Sensory analysis of natural emulsifiers
580
Presented by: Jaana Ailus
Introduction
The rise in consumer demand for more natural cosmetics has spearheaded the development of increasingly advanced natural emulsifiers. Previously only a few emulsifier options were available when formulating naturally certified cosmetics, but due to recent product launches, more options for texture and skinfeel are now available.
This paper looks at nine different naturally compliant emulsifying systems from various supplier and compares and contrasts their sensorial aspects.
Purpose
The aim of this study is to investigate the sensorial aspects of nine emulsions. They will be assessed in regards to absorption, play-time, spreadability, soaping and after-feel.
The final result of this study will help in the selection of the most appropriate emulsifier. It will also provide nine easy emulsion bases that can be modified to be used in finished products.
Methods
At first nine simple emulsions were developed. Accelerated stability testing was performed to ensure a minimum of two years shelf-life. All emulsions have the same oil base, stabilising agents and preservative system, and only differ in the choice of emulsifier. The oil base and preservative system were chosen as they are easily available and easy to use in order to keep the focus on the emulsifiers.
Once the emulsions were made, they were given to 32 sensory assessors, who were Masters of Beauty Science students at Laurea University of Applied Sciences, and they were given benchmarks against which to compare the emulsions’ sensory properties.
The emulsifiers used in this study were emulsifier 1 (INCI: Lecithin), emulsifier 2 (INCI: Glyceryl Oleate Citrate), emulsifier 3 (INCI: Isostearyl Alcohol, Butylene Glycol Cocoate, Ethylcellulose), emulsifier 4 (INCI: Glyceryl Stearate Citrate, Polyglyceryl-3 Stearate, Hydrogenated Lecithin) emulsifier 5 (INCI: C14-22 Alcohols, C12-20 Alkyl Glucoside), emulsifier 6 (INCI: Polyglyceryl-4 Stearate, Potassium Olivate), emulsifier 7 (INCI: Cetearyl Olivate, Sorbitan Olivate), emulsifier 8 (INCI: Polyglyceryl-2 Stearate, Glyceryl Stearate, Stearic Acid) emulsifier 9 (INCI: Polyglyceryl-3 Dicitrate/Stearate). The manufacturers of the emulsifiers used in this study were Berg&Schmidt, Evonik, Gattefosse, Hallstar, Innovacos, Lucas Meyer, Seppic and Socri.
Results
The emulsions created had a variety of different skin feels. The preliminary results indicate that the emulsifiers with the best ease of absorption were emulsifiers 2 (Glyceryl Oleate Citrate) and 3 (Isostearyl Alcohol, Butylene Glycol Cocoate, Ethylcellulose) and the one that had the lowest ease of absorption was emulsifier 8 (Polyglyceryl-2 Stearate, Glyceryl Stearate, Stearic Acid). The emulsifiers with the shortest playtimes were emulsifiers 2 and 3 and the emulsifiers with the longest playtimes were emulsifiers 5 (C14-22 Alcohols, C12-20 Alkyl Glucoside) and 8. The emulsifier that exhibited the least amount of soaping was emulsifier 3, while the one with the most soaping was emulsifier 8. The emulsifier with the greatest spreadability was emulsifier 3, while the the lowest spreadability was exhibited by emulsifier emulsifier 7 (Cetearyl Olivate, Sorbitan Olivate). The lightest afterfeel was achieved by using emulsifier 3 the most lasting afterfeel was felt with emulsifier 8.
Discussion
When it comes to light skinfeel and ease of spreadability, the classic natural cosmetics emulsifier 7 outperformed in all aspects by emulsifiers 2 and 3. If a heavier and richer skinfeel is preferred, then emulsifier 8 would be the ideal choice.
The mid-range emulsifiers were 4, 6 and 9, as they performed in all assessed categories at neither extreme end of the spectrum.
The tool created by this study can be used as a guide when selecting an emulsifier for specific purposes.
Conclusion
Natural cosmetics are no longer constrained by a limited choice of emulsifiers. With the new developments in the field of emulsifiers, light and fluid textures can be obtained, as well as more traditional rich textures. This gives formulators a larger scope to interact with a wide spectrum of textures, and skinfeel can be tailored according to different product specifications.
The rise in consumer demand for more natural cosmetics has spearheaded the development of increasingly advanced natural emulsifiers. Previously only a few emulsifier options were available when formulating naturally certified cosmetics, but due to recent product launches, more options for texture and skinfeel are now available.
This paper looks at nine different naturally compliant emulsifying systems from various supplier and compares and contrasts their sensorial aspects.
Purpose
The aim of this study is to investigate the sensorial aspects of nine emulsions. They will be assessed in regards to absorption, play-time, spreadability, soaping and after-feel.
The final result of this study will help in the selection of the most appropriate emulsifier. It will also provide nine easy emulsion bases that can be modified to be used in finished products.
Methods
At first nine simple emulsions were developed. Accelerated stability testing was performed to ensure a minimum of two years shelf-life. All emulsions have the same oil base, stabilising agents and preservative system, and only differ in the choice of emulsifier. The oil base and preservative system were chosen as they are easily available and easy to use in order to keep the focus on the emulsifiers.
Once the emulsions were made, they were given to 32 sensory assessors, who were Masters of Beauty Science students at Laurea University of Applied Sciences, and they were given benchmarks against which to compare the emulsions’ sensory properties.
The emulsifiers used in this study were emulsifier 1 (INCI: Lecithin), emulsifier 2 (INCI: Glyceryl Oleate Citrate), emulsifier 3 (INCI: Isostearyl Alcohol, Butylene Glycol Cocoate, Ethylcellulose), emulsifier 4 (INCI: Glyceryl Stearate Citrate, Polyglyceryl-3 Stearate, Hydrogenated Lecithin) emulsifier 5 (INCI: C14-22 Alcohols, C12-20 Alkyl Glucoside), emulsifier 6 (INCI: Polyglyceryl-4 Stearate, Potassium Olivate), emulsifier 7 (INCI: Cetearyl Olivate, Sorbitan Olivate), emulsifier 8 (INCI: Polyglyceryl-2 Stearate, Glyceryl Stearate, Stearic Acid) emulsifier 9 (INCI: Polyglyceryl-3 Dicitrate/Stearate). The manufacturers of the emulsifiers used in this study were Berg&Schmidt, Evonik, Gattefosse, Hallstar, Innovacos, Lucas Meyer, Seppic and Socri.
Results
The emulsions created had a variety of different skin feels. The preliminary results indicate that the emulsifiers with the best ease of absorption were emulsifiers 2 (Glyceryl Oleate Citrate) and 3 (Isostearyl Alcohol, Butylene Glycol Cocoate, Ethylcellulose) and the one that had the lowest ease of absorption was emulsifier 8 (Polyglyceryl-2 Stearate, Glyceryl Stearate, Stearic Acid). The emulsifiers with the shortest playtimes were emulsifiers 2 and 3 and the emulsifiers with the longest playtimes were emulsifiers 5 (C14-22 Alcohols, C12-20 Alkyl Glucoside) and 8. The emulsifier that exhibited the least amount of soaping was emulsifier 3, while the one with the most soaping was emulsifier 8. The emulsifier with the greatest spreadability was emulsifier 3, while the the lowest spreadability was exhibited by emulsifier emulsifier 7 (Cetearyl Olivate, Sorbitan Olivate). The lightest afterfeel was achieved by using emulsifier 3 the most lasting afterfeel was felt with emulsifier 8.
Discussion
When it comes to light skinfeel and ease of spreadability, the classic natural cosmetics emulsifier 7 outperformed in all aspects by emulsifiers 2 and 3. If a heavier and richer skinfeel is preferred, then emulsifier 8 would be the ideal choice.
The mid-range emulsifiers were 4, 6 and 9, as they performed in all assessed categories at neither extreme end of the spectrum.
The tool created by this study can be used as a guide when selecting an emulsifier for specific purposes.
Conclusion
Natural cosmetics are no longer constrained by a limited choice of emulsifiers. With the new developments in the field of emulsifiers, light and fluid textures can be obtained, as well as more traditional rich textures. This gives formulators a larger scope to interact with a wide spectrum of textures, and skinfeel can be tailored according to different product specifications.