prior to
soap finishing. In order to use conventional soap
production lines without substantial modification, a need
~r~ ,,5 ~
- 6 - C3424
exists for a soap bar composition which avoids the
necessity of these additional steps and yet provides a
product with reduced harshness while maintaining lathering
and structural properties.
The present invention provides such a composition and
subsists in the use of relatively more highly saturated
long chain soaps, ie. relatively less unsaturated long
chain soaps than in conventional soap compositions. It is
believed that the removal of soluble non-lauric fatty acid
soaps is particularly advantageous in improving the soap-
structuring properties to an extent such that higher
levels of co-actives than are conventionally used may be
incorporated in the soap composition without the need for
special processing.
Accordingly, a first aspect of the present invention
comprises the use, as a structuring agent, of insoluble
non-lauric fatty acid soaps, having a low iodine value, in
the preparation of a soap bar containing one or more
synergistic mildness agents.
Preferred embodiments of the present invention include
soap bars which comprise:
a) At least 25%wt on total actives of lauric acid
soaps,
b) As the balance of the soaps, non-lauric soaps
having an iodine value of less than 45, and,
c) At least 5%wt on total actives of one or more
synergistic mildness active.
- 7 - ~'~J~r~.~..S ~ C342~
As mentioned above, lauric acid soaps promote lathering
and are characterised by a fatty acid composition
containing a high proportion, particularly 65-80% on fatty
acid content, of C10-C14 saturated acids. In the context
of the present invention suitable sources of lauric fatty
acids include:- coconut oil/fatty acid, palm kernel
oil/fatty acid, babassu oil/fatty acid, macauba oil/fatty
acid and mixtures thereof. The fats and fatty acids
derived from coconut are preferred due to availability.
Suitable non-lauric soaps are those rich in saturated
fatty acids having a chain length greater than C14.
Sources of such fatty acids include animal fats/fatty
acids, eg. tallow and lard and the fatty acid derived
therefrom, and also vegetable derived oils, particularly
fats~fatty acids rich in palmitic and stearic acid such as
palm oils and fractions thereof. Where fatty acids are
derived from oil-sources yielding fatty acids with a high
degree of unsaturation, such as soya bean oil, sunflower
oil, rice bran oil, linseed oil, rapeseed oils, ground nut
oil, marine oils and the like, the oil stocks are
preferably hardened or fractionated to yield partially or
fully hardened fatty acid mixtures and or stearines. The
fats and fatty acids derived from tallow are preferred
except where nut-oil or other vegetable substitutes are
employed for cultural reasons.
The preferred upper limit of the lauric acid soaps is
about 60%, for reasons of economy.
In pr~ferred embodiments of the invention the iodine value
of the non-lauric soaps ranges from 10 to 45, is more
preferably 20 to 40, and most preferably in the range 25
to 40. For conventional soap blends of tallow and coconut
oil the iodine value of the non-lauric soaps is measured
- 8 - C3424
at around 48 (similar to the quoted value for pure
tallow), it can therefore be seen that the non-lauric fats
of the compositions of the present invention are, in
general, more saturated than those employed in
conventional soap making.
While single oils and or fatty acids derived therefrom may
be employed in soap components of the formulations
according to the invention the use of mixtures or two or
more oils and/or fatty acid compositions is not hereby
excluded and, in practice, will be more commonplace.
As mentioned above, in compositions according to the
present invention the ratio of saturated to unsaturated
fatty acids in the non-lauric soaps has been shifted in
favour of the saturated fatty acids. This can be
accomplished by the addition of saturates to the soap
blend or the removal or unsaturates. It is particularly
preferable that a relative increase in the level of
saturates is accomplished by the removal of oleic soaps.
The oleics are the soluble C18:1 (oleic) and C1~:2
(linoleic) soaps in tallow and palm and removal of these
increases the overall saturate content.
Overall for the soaps, the iodine value of the soap blend
will be less than 35 taking into account both lauric and
non-lauric components.
In particular embodiments of the present invention the
composition further comprises at least one synthetic
anionic active at a level of not more than 20%wt,
preferably at a level of not more than 10%wt, most
preferably at a level of not more than 6%wt on the total
active content of product.
2 ~ 7 ~ ~ ~ ~
- 9 - C3424
In embodiments of the present invention the overall
soluble active inventory should be in the range 50-70%wt,
based on a normalised total active content of 100%wt and
classing saturated soaps with a carbon chain length of
less than 16, unsaturated soaps, synthetic anionic actives
and synergistic mildness actives within the soluble active
component inventory.
Preferably, the synergistic mildness active is selected
from the group consisting of non-ionic surfactants,
amphoteric surfactants and mixtures thereof. The
synergistic mildness active should be present at a level
of at least 5%wt of the total active level. Particularly
useful compositions comprise 5-25%wt, preferably 8-20%wt,
more preferably 9-18%wt of synergistic mildness active on
total actives.
Suitable non-ionic surfactants include:- polyethoxylated
alcohols, polyethoxylated alkyl phenols, alkyl
polyglycosides, sorbitan esters, polysorbates,
alkanolamides, poloxamers, and mixtures thereof.
Preferred amongst the non-ionic surfactants are
polyethoxylated alcohols, particularly tallow ethoxylates.
The preferred tallow ethoxylates have an average alkyl
chain length of 10-20 carbons and an average ethoxylate
content of 3-20 units.
Suitable amphoteric surfactants include:- amine oxides,
aminomides, betaines, amido betaines and sulphobetaines,
and mixtures thereof. Cocoamidpropyl betaines and
tegobetaines are particularly preferred due to their low
potential nitrosamine-precursor content.
.~s mentioned above the composition preferably comprises
one or more synthetic anionic actives. Suitable synthetic
: '
- lo 2~ C3424
anionic actives include:- alkyl sulphates, alkyl ether
sulphates, alpha-olefin sulphonates, fatty isethionates,
alkyl glyceryl ether sulphonates, mono-alkyl glyceryl
sulphates, alkyl sarcosinates, alkyl taurides, alkyl
sulphosuccinates, alkyl phosphates, and mixtures thereof.
Preferred amongst the anionic actives are sodium lauryl
ether sulphate (SLES), alpha-olefin sulphonates and sodium
fatty isethionates. Sodium lauryl ether sulphate (SLES) is
particularly preferred.
Preferred compositions according to the present invention
have a 'lathering ratio' greater than 0.56, preferably
greater than 0.6, more preferably greater than 0.8. The
lathering ratio is defined as the sum of the saturated
soaps with carbon chain lengths less than 16 plus the
synthetic anionic actives divided by the sum of the
unsaturated soaps plus the synergistic mildness actives.
As noted above, the synergistic mildness actives can be
either non-ionic surfactants, amphoteric surfactants and
mixtures thereof. In consequence for the vast majority of
formulations, the lathering ratio can be written as L/LL
where:
L:= C8 14 ~ + synthetic anionic actives
LL:= unsaturated soaps + non-ionics + amphoterics
For conventional '80/20' soap formulations based on tallow
and coconut oil (free of synthetic anionic actives, non-
ionics and amphoterics) the ratio L/LL is about 0.45.
In embodiments of the present invention the total watercontent of the soap bar should be in the range 8-20%wt of
the soap bar, preferably 9-17%wt, more preferably 10-
16%wt. The most preferred level of water in the final bar
.
- 11 C3424
is a normal water content for soap bars (around 12%) hence
conventional driers can be used to achieve this level.
The salt conter.t of the bars can vary. In practice the
salt level will lie between 0 and 1.5%. Some or all of
this salt can be residue from the saponification processes
typically employed in soap making, as is known in the art.
It is also known that the level of salt can have some
slight influence on the eventual hardness of the product.
This variation modifies the hardness of the soap bars and
can be used to control the final hardness within
production limits. It is preferred that the salt content
lies between 0.2-0.8 wt%.
The most preferred compositions according to the present
invention obey all the formulation rules given above: ie.
these blends comprise:
a) 25-60%wt on total actives of lauric acid soaps,
b) As the balance of the soaps non-lauric soaps
having an iodine value in the range 10-45, and,
c) 5-20%wt on total actives of one or more
synergistic mildness active,
d) 50-70%wt on total actives of saturated soaps
with a carbon chain length of less than 16,
unsaturated soaps, optional synthetic anionic
actives and synergistic mildness actives, and,
e) a ratio of greater than 0.56:1, of L:LL wherein:
L:= saturated soaps with carbon chain lengths
less than 16 plus the optional synthetic anionic
actives, and,
- 12 - C3424
LL:= unsaturated soaps plus the synergistic
mildness actives.
Having regard to process aspects a further aspect of the
present invention provides a process for the manufacture
of soap bars from neat soap which comprises the steps of:
a) preparing a neat soap comprising non-lauric
fatty acid soaps having an iodine value of less
than 45 and lauric fatty acid soaps, preferably
such that the overall iodine value is less than
35,
b) combining the product of step (a) with one or
~5 more synergistic mildness actives and drying to
obtain a blend comprising at least 5%wt on total
actives of synergistic mildness active, at least
25%wt on total actives of lauric acid soaps and
8-20wt% moisture, and,~0
c) finishing the soap without energetic working to
obtain soap bars.
It should be noted that in step (b) drying can precede the
combination of ingredients or can follow the combination
of ingredients. A further alternative is that the
combination of ingredients takes place during the drying
process, ie. after the completion of a first drying stage,
eg. after the heat exchangers but before the vacuum drying
step.
Conveniently, the finishing step (c) comprises the
conventional steps of milling, plodding and stamping.
- 13 - C3~24
In order that the present invention can be better
understood it will be illustrated hereafter by way of non-
limiting examples.
EXAMPLES:
The following three processing methods were applied in the
production of a bar soap using the formulatlons given
hereafter. The processing applied was essentially
conventional and did not make use of a modified processing
line.
The properties of the final product as regards 'harshness'
were assessed using a test substantially similar to the
'Zein' test as described by E. Gotte in Proceedings of the
IVth International Congress on Surface Active Substances
(Brussels (1964)), [3] pp 83-90 at a 2%wt dilution level.
~xam~le (~rocess) 1.
The fat charge was saponified as for conventional soap-
making and washed/fitted to produce a neat soap at >70~C.
This material was then dried via conventional flash vacuum
drying equipment, with the synergistic mildness actives
being injected into the process stream prior to passage of
the process stream through heat exchangers. The optional
synthetic anionic active(s) were injected into the process
stream after the heat exchangers but prior to the drying
chamber. Subsequent processing of the process stream was
via conventional milling/plodding/stamping.
- 14 ~ C3424
~~~mpl~ (Process) 2.
The fat charge was saponified as for conventional soap and
washed/fitted to produce a neat soap at >70~C as in the
method of process example 1. This material is then dried
via conventional flash drying equipment, with the
synergistic mildness actives and optional synthetic
anionic actives being injected at the same time either
prior to or immediately after passage of the process
stream through the heat exchangers. Subsequent processing
of the process stream was via the conventional process
operations of milling/plodding/stamping.
Exam~le (Proces~) 3.
The fat charge was saponified as for conventional soap and
washed/fitted to produce a neat soap at >70~C as in
example 1. The synergistic mildness agent(s) were added
directly to this neat soap to produce a pumpable mix. The
optional synthetic anionic active(s) were injected into
this mix either before or after the heat exchangers and
prior to a conventional drying step as in process example
1.
Using the above-mentioned processes, soap bars were
manufactured from the feedstocks listed below in product
examples 1-13 as shown in Table 1 below. All ratios are
given as ratios of wt% on total active. Process example 3
was found to be particularly advantageous in pxactice. In
addition to the components mentioned below the process was
conducted with conventional levels of further soap
ingredients such as water, perfumes and colours.
- '
'
- 15 - ~ t~ C3424
Materials employed in the examples are identified as
follows:
Synperonic A7: [RTM] Alcohol ethoxylate (ex~
ICI) with C13/15 alkyl chain with
an average of 7 ethoxylate units.
Synperonic A3: [RTM] Alcohol ethoxylate (ex.
ICI) with C13/15 alkyl chain with
an average of 3 ethoxylate units.
Synperonic A20: [RTM] Alcohol ethoxylate (ex.
ICI) with C13/15 alkyl chain with
an average of 20 ethoxylate
units.
Tegobetaine L7: Cocoamidopropyl betaine (ex.
Goldschmidt)
EGE: Ethyl-6-O-dodecyl glycoside
(prepared in house)
Empilan KMll: [RTM] Alcohol ethoxylate (ex.
Albright & Wilson) with C15/18
alkyl chain with an average of 11
ethoxylate units.
Empilan KM20: [RTM] Alcohol ethoxylate (ex.
Albright & Wilson) with C16/18
alkyl chain with an average of 20
ethoxylate units.
Pluronic PE/P85: ~RTM] a block co-polymer of
polyoxyethylene and
polyoxypropylene (ex. BASF).
.. .. .
.
- 16 - C342~
SLES Genapol[RTM] sodium lauryl ether
sulphate (ex Hoechst)
HT Hardened Tallow (made in-house).
Example 1 is a control example in which conventional soap
having a ratio of 80-parts conventional non-laurics to 20-
parts laurics was employed. The iodine value of the non-
lauric component of this blend was 48, a typical value for
tallow. It can be seen that the Zein value of this
composition was determined at 0.72. This result is to be
expected of current toilet soap bars. Lower Zein values
indicate milder products.
Examples 2-10 relate to embodiments of the present
invention in which hardened tallow (indicated as 'HT'), a
non-ionic surfactant (indicated as ~Non') and coconut oil
(indicated as 'CNO') were employed as the components of
the fat charge. It is noted that the iodine values of the
non-lauric fats range from 1-28: this is indicative of the
increased degree of saturation of the non-lauric fats. It
càn also be seen that the Zein value of the products
prepared with these compositions ranged from 0.50 to 0.58,
indicating a positive benefit as regards reduced
harshness. The non-ionic surfactant used in the examples
is Empilan XM20 unless otherwise indicated.
In examples 11-13, sodium lauryl ethyl sulphate (indicated
as 'SLES') a synthetic anionic, was incorporated into the
composition by one of the methods discussed above. The
addition level of SLES varied in the range 6-12% on total
active. The presence of SLES or other synthetic anionics
is optional in embodiments of the present invention. It
can be seen that the Zein value of the products prepared
.
- 17 - ~ C3424
with these compositions ranged from 0.44-0.45 indicating a
further benefit as regards reduced harshness.
In all of the examples 1-13, the resulting soap bars had a
hardness similar to that of conventional soap bars and had
similar in-use properties with respect to wear-rate and
mush formation. In the examples 2-13, the soaps exhibited
improved creaminess and a reduced Zien harshness.
Examples 14-16 illustrate that soap bars according to the
present invention can be manufactured with levels of
solubles higher than those found in the control. It will
be noted that the Iodine Value of these compositions (as
defined below) is lower than that of the control and that
the Zein value ~see example 16) indicates a reduction in
the harshness of the product as compared with the control.
Examples 17-21 illustrate how soap bars containing SLES
can be manufactured with higher levels of solubles than
those found in the control. As with the above-mentioned
embodiments the Zein value (see examples 19-21) indicates
a reduction in the harshness o~ the product as compared
with the control.
'
- 18 - ~9 - ''J - ' C3424
TABL~ 1
S Ble~d Solubles* ~/LL*~ I .V. ~** Ze~
1 80/20 control 60 0.45 48 0.72
HT/Non/CNO
2 52/11/37 55 1.1 2~ 0.5
3 58/11/31 55 0.8 28 0.58
4 47/11/31 55 1.5 16 0.57
52/17/31 56 0.8 23 0.55
6 46/17/37 55 1.1 16 0.55
7 41/17/42 56 1.5 7 0.52
8 41/22/37 56 0.96 6
9 36/22/42 59 1.3 1 0.52
10 53/10/37 56 1.0 25 0.5
........... ~ :. s '. .:.: ~ S;S .. , ''''~.. :.. iS:':::.:'.:f::::
'''""""'" si '~j' ".".... :~,.. , ~ ~,$ss ~ . s: :: ,Si ~''' ; . ,
....... ... . ................... .....
14 42/11/47 68.2 1.14 38
lS 52/11/37 61.6 0.88 34
16 52/11/37 63.7 0.83 38 0.69
............
HT/Non/SL~S/CNO
11 48/16/06/28 55 1.0 15 0.44
12 45/17/12/26 58 1.2 15 0.45
13 37/22/12/29 58 1.~ 1 0.45
~ ssS ~ ss~~ ~ 4
17 47/17/05/31 61.6 0.90 26
18 42/17/10/31 65.4 1.09 26
19 42/17/05/35.564.5 1.03 26 0.58
49/17/04/40 65.9 1.10 26 0.67
21 42/17/04/37 64.1 1.01 26 0.59
- 19 - C3424
~ey:
* Soluble soap component inventory as defined above:
based on a normalised total active content of 100%
and classing saturated soaps with a chain length of
less than 16 carbons, unsaturated soaps, synthetic
anionic actives and synergistic mildness actives
within the soluble soap component inventory.
~0 ** Ratio of lathering to low lathering species: defined
as the sum of the saturated soaps with carbon chain
lengths of less than 16 plus the synthetic anionic
actives divided by the sum of the unsaturated soaps
plus the synergistic mildness actives.
*** iodine value of non-lauric oil.
Table 2, as presented below illustrates the present
invention by means of comparative examples in which the
soluble soap component inventory as defined above falls in
the range 50-70% wt, ie. the preferred range of th~
present invention, but the lathering ratio as defined
above are below the preferred lower limit of 0.56. In
addition to the values tabulated in Table 1, lather
volumes have been indicated. The non-ionic detergent
employed was Empilan KM20.
TAB~E 2
Ble~d Solubles~ L/h~*~ I .V. ~ Zei~ Lat~er
1 80/20 control 60 0.45 48 0.72 32
~ ~ s~ . .o .~ s ~ i ~'s ~ ..... s ~s~ si
~T~No~/C~O
~2 68/11/21 54 0.41 26 0.62 19
; 23 57/22/21 56 0.40 17 0.59 lS
24 46/33/21 57 0.38 8 0.39 15
38/41/21 59 0.37 2 0.29 11
si , ~. s' . ~ ~ss~
14 42/11/47 68.2 1.14 38 - 42.6 ~'~
52/11/37 61.6 0.88 34 - 39.9
1 ~
16 52/11/37 63.7 0.83 38 ~.69 37.9 ~
s ~ ~ rs ~~ i;s ~ ~ ~' ?Si; ~' ... s .. Q .i.. ;., ~ ~
~T/Non/S~ES/C~O
17 47/17/05/31 56.1 1.12 9 - 38.5
.. . ...
2~
- 21 - C3424
It can be seen from the comparative examples 22-25
presented in Table 3 that compositions having a low
lathering ratio exhibit poor lathering performance, as
demonstrated by the low lather volumes. Examples 14-17
are reproduced in the table with lather performance
indicated. It can be seen that the embodiments of the
invention have acceptable lather volumes, in all cases
better than the control.
Table 3, as present below, provides further examples of
the present invention in which alternative mildness agents
have been employed. In all cases it can be seen that the
Zein harshness is improved as compared with a conventional
soap bar (example 1).
TABLE 3
Blend ~iIdneas¦Solubles~ * I.V.**~ Zein
Agent
1 80/20 none 60 0.45 48 0.72
~ 5 .. ...... : .. ~ .. . . ,c, .~ j 5 '' ' i 5 : j j 5 . ~ ._ 5 5
~/CA/CNO N
26 50/05/45 Synperonic A7 66 1.65 21 0,63
27 48/10/42 Synperonic A7 68 1.35 28 0.63
28 45/15/40 Synperonic A7 69.6 1.12 16 0.55
29 48/10/42 Synperonic A3 68 1.35 38 0.65
48/10/42 Synperonic A20 68 1.35 38 0.69 f-~
31 48/10~42 Tegobetaine ~7 68 1.35 38 0.65
32 48/10/42 EGE 68 1.35 38 0.61
33 48/10/42 Empilan KM11 68 1.35 38 0.57
34 48/10/42 Pluronic 68 1.35 38 0.64
