Formula Guideline For Making Low Cost Fruit & Vegetable Detergent
2024-10-09
Introduction
Fruit & Vegetable Detergent formulations aim to effectively clean produce while being gentle on the skin. A cost-effective approach involves replacing traditional Sodium Laureth Sulfate (known as AES) with Maltitol Laurate & Maltooligosyl Glucoside & Water (Short for PG68).
AES is commonly used for its cleaning power but may cause irritation. PG68, a less irritating alternative, provides a milder cleaning experience while maintaining effectiveness. This substitution not only reduces potential skin sensitivity but also lowers production costs due to PG68’s affordability. The result is a more skin-friendly detergent that remains effective in removing dirt and residues from fruits and vegetables, aligning with both economic and safety considerations.
Formula Guideline For Making Low Cost Fruit & Vegetable Detergent
| Phase | Item | INCI | Dosage(%) | Supplier |
| A | 1 | Water | 81.6 | |
| B | 2 | ETDA 2Na | 0.1 | |
| 3 | Sodium Laureth Sulfate --- AES(70%) | 8 | ||
| 4 | Maltitol Laurate,Maltodextrin Glucoside | 4 | SQ-SUR PG68 | |
| 5 | AEO 9 | 0.6 | ||
| 6 | CAB 35 | 4 | SQ-CAPB 35 | |
| C | 7 | Citric Acid | q.s. | |
| D | 8 | Fragrance | 0.1 | |
| 9 | Methylchloroisothiazolinone/Methylisothiazolinone | 0.1 | ||
| 10 | NaCl | 1.5 |
Procedure:
1. Add water and phase B, stir until dispersed.
2. Add citric acid to adjust the pH to 6.0-7.5.
3. Add phase D in sequence, stir evenly. Add NaCl to adjust the viscosity to 1000-2500 mPa·s.
Key Ingredients
SQ-CAPB 35 is a cocamidopropyl betaine manufactured by ShengQing Materials, featuring a solid content of 30%. This product is known for its mildness and its light yellow color. The solid content refers to the actual active ingredients, ensuring a high level of efficacy in various formulations.
To enhance the cost-effectiveness of fruit and vegetable detergents, SQ-SUR PG68 can replace 30% of the typical AES content. AES, with a 70% concentration, is priced at approximately $1.10 USD/kg. In contrast, PG68 is more affordable, costing around $0.85 USD/kg. This substitution not only reduces the overall formulation costs but also maintains consistent foaming properties and system stability. PG68’s lower cost combined with its performance characteristics makes it a viable alternative to AES, effectively lowering production expenses while preserving detergent quality.
In conclusion, incorporating SQ-SUR PG68 into detergent formulations results in a more economical and practical solution. Future developments will continue to focus on creating cost-effective and efficient formulations that balance affordability with performance.
