oy United States Patent Karim et al. (10) Patent No. (4s) Date of Patent: US 9,896,651 BI Feb, 20, 2018 (54) ANTISEPTIC AND FRA GRANCE-FREE SOAP (71) Applicant: KING SAUD UNIVERSITY, Riya ) (72) Iaventors: Mohammad Rezaul Karim, Riyadh SA}; Muhammad Omer Aija2, Riyadh (SA): Nabeel AL-Harth Riyadh (SA) KING SAUD UNIVERSITY, Riyadh (SA) (3) Assignee: (7) Notice: Subject o any dislaimer, the term ofthis patent is extended or adjusted under 38 USC. 15806) by 0 days. 21) Appl. Nos 189889,787 (22) Filed: May 8, 2017 (1) Tae c1iD 900 (2006.01) cin 9706 (2006.01) cmp 98 (2006.01) CID 13/10 (2006.01) CHD 13116 (2006.01) (2) US.CL cre CIID 9007 @2013.01y, CHD 9706 (01301); CHD 978 201301); CID 130 (013.01), CHD 1946 2013.01) (58) Field of Clastiction Search None ‘ce application file for complete search history 66) References Cited US. PATENT DOCUME S728 A 1/1996. Chop ea ooraosiss Al* 43007 acest ASIN 2o090200364 AL 92000 Pike-Bigunski doipoosetss AL 42010 Pak Do1Dors0s¥4 Al 72012 Havin ta 20160022827 AL 12016 Chan eta soteoosnrs Al 32016 Perkins asigow 464 20160376526 A1* 122016 Smith eucrnss * cited by examinor Primary Examiner —Necholus Ogden, Ie (74) Atornes, Agent. or Firm — Riebard C, Litman ABSTRACT and fragrance-free soap includes about 5% © 30% percent by weight of daionizod water about 3% 10 10% ‘by weight of eatstic soda, about 25% to XM by weight of ‘ogetable fat, and about 0.1% to 1% by weight of antiba terial nanoparticles. The vegetable fat can be selected fo the group consisting af clive eil, coconut oil, palm oi almond oi jojoba oi, shes beter or a combination thereof The antibacterial nanoparticles are preferably silver nano- particles made by any conventional method 2 Calms, No DrawingsUS 9,896,651 BI 1 ANTISEPTIC AND FRAGRANCE-FREE SOAP BACKGROUND OP THE INVENTION 1, Field ofthe Invention ‘The present invention relates t© soap produetion, snd particularly wo an antiseptic and ffagrance-tree soap and ‘method of making the same, 2, Description of the Related Art ‘Some components commonly found in commercial soaps, scl as imal fats, synbietic additives, coloranis, prestee valves, chemical additives, and artificial fragrances do not ‘comport with Halal standards. Accordingly, soaps contsin- ing such componeats are forbidden under Islami priniples. Further, soaps that do conform to Halal standards typically do not contain anti-bacterial properties ‘Thus, an antiseptic and fragrance-fice soap solving the aforementioned problems is desire. SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION ‘he smsepic and fragrance-froe sap includes about 5% 10 30% percent by weight of deionized water, about 3% 10 10s by weight of eaustc sod, about 25% 19 90% by weight of vogetable fat, and about 0.1% 10 1% by weight of fniibacterial nanoparticles. The vegetable fit may be Selected from the group consisting oF alive oi, coeonit ei, palm il, almond oil, ojoba oil shea buster, ora combina tion thereof Caustic sda is commonly kocwn as ye and has the chemical name sodium hydroxide. The antibacterial ‘nanoparticles are preferably silver nanoparicles, and may be ‘made by any conventionally known technique. A method of ‘making the antiseptic and fagrance-fr soap i also pro- vided ‘These and other features of the preseat invention will become readily apparent upon further review of the follow ing specification DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS, The antiseptic _and_fragrance-fee soap (hereinafter referred 1 asthe "Soap" includes about $¥6 to 30% percent by weight of deionized water about 3% 10 10% by weight ‘of caustic soda (sodium hydroxide), about 25% to 90% by ‘weight of vegetable ft, an about 0.1% to 1% by weight of aniieterial nanoparticles. ‘he Soap can include any suitable ype of vegetable fat, such as olive oil, coconut i, palm oil, almond oil, jojoba shea butter oF a combination thersof. Further, the fniibcterial nanoparticles ate preferably silver nanopar- ticles, may be made by any conventionally known toch nique ‘An analysis was done comparing thre soap samples, including: (1) Soap made as described herein, but without ani-bactrial agents (2) Soap mado as describad herein, Bat ‘with anicbacteral agents; and (3) commercial antiseptic soap in onder to compare hardness (Table 1), foamability (Table 2), pl (Table 3), and the anti-bacterial properties 2 (Table 4) berwoen the Soap, both with and without snti- bacterial agents, as well as commercial antiseptic soap, Example 1 ardness Test As illustrated in Table 1, soap hardness was tested as follows, A noedle (ea. @ needle having a length of 6.4 em. and a diameter of | mi) was attached to a weight, such a 4 lead fishing weight having 4 mass of 150 geams, and Jowered into composition (1), the Soap with anti-becteril agents: composition (2), the Soup without anti-bacterial ‘ages; and composition (3), the commercial antiseptic sop ‘The distance imo which the needle penetrated the soaps after about 60 sooonds was recorded to measure the hardness of ‘ech soap simple, This test was condicted thre times So that the mean and the appropriate standard deviation could ‘be computed, TABLE L Soap wise Dh ofuenle Det emEa07 OAT ane AOS Oem = 00S Example 2 oamabilty Test As illustrated in Table 2, soap foamabilty was ested by dissolving 100 g ofeach Soap in 10 ml of distilled water in 100 ml measuring cup and shaken vigorously for appeoxi~ imately 5 minutes, Each mixture was allowed tit for approximately 15 minutes, after which the height of the foam was determined. This test was conducted thos times so that the meen and the eppropriste standard de ‘could be computed. TABLE 2 ia Se Ss Dist ae am igh om) 16am 202 Sen 20 Example 3 put Testing As illustrated in Table 3, the pH produced by each ofthe soap samples was analyzed using a suitable pH meter, viz. a HANNA HL 422 pif Meter. Approximately 1.0 gram of ‘each ofthe produced soaps was dissolved in approximately 50 mi of deionized water. Subsequently, the pH ofeach of the samples was measured using the pH meter This test Was ‘conreted tice so thatthe mean could be computeUS 9,896,651 BI 3 TABLE 3 oso Sule Disotet s Swot “ape acera agen ster oe BE » > e Example 4 Anti-Bacterial Testing Asillustrated in Table 4, the anti-bacterial properties were tested using 2 control sample, a sample having bulk anti- ‘acteral agents, Soap prepared as described herein without anli-hictenl agents, Soep as described herein wilh an bacterial agents, and commercial antiseptic soap. The a ‘terial properios ofthe soop samples were studiod using the hoctera Ficericha coll, obtains frm the Departznent ‘of Agrieultre, King Sax! University, Riyadh, Sani Arabia 'S colony of organisms Was obtained from Sant eulture of {est organisms, and thea suspended in sterile disilled water ina glass bot, Subsequently, approximately 10 grams of cach soap Sample was weighed and dissolved in a sterile lass bottle consiting 10 mL of died water, Fonning Stock solution having a concentration of 1000 mgt. The Stock solution ofthe soap was then used to propare various ‘concentrations of each soup sample (eg, 200 mgm, 400 mg/mL, and 600 mginl.). The plates were left for about ‘hours thatthe soap could dfs into azar, which was then incubated with approximately 200 lof F. Col et abou 28° C-for approximately 48 hours. The experiments were pet= form in duplicates, andthe bacterial growth was observed by a colony counter, viz., a Stuat SC6+ colony counter. TABLE 4 Commer engi op ‘The soap having the anti-bacterial agents, of course, had the best anti-bacterial properties when compared with the remaining bo soap samples. ‘Assen above, the pH range ofthe Saap is between 9 and 10, Furter, there is no separation, precipitation, and porfo- 4 ration smells. As such, 2 comparison betwoen the Scap samples and commercial antiseptic oop illustrates that the ‘Soap described herein has a higher hardiness, lower pH, and Detter anti-bacterial properties than the commercial ativep- tie soap Example 5 Process af Making Soap ‘To make the Soap, fist measure approximately 5% 10 30% by weight of deionized water in a container, such as 2 {quart canning jar. Aer the appropriate amount af deisnizet ‘water has been poured into the container, about 3% 10 10% ‘by weight of catstic soda is added to te deionisd water form a homogenized mixture, sich as by stirng uni the deionized water begins 1 clear, thereby forming Ie for the Soap. Nex, hoat between 25% 10 90% by weight of veg- table fats uni they reach 120° F ‘When both the Ive andthe heated vegetable fats (which are now oils) ate a the correct temperate (between 95°F fad 110" F), the vegetable fas (eis) are poured into wontainer, such as a mixing. bowl, and the Iye is slowly ‘mixed into the vegetable fats, stirring the mixture for ‘tween 5 minutes to 10 minutes, Filly, about 0.19% (0 1% by weight of antibacterial nanoparticles (silver nanopar- ticles: average size 25 am) ate added to the vepotable fatlye minture until all the substances are homogenized, such as by sting the substances or by mixing the sub- Stances in a blender, such as an immersion blend, for ‘several minutes to form a sp mixture that i thik and ight in color. The soap mixture is then poured into @ mold and covered in plastic wrap. An od towel may be placed over the covered molds 10 mviniin the residnal heat The Soap mixture is allowed to sit for up 1 twenty-four (24) hours in the residoa heat to complete soponification Tris to be understood thatthe present inveation is not limited to the embodiments described above, but encom passes aay and all embodiments within the seope of the following claims We claim: 1. The aotiveptic and fragrance-fiee s09p consisting of 5% 10 30% percent by weight of deionized water: 3% to 10% by weight of caustic soda 25% to 906 by weight of vegetable 0.1% 1 1%by weight of sibernaoparticles, wherein the silver nanoparticles have an average particle size of 25 wherein the pl of the soop is 98. 2. The antiseptic and fragrance-free soap according 10 claim 1, wherein said atleast one vegetable ft is selected ftom the greup consisting of olive oil, coconut ol, palm ol, lmood ei, jojoba oil, and shea butter.