cosmetics

Article
An Evaluation of the Physicochemical Properties of
Stabilized Oil-In-Water Emulsions Using Different
Cationic Surfactant Blends for Potential Use in the
Cosmetic Industry
Pamela Agredo 1 , Maria C. Rave 1 , Juan D. Echeverri 1 , Daniela Romero 2 and
Constain H. Salamanca 1,2, *
1 Programa de Maestría en Formulación de Productos Químicos y Derivados, Facultad de Ciencias Naturales,
Universidad Icesi, Calle 18 No. 122–135, Cali 76003, Colombia; pamelasanin@usc.edu.co (P.A.);
mdrave@icesi.edu.co (M.C.R.); jdecheverri@icesi.edu.co (J.D.E.)
2 Departamento de Ciencias Farmacéuticas, Facultad de Ciencias Naturales, Universidad Icesi,
Calle 18 No. 122–135, Cali 76003, Colombia; Daniela.romero@icesi.edu.co
* Correspondence: chsalamanca@icesi.edu.co; Tel.: +57-2-5552334




Received: 17 January 2019; Accepted: 13 February 2019; Published: 18 February 2019


Abstract: One of the most complex problems in hair care formulations is the duality of the surfactants
used. In this regard, such surfactants must be cationic so as to interact with the negatively
charged cuticle surface of hair. However, these interdependencies typically lead to non-ideal
values for the required hydrophilic–lipophilic balance (HLB) in the oil phase. This study was
designed to evaluate the physicochemical properties of several oil-in-water emulsion prototypes
for the potential use in hair conditioners. Here, a base formulation was utilized, incorporating
binary mixtures of cationic surfactants in different proportions. The cationic surfactants employed
were hydroxyethyl-behenamidopropyl-diammonium chloride, behentrimonium methosulphate,
cetrimonium chloride, and (iv) Polyquaterniumpolyquaternium-70. The surfactants were evaluated
for their capability to decrease the surface tension in an aqueous solution through contact angle
measurements between the oily phase and the aqueous phase. The required HLB of the oil phase was
also determined. The emulsification process was developed using standard preparation methods. For
three months, the prototypes with high viscosity were packed in containers and stored in a stability
chamber at accelerated conditions (40 ± 2 ◦ C and 75 ± 5% RH). During this time, the size, size
polydispersity, zeta potential, viscosity, rheological profile, and creaming index were all evaluated
monthly. The results showed a slight change in the physical stability of the prototypes, where the
droplet size increased moderately, however, did little to destabilize the formulations. This suggests
that the mixtures of cationic surfactants used could be useful for technological developments in hair
conditioning products.

Keywords: cationic surfactant blends; oil-in-water emulsions; hair conditioner; stability

1. Introduction
A large part of formulating hair conditioning products corresponds to improving oil-in-water
emulsion systems that are characterized primarily by having a vast array of raw materials. Among
these, preservatives, organoleptic modifiers, and stabilizers constitute some of the main additives
in hair conditioners [1]. Such ingredients are usually complex mixtures made up of neutral and
cationic surfactants (both monomeric and polymeric) that are used for various purposes in the
formulations [2–6]. In the case of neutral surfactants, these are employed with the aim to lower

Cosmetics 2019, 6, 12; doi:10.3390/cosmetics6010012 www.mdpi.com/journal/cosmetics

Cosmetics
Cosmetics 2018,
2019, 5,
6, x
12FOR PEER REVIEW 22 of
of 12
12

[2–6]. In the case of neutral surfactants, these are employed with the aim to lower the interfacial
the interfacial
tension between tension
the oilbetween
and water,the inoilorder
and water, in order
to generate to generate
a compact film aaround
compactthefilm around
droplets the
in the
droplets in the dispersed phase [4]. Cationic surfactants are utilized for various
dispersed phase [4]. Cationic surfactants are utilized for various purposes, particularly for the purposes, particularly
for the provision
provision of an electrostatic
of an electrostatic stabilizing
stabilizing effect, prevents
effect, which which prevents the aggregation
the aggregation and coalescence
and coalescence of the
of the oil phase [7,8], and to confer the effects of adhesion on hair fibers (especially
oil phase [7,8], and to confer the effects of adhesion on hair fibers (especially the cuticle) [9]. the cuticle) [9].
Although cationic surfactants are fundamental to formulations in hair care
Although cationic surfactants are fundamental to formulations in hair care products, at times they products, at times they
thermodynamic conditions,
lead to unfavorable thermodynamic conditions, as as ionic functional
functional groups (i.e., tertiary amines and
ammonium salts) provide
ammonium salts) provide a highly hydrophilic tone to the required hydrophilic–lipophilic balance
(HLB) of stabilizing system mixtures [10–12]. Such Such aa situation
situation leads
leads toto differences
differences between
between the
required HLB
HLB ofof the
theoily
oilyphase
phaseand andthetheHLB
HLBresulting
resulting from
from each
eachof of
thethesurfactant mixtures
surfactant mixtures used in the
used in
formulation [10,13]. Therefore, to further improve the stability of these emulsified
the formulation [10,13]. Therefore, to further improve the stability of these emulsified products, it products, it has been
necessary
has to use viscosifying
been necessary agents that generate
to use viscosifying a structured
agents that generatevehicle robust network
a structured vehicle structure [14–16],
robust network
that avoids aggregation and, in turn, generates important organoleptic features
structure [14–16], that avoids aggregation and, in turn, generates important organoleptic features needed for these types
of products.
needed for these types of products.
Although the
Although the first
firstimpression
impressionofofthis thiswork
workcould
couldbebelacking
lacking inin novelty
novelty about
about thethe stabilization
stabilization of
emulsified systems, it should be highlighted that the information available in the specific field of
of emulsified systems, it should be highlighted that the information available in the specific field
hair care products is minimal and limited. Only Only aa handful
handful of of studies
studies on the stabilization
stabilization of these
types of products have been reported in literature, much less those where binary cationic surfactant
mixtures are used [1,17,18]. For For this
this reason,
reason, wewe focus
focus this
this study
study on on evaluating
evaluating thethe effects
effects of
of four
cationic surfactants
cationic surfactants (Figure
(Figure 1),
1), commonly
commonly used used asas raw
raw materials
materials in in the cosmetics
cosmetics field, where their
applications have yet to be reported
reported widely,
widely, particularly the synergistic effects on the stabilization of
hair conditioner products.

Figure 1.
Figure Chemical structures
1. Chemical structures of
of cationic
cationic surfactants
surfactants used
used in
in the
the study.

2. Materials and Methods

2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Materials
2.1. Materials
Hydroxyethyl-behenamidopropyl-dimonium chloride (HBD-C1) and behentrimonium-
Hydroxyethyl-behenamidopropyl-dimonium chloride (HBD-C1) and
methosulfate were provided by CRODA (Snaith, United Kingdom), whereas cetrimonium chloride
behentrimonium-methosulfate were provided by CRODA (Snaith, United Kingdom), whereas
was supplied by BASF (Ludwigshafen, Germany). The remaining raw materials were provided by
cetrimonium chloride was supplied by BASF (Ludwigshafen, Germany). The remaining raw
the cosmetic company Belleza Express S.A. (Cali, Colombia) and used as received. Water Type II
materials were provided by the cosmetic company Belleza Express S.A. (Cali, Colombia) and used as
(ultra-pure water) was obtained from a purification system called Millipore Elix Essential (Merck
received. Water Type II (ultra-pure water) was obtained from a purification system called Millipore
KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany).
Elix Essential (Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany).
Cosmetics 2019, 6, 12 3 of 12

2.2. Surface Tension and Contact Angle Measurements

Surface tension and static contact angle measurements were carried out using the pendant and
sessile drop methodology [19–23]. Here, a video-based optical contact angle instrument (OCA15EC
Dataphysics Instruments, Filderstadt, Germany) with version 4.5.14 SCA20 and SCA22 software
were used. Data were recorded on an IDS video camera, where information was gathered from
approximately 400 to 800 frames for reference as the static angle. Moreover, the point of capture
was defined where the reflected incident light completely disappeared (about 1 s from leaving the
dispensing system). Drop volumes ranged from 5 × 10−3 to 15 × 10−3 mL, whereas the liquid
deposition was fixed to 1 cm for all assays. Each measurement was carried out at approximately
22 ± 1 ◦ C and 60% ± 5% relative humidity.

2.3. Determination of the Required HLB for the Oil Phase

To determine the required HLB in the oil phase for the emulsified prototypes, 11 formulations
were synthesized (in the oil phase only) using a range of preservatives, ultra-pure water, and an
emulsifying system. In these formulations, the same proportions were maintained as described in
Table 1. Only the emulsifying system was changed to a Span 80 and Tween 80 blend, with the mixture
combined using different proportions to obtain mixed HLB values, corresponding to 6, 7, 8, 9, 10,
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16. Subsequently, each prototype was packed inside a 15 mL FalconTM tube
and exposed to a thermal stress assay for three weeks. The storage conditions were changed from
40 ± 1 ◦ C to 4 ± 0.5 ◦ C every four days.

Table 1. Hair conditioner product prototype formulations.

Individual Component Ingredients % (w/w)

Cetearyl-alcohol
Oil Phase Coco-caprylate 4.8
Shea butter
Viscosity agent Hydroxy-ethyl-cellulose 0.5
Wetting agent Glycerin 0.2
Methyl-isothiazolinone
Preservative Phenethyl-alcohol 0.2
Propylene-Glycol-2-methyl
ether
pH modifier Citric acid 0.05
Lauryl-glucoside (neutral) 0.2
Emulsifier system Cationic Surfactant 1
1
Cationic Surfactant 2
Dispersing phase Water q.s.

2.4. Preparation of Emulsions

The emulsified systems were developed according to the formulation shown in Table 1.
All prototypes were synthesized in triplicate using different binary cationic surfactant blends,
as shown in Table 2. At first, the aqueous phases (composed of hydroxy-ethyl-cellulose, glycerin,
and ultra-pure water) were mixed using a homo-mixer (Ultra Turrax® T-25, IKA® , Staufen, DE-BW,
Germany) at 6000 rpm for 10 min and subsequently heated to 80 ◦ C (mixture 1). At the same time,
the oily ingredients were weighed together with the surfactants (mixture 2) and heated to 75 ◦ C
in a separate vessel. The oil phase (mixture 2) was then added to the aqueous phase (mixture 1)
with a 9000-rpm agitation for 10 min until a white emulsion was formed with a viscous consistency.
The emulsions were continuously stirred at 400 rpm speed using a propeller-type stirrer (IKA®
RW 20, IKA® , Staufen, DE-BW, Germany) and heated to 40 ◦ C, whereas the remaining ingredients
(i.e., preservative and pH modifier) were incorporated into the emulsion. The resulting mixture was
cooled to room temperature. Subsequently, the prototypes were selected according to the viscosity
Cosmetics 2019, 6, 12 4 of 12

criteria, which must have a minimum viscosity of 15,000 cP. These conditions are fundamental to both
intrinsic organoleptic characteristics and the stabilization of these products.

Table 2. Designing the cationic surfactant mixture for the hair conditioner prototypes.

Emulsified System Prototype Cationic Surfactant Mixture Ratio

1 HBD-Cl and BT-MS 1:3
2 HBD-Cl and BT-MS 1:1
3 HBD-Cl and BT-MS 3:1
4 HBD-Cl and CT-Cl 1:3
5 HBD-Cl and CT-Cl 1:1
6 HBD-Cl and CT-Cl 3:1
7 HBD-Cl and PQ-70 1:3
8 HBD-Cl and PQ-70 1:1
9 HBD-Cl and PQ-70 3:1
10 BT-MS and CT-Cl 1:3
11 BT-MS and CT-Cl 1:1
12 BT-MS and CT-Cl 3:1
13 BT-MS and PQ-70 1:3
14 BT-MS and PQ-70 1:1
15 BT-MS and PQ-70 3:1
16 CT-Cl and PQ-70 1:3
17 CT-Cl and PQ70 1:1
18 CT-Cl and PQ-70 3:1
The ratio is given in parts that are 1% of the total cationic surfactant in each formulation. HBD-Cl:
Hydroxyethyl-behenamidopropyl-diammonium chloride, BT-MS: Behentrimonium methosulphate, CT-Cl:
Cetrimonium chloride, and PQ-70: Polyquaternium-70.

2.5. Accelerated Stability Tests

One hundred milliliters of each prototype conditioner was packed in a polyethylene-
terephthalate-PET container and stored at accelerated stability conditions (40 ◦ C ± 2 ◦ C and 75 ± 5%
relative humidity) for 12 weeks.

2.6. Zeta Potential, pH, and Conductivity Measurements

Zeta potential measurements were carried out using a zetasizer nano ZSP (Malvern Instruments,
UK) at 25 ± 2 ◦ C temperature, with equilibration times of 120 s in a DTS 1070 capillary cell. Here,
the attenuator position and intensity were set automatically. To prepare a sample, 130 mg of the
emulsifier was diluted in 20 mL of ultra-pure water and manually stirred. From this, a 50 µL aliquot
was taken and diluted with 1 mL of ultra-pure water before each zeta potential measurement was taken.
The electrical conductivity and the pH of the emulsions were determined using a CR-30 conductivity
meter and a Starter-2100 pH meter, respectively.

2.7. Particle Size Analysis

The particle size distribution of the emulsions was obtained using a Mastersizer 3000 (Malvern
Instruments, Malvern Instruments, UK), equipped with a helium/neon laser at a wavelength of
632.8 nm. Previously, 0.6 g of the emulsion was diluted with 10 mL of ultra-pure water at 25 ± 2 ◦ C
and stirred at 400 rpm. The appropriate amount sample was determined when the dark level was
reached (between 2% and 8%).

2.8. Rheological Profile and Viscosity

The rheological profile was obtained using different shear rates (20 s−1 to 150 s−1 ). For this, a
viscometer (micro-visc, RheoSense Inc., San Ramon, CA, USA) was used. The viscosity was measured
using a Brookfield® viscometer with a No. 4 needle (Brookfield® , Middleboro, MA, USA) at 10 rpm.
Cosmetics 2018, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 12
Cosmetics 2019, 6, 12 5 of 12
measured using a Brookfield® viscometer with a No. 4 needle (Brookfield®, Middleboro, MA, USA)
at 10 rpm.
2.9. Creaming Index (CI)
2.9. Creaming
CreamingIndex
index(CI)
values were determined from the ratio of sediment volume and the total emulsion
volume.
Creaming indexofvalues
Here, 15 mL the emulsion was centrifuged
were determined frominthe
a Wincom
ratio of80-2 centrifuge
sediment at 3000
volume andrpm
thefortotal
4 h.
The resultsvolume.
emulsion were expressed
Here, 15 as
mLthe
of creaming index
the emulsion (CI)
was [24,25] according
centrifuged to
in a Wincom 80-2 centrifuge at 3000
rpm for 4 h. The results were expressed as the creaming
HS index (CI) [24,25] according to
𝐻 =
CI ×100 (1) (1)
CI = HE
×100
𝐻
HSS is the sediment height and HEE is
where H is the
the sample
sample height
height before centrifugation.

3. Results and Discussion

One of the most
most important
important considerations in the preformulate-on stages of emulsified systems
is the adequate selection of those surfactants that can lead to the maximum stabilization of the
heterodisperse system. According
According toto this, there are several aspects that should be considered at the
time of such selection, where (i) the capability to decrease surface tension and (ii) the capability to
provide a surfactant mixture’s HLB value very close to the required HLB value of the oily phase, are
the most important considerations. Due to the aforementioned, the first approach of the study was to
evaluate the surfactant’s capability to decrease the surface tension of water, as well as to determinate
the required HLB value
value of
of the
the oil
oil phase
phase in
in the
the formulation.
formulation.

3.1. Surface Tension

3.1. Surface Tensionand
andContact
ContactAngle Measurements
Angle Measurements
The
The resulting
resulting reduction
reductionin
insurface
surfacetension
tensionand
andcontact
contactangle
anglegiven byby
given the surfactants
the areare
surfactants shown in
shown
Figure 2.
in Figure 2.

2. (A) The reduced surface tension due to the concentration of surfactants used in the hair
Figure 2.
conditioner formulation.
formulation.(B)
(B)AAdrop of of
drop ultra-pure water
ultra-pure lying
water on top
lying of the
on top of oil
thephase. (C) Drops
oil phase. of the
(C) Drops
cationic
of surfactant
the cationic blendsblends
surfactant in aqueous
in aqueoussolution lying
solution on on
lying toptopofof the
the oil phase. HBD-Cl:
oil phase.
Hydroxyethyl-behenamidopropyl-diammonium chloride,
Hydroxyethyl-behenamidopropyl-diammonium chloride, BT-MS: Behentrimonium
Behentrimonium methosulphate,
methosulphate,
Polyquaternium-70.
CT-Cl: Cetrimonium chloride, and PQ-70: Polyquaternium-70.
Cosmetics 2018, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 12

Figure 2A shows that the surfactant amounts used in the prototype formulations are slightly
Cosmetics 2019, 6, 12 6 of 12
higher than the critical micellization concentration (cmc) values for each received surfactant in
aqueous media. This could be because the emulsifiers in the right quantities were needed to reach
the stabilization
Figure 2A showspointthat
in the
the heterodisperse
surfactant amounts system.
usedIn addition,
in the prototypeit was observed are
formulations thatslightly
the neutral
higher
surfactant (lauryl-glucoside)
than the critical micellizationproved to be the
concentration most
(cmc) effective
values in reducing
for each receivedsurface
surfactanttension, whichmedia.
in aqueous is in
agreement
This could with that previously
be because reported
the emulsifiers in theinright
the literature
quantities[26–28]. Likewise,
were needed such
to reach theneutral surfactant
stabilization point
has an heterodisperse
in the HLB value of 10 according
system. to the Griffin
In addition, it was method
observed(seethatsupplementary file), which
the neutral surfactant makes it in
(lauryl-glucoside)
the formulation´
proved to be thesmost
surfactant
effectivewith
in the HLB value
reducing surface closer to the
tension, 'idealized
which zone' for with
is in agreement the stabilization
that previously of
oil-in-water
reported in emulsions
the literature(HLB = 8–16)
[26–28]. [29]. Conversely,
Likewise, such neutral thesurfactant
surfactants hasCl-CT
an HLB andvalue
HBD-Clof 10have HLB
according
values of 22 method
to the Griffin and 32,(see respectively,
supplementary which arewhich
file), outside
makestheit in
ideal range to stabilize
the formulation´s oil-in-water
surfactant with the
emulsions.
HLB valueIn the case
closer of‘idealized
to the PQ-70, this surfactant
zone’ has an HLB value
for the stabilization of 13, and
of oil-in-water although(HLB
emulsions it is in
= the
8–16)ideal
[29].
zone for stabilization,
Conversely, its capability
the surfactants Cl-CT and to decrease
HBD-Clthe have surface tensionofis 22
HLB values very
and low,
32, making the surfactant
respectively, which are
less effective
outside [29]. range to stabilize oil-in-water emulsions. In the case of PQ-70, this surfactant has
the ideal
an HLBIn contrast,
value of Figure
13, and2B indicates
although it isthat theideal
in the boundary
zone forgenerated between
stabilization, the water
its capability to and the oil
decrease the
phase
surface has a hydrophobic
tension is very low, interface
makingof thec = 92.6°, [20,21,23],
surfactant which
less effective [29].decreases when the surfactants
were incorporated into the
In contrast, Figure 2B aqueous
indicatesphasethat the (Figure
boundary2C). Such a marked
generated betweendecrease was and
the water morethe evident in
oil phase
the
hasmixtures that contained
a hydrophobic interface theofCT-Cl ◦
θc = surfactant, as opposed
92.6 , [20,21,23], whichtodecreases
the mixtures whencontaining the HBD-Cl
the surfactants were
or PQ-70 surfactants.
incorporated into theThese
aqueousresults
phaseprove very 2C).
(Figure interesting,
Such a considering
marked decrease that thewaslargest
more proportion
evident in the of
the oil phase is made up of cetearyl alcohol and coconut caprylate, which
mixtures that contained the CT-Cl surfactant, as opposed to the mixtures containing the HBD-Cl or are fatty compounds with
alkyl
PQ-70 chains composed
surfactants. Theseof 14–16
resultscarbon
prove atoms. It seems the
very interesting, cetrimonium
considering thatchloride
the largest(CT-Cl) surfactant,
proportion of the
which
oil phasehas is
anmade
alkylupchain length of
of cetearyl 14 carbon
alcohol atoms, iscaprylate,
and coconut the emulsifier
whichwith a higher
are fatty affinity with
compounds to thealkyl
oil
phase.
chains composed of 14–16 carbon atoms. It seems the cetrimonium chloride (CT-Cl) surfactant, which
has an alkyl chain length of 14 carbon atoms, is the emulsifier with a higher affinity to the oil phase.
3.2. Determining the Required HLB for the Oil Phase
3.2. Determining the Required HLB for the Oil Phase
According to the thermal stress study conducted, it was found that the lowest creaming index
valuesAccording
were obtained to thewhen
thermal stress study
the system conducted,
presented it wasHLB
a surfactant found thatbetween
value the lowest12 creaming index
and 13 (Figure
values
3). were obtained when the system presented a surfactant HLB value between 12 and 13 (Figure 3).

24
22
20
18
Creaming index (%)

16
14
12
10
8 Required
6 HLB
4
2
0
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

HLB values of emulsifier blends

Initial time Final time

Figure 3. Results of the creaming index with respect to the hydrophilic–lipophilic balance (HLB) values
Figure 3. Results of the creaming index with respect to the hydrophilic–lipophilic balance (HLB)
of the cationic surfactant blends used for the emulsified prototypes.
values of the cationic surfactant blends used for the emulsified prototypes.
The results of the required HLB were consistent in the oil phase formulations, which were
Thecomposed
mainly results of of
thefatty
required HLB were
components havingconsistent in the oil
an intermediate phase
alkyl formulations,
chain which 14
length containing were
and
mainly composed
16 methylene of fatty
groups andcomponents having
also alcohol-like an intermediate
functional groups, alkyl
whichchain lengththe
decreased containing 14 and
hydrophobicity.
This result is consistent because it matches with HLB value of 12.4 obtained by the Griffin method [11]
Cosmetics 2018, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 12

Cosmetics 2019, 6, 12 7 of 12
16 methylene groups and also alcohol-like functional groups, which decreased the hydrophobicity.
This result is consistent because it matches with HLB value of 12.4 obtained by the Griffin method
[11](See
(Seesupplementary
supplementary file).
file). Therefore,
Therefore, thethe values
values of the
of the creaming
creaming index index suggest
suggest that that in order
in order to
to achieve
achieve thephysicochemical
the best best physicochemical properties
properties with stabilized
with stabilized emulsions, emulsions, it is to
it is necessary necessary to use a of
use a combination
combination
surfactantsofwith
surfactants
an HLBwith closean
to HLB close to HLB
the required the required
of the oilHLB of the oil phase.
phase.

3.3.3.3. Emulsion
Emulsion Preparation
Preparation
TheThe results
results of the
of the viscosity
viscosity andand mixed
mixed emulsifier
emulsifier HLBHLB used
used in the
in the hairhair conditioner
conditioner prototypes
prototypes
areare shown
shown in Figure
in Figure 4. Also,
4. Also, thethe calculations
calculations used
used to determine
to determine thethe
HLBHLB values
values for for
thethe emulsified
emulsified
prototypes
prototypes arearedetailed
detailedinin the
the supplementary
supplementary material.
material.InInregard
regardto the pH of
to the pHtheofemulsified systems,
the emulsified
these were
systems, these adjusted between
were adjusted 4.0 and
between 4.04.5.
andThis
4.5. isThis
dueistodue
theto
required pH values
the required of these
pH values of types
these of
products
types [30]. [30].
of products

H B D -C l : C T -C l (3 :1 )

B T -M S : C T -C l (3 :1 )

B T -M S : C T -C l (1 :3 )
H B D -C l : C T -C l (3 :1 )
20000
26 B T -M S : C T -C l (3 :1 )
D e s ir e d
24
v is c o s it y M ix e d H L B v a lu e 22 B T -M S : C T -C l (1 :3 )
15000
V is c o s it y ( c P )

20
18
16
R e q u e r id
10000 14
12
HLB
10 o f o il p h a s e
8
5000
6
4
2
0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

E m u ls if ie d s y s t e m p r o t o t y p e E m u ls if ie d s y s t e m p r o t o t y p e

Figure 4. Results
Figure of viscosity
4. Results andand
of viscosity mixed HLB
mixed values
HLB for for
values the the
emulsified prototypes.
emulsified prototypes.

These
These results
results show
show that
that thethe cationicsurfactant
cationic surfactantmixtures
mixturesneeded
neededto toobtain
obtain the
the required HLB HLB for
forthe
theoil
oilphase
phase(i.e.,
(i.e.,emulsified
emulsifiedsystem
systemprototypes
prototypes1313and and16)
16)did not
did reach
not reachthethe
viscosities
viscositiesneeded
neededforfor
these
products
these products [16]. The
[16]. Thecationic
cationicsurfactant
surfactant blends
blendsthat did
that didachieve
achievethe
therequired
requiredviscosity,
viscosity,however,
however,had
hadHLBHLB values
valuesgreater than
greater those
than required
those in the
required inoil
thephase. This result
oil phase. indicates
This result that it was
indicates thatnot possible
it was not to
find ato
possible cationic surfactant
find a cationic mixture mixture
surfactant system that would
system thatachieve
would the HLBthe
achieve required by the oilbyphase,
HLB required the oiland
phase, and the viscosity required for this class of product. According to the previous result, thethat
the viscosity required for this class of product. According to the previous result, the emulsions
fulfilledthat
emulsions the viscosity requirement
fulfilled the viscosity were selected,were
requirement evenselected,
if they were
evennot in the
if they “ideal
were notcondition” of the
in the “ideal
requiredof
condition” HLB
the[31,32].
required TheHLBprototypes selected
[31,32]. The were the
prototypes system-6
selected [HBDC-Cl:CT-Cl
were (3:1)], the system-10
the system-6 [HBDC-Cl:CT-Cl
[BT-MS:CT-Cl (1:3)], and the system-12 [(BT-MS:CT-Cl (3:1)].
(3:1)], the system-10 [BT-MS:CT-Cl (1:3)], and the system-12 [(BT-MS:CT-Cl (3:1)].

3.4.3.4. Accelerated
Accelerated StabilityTests
Stability Tests

ForFor
thethe selected
selected prototypes,
prototypes, thethe results
results of the
of the creaming
creaming index
index werewere unable
unable to show
to show a phase
a phase
separation. The formation of the layer that suggested “the emulsion break” or the separationphases
separation. The formation of the layer that suggested “the emulsion break” or the separation of of
phases was not observed and thus, the sedimentation rate could not be determined, or was assumed a
was not observed and thus, the sedimentation rate could not be determined, or was assumed with
value
with of 0 (zero).
a value This suggests
of 0 (zero). that the selected
This suggests that the systems
selecteddo have adequate
systems do havestability characteristics.
adequate stability
Nevertheless, in order to obtain a more detailed description of the stabilization process,
characteristics. Nevertheless, in order to obtain a more detailed description of the stabilization it was necessary
to analyze
process, other
it was parameters,
necessary such asother
to analyze the droplet size, pH,
parameters, electrical
such as theconductivity,
droplet size,zeta
pH,potential,
electricaland
rheological profile. All these results are shown and explained in detail in the
conductivity, zeta potential, and rheological profile. All these results are shown and explained following Sectionsin 3.5
andin3.6.
detail the following sections 3.4 and 3.5.
3.5. pH, Electrical Conductivity, Zeta Potential, and Droplet Size
3.5. pH, Electrical Conductivity, Zeta Potential, and Droplet Size
The results of the pH, electrical conductivity, zeta potential, and oil droplet size for the chosen
The results of the pH, electrical conductivity, zeta potential, and oil droplet size for the chosen
prototypes are shown in Figure 5.
prototypes are shown in Figure 5.
Cosmetics 2019, 6, 12 8 of 12
Cosmetics 2018, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 12

A 40 B C

Conductivity (S/cm)
Zeta potential (mV)
4.5 400
4.4 35
300
4.3 30
pH

4.2 25 200
4.1 20
100
4.0 15
3.9 10 0
0 4 8 12 0 4 8 12 0 4 8 12
Time (weeks) Time (weeks) Time (weeks)

D
100 Size Dx (50) 250 Size Dx (90)
14 Size Dx (10)
12 200
Size (m)

80

Size (m)
Size (m)
10
60 150
8
6 40 100
4
20 50
2
0 0 0
0 4 8 12 0 4 8 12 0 4 8 12
Time (weeks) Time (weeks) Time (weeks)

Figure
Figure 5. Results of
5. Results of (A)
(A) pH,
pH, (B)
(B) electrical
electrical conductivity,
conductivity, (C)
(C) zeta
zeta potential, and (D)
potential, and (D) particle
particle size
size
distribution for the
distribution for the selected
selected prototypes
prototypes asas aafunction time.#HBD-Cl
functionofoftime. HBD-Cl+ +CT-Cl
CT-Cl(3:1), BT-MS
(3:1), BT-MS+
+CT-Cl (1:3),∆BT-MS
CT-Cl(1:3), BT-MS++CT-Cl
CT-Cl(3:1).
(3:1).

It
It can
can bebe seen
seen in
in Figure
Figure 55 that
that the
the selected
selected prototypes
prototypes displayed
displayed similar
similar behaviors
behaviors in in most
most of of the
the
cases evaluated. For the pH measurements (Figure 5A), no significant
cases evaluated. For the pH measurements (Figure 5A), no significant changes were observed during changes were observed during
the
the course
course of of the
the 12-week
12-week study
study around
around pH pH values
values between
between 44 and and 4.5. Conversely, the
4.5. Conversely, the zeta
zeta potential
potential
presented a decrease with respect to time for the selected prototypes
presented a decrease with respect to time for the selected prototypes (Figure 5B). In the first (Figure 5B). In the first few
few
weeks,
weeks, the zeta potential changed from +35 mV to +30 mV for the surfactant blend BT-MS +
the zeta potential changed from ~+35 mV to ~+30 mV for the surfactant blend BT-MS CT-Cl
+ CT-Cl
(1:3).
(1:3). Conversely,
Conversely, blends
blends HBD-Cl
HBD-Cl ++ CT-Cl
CT-Cl and and BT-MS
BT-MS ++ CT-ClCT-Cl (3:1)
(3:1) remained
remained constant.
constant. Here,
Here, the
the zeta
zeta
potential
potential was was found
found toto decrease
decrease to to +20 and +25
+20 and +25 mV mV in in the
the very
very last
last weeks
weeks for for these
these three
three prototypes.
prototypes.
This
This behavior
behavior couldcould be
be ascribed
ascribed to to the
the migration
migration of of cationic
cationic surfactants
surfactants from from thethe oil–water
oil–water interface
interface
to
to the dispersion medium [33]. In this regard, when the cationic surfactants migrated toward the
the dispersion medium [33]. In this regard, when the cationic surfactants migrated toward the
dispersing
dispersing bulk bulkphase,
phase,the emulsion
the emulsion interface
interface lostlost
partpart
of itsofelectrostatic polarization
its electrostatic capabilities,
polarization which
capabilities,
caused the zetathe
which caused potential to decrease.
zeta potential This then
to decrease. Thiscaused the electrical
then caused conductivity
the electrical to increase
conductivity as the
to increase
surfactant counterions
as the surfactant were less
counterions attracted
were to the double
less attracted to theelectric
doublelayer formed
electric layerby the oil–water
formed interface.
by the oil–water
It then gained better electrical mobility and thus greater conductivity (Figure
interface. It then gained better electrical mobility and thus greater conductivity (Figure 5C) [34,35]. 5C) [34,35]. Regarding to
droplet size (Figure 5D), the values obtained for DX (90) contained
Regarding to droplet size (Figure 5D), the values obtained for DX (90) contained very large very large polydisperse droplet sizes,
which may have
polydisperse beensizes,
droplet formed because
which may of the been
have incorporation
formed because of air during the manufacturing
of the incorporation of airprocess.
during
Instead, the values obtained at the 4th and 8th weeks showed that
the manufacturing process. Instead, the values obtained at the 4th and 8th weeks showed that bothboth the size and polydispersity
lowered,
the size and probably due to thelowered,
polydispersity loss of airprobably
previously dueincorporated
to the loss of into
airthe emulsified
previously preparation.into
incorporated At the
the
12th week, however, it was found that the size of the droplets increased
emulsified preparation. At the 12th week, however, it was found that the size of the droplets significantly, suggesting that
this was the
increased point at which
significantly, the aggregation
suggesting that thisprocesses
was the pointbeganat[36].which Thethevalues obtainedprocesses
aggregation for DX (10) and
began
DX
[36].(50)
The showed
valuesnoobtained
variationforat 4th
DXand (10)8th andweeks, meaning
DX (50) showed that nothe variation
particle size at remained
4th and 8th stable with
weeks,
no aggregation experienced. The systems did, however, start to aggregate
meaning that the particle size remained stable with no aggregation experienced. The systems did, at week 12. An example is
the emulsion formed by HBD-Cl:CT-Cl (3:1), which showed fewer variations
however, start to aggregate at week 12. An example is the emulsion formed by HBD-Cl:CT-Cl (3:1), in size, suggesting that a
surfactant
which showed mixture of variations
fewer this type was one suggesting
in size, that projected thatthe highest stability.
a surfactant mixture of this type was one that
projected the highest stability.
3.6. Rheological Profile and Viscosity
The results of
3.6. Rheological the rheological
Profile behavior for each of the prototypes are shown in Figure 6.
and Viscosity
The results of the rheological behavior for each of the prototypes are shown in Figure 6.
 Cosmetics 2019, 6, 12 9 of 12
Cosmetics 2018, 5, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 12

2500 HBD-Cl and CT-Cl (3:1) 2500 BT-MS and CT-Cl (1:3)

0 weeks 0 weeks
4 weeks 4 weeks
2000

Viscosity (cP)
2000
Viscosity (cP)
8 weeks 8 weeks
12 weeks 12 weeks

1500 1500

1000 1000

500 500
0 50 100 150 200 0 50 100 150 200
-1 -1
Shear rate (s ) Shear rate (s )
2500 BT-MS and CT-Cl (3:1) Viscosity
0 weeks
4 weeks 2×10 5 HBD-Cl and CT-Cl (3:1)
2000
Viscosity (cP)

8 weeks BT-MS and CT-Cl (1:3)

12 weeks BT-MS and CT-Cl (3:1)
1.8×10 5
Viscosity (cP)
1500
1.6×10 5
1000
1.4×10 5

500
0 50 100 150 200 1.2×10 5
0 4 8 12
Shear rate (s-1) Time (weeks)

Rheologicalprofiles
Figure6.6.Rheological
Figure profilesand
andviscosity
viscosityvalues
valuesobtained
obtainedfor
forthe
theselected
selectedprototypes
prototypesasasa afunction
function
of time.
of time.

Here, three prototypes were observed to behave in a pseudo-plastic way [6] since the viscosity of
Here, three prototypes were observed to behave in a pseudo-plastic way [6] since the viscosity
the system decreased with an increase in shear rate. Such rheological behavior, which was required
of the system decreased with an increase in shear rate. Such rheological behavior, which was
for these types of products was due to the dosage and application form [14] that remained during
required for these types of products was due to the dosage and application form [14] that remained
the 12 week evaluation process. It is very important that this rheological behavior remained in time,
during the 12 week evaluation process. It is very important that this rheological behavior remained
because this ensures that the product (hair conditioner) can be used by consumers correctly [30,37].
in time, because this ensures that the product (hair conditioner) can be used by consumers correctly
In contrast, an increase in viscosity was obtained up until the 8th week, which saw to the viscosity
[30,37]. In contrast, an increase in viscosity was obtained up until the 8th week, which saw to the
stabilize then decrease at the 12th week. This phenomenon may be attributed to how the emulsions
viscosity stabilize then decrease at the 12th week. This phenomenon may be attributed to how the
were manufactured; where high shear forces are typically applied, which tends to incorporate air into
emulsions were manufactured; where high shear forces are typically applied, which tends to
the system, affecting the cohesiveness of the phases. Over time, however, the systems began to recover
incorporate air into the system, affecting the cohesiveness of the phases. Over time, however, the
their internal configuration [38] and this stability could also be attributed to the Hydroxy-ethyl-cellulose
systems began to recover their internal configuration [38] and this stability could also be attributed
polymer used as the viscosity agent [39]. Nevertheless, the two systems that contain the BT-MS
to the Hydroxy-ethyl-cellulose polymer used as the viscosity agent [39] . Nevertheless, the two
surfactant do start to decrease at week 12, in contrast to the system with the HBD-Cl that remains stable.
systems that contain the BT-MS surfactant do start to decrease at week 12, in contrast to the system
with the HBD-Cl that remains stable.
4. Conclusions
It was found that the required HLB for the oil phase used was between 12 and 13. However, the
4. Conclusions
cationic surfactant blends that most approached this value were incapable of reaching the viscosity
It was found that the required HLB for the oil phase used was between 12 and 13. However, the
values required for these types of products. Therefore, we conclude that our best surfactant blend
cationic surfactant blends that most approached this value were incapable of reaching the viscosity
cannot be explained by the HLB theory because of its cationic nature. Likewise, it was found that the
values required for these types of products. Therefore, we conclude that our best surfactant blend
physicochemical characterization and interfacial stabilization was provided instead by the formation of
cannot be explained by the HLB theory because of its cationic nature. Likewise, it was found that the
a structured network. This includes the non-ionic surfactant and the Hydroxy-ethyl-cellulose polymer
physicochemical characterization and interfacial stabilization was provided instead by the formation
used as the viscosity agent. In regard to the prototypes, they were found to have the appropriate
of a structured network. This includes the non-ionic surfactant and the Hydroxy-ethyl-cellulose
physical stability according to creaming index testing. The pH, electrical conductivity, and zeta
polymer used as the viscosity agent. In regard to the prototypes, they were found to have the
potential all indicated that the emulsified prototypes tended to change slightly because of the migration
appropriate physical stability according to creaming index testing. The pH, electrical conductivity,
of cationic surfactants from the interface to the dispersing phase. The rheological study showed that
and zeta potential all indicated that the emulsified prototypes tended to change slightly because of
the migration of cationic surfactants from the interface to the dispersing phase. The rheological
study showed that the three emulsified systems displayed pseudo-plastic behavior, which was ideal
Cosmetics 2019, 6, 12 10 of 12

the three emulsified systems displayed pseudo-plastic behavior, which was ideal for these types of
products. Furthermore, it was found that such systems change their viscosity over time, due, in part, to
the incorporation of both air and high strength shears in the initial manufacturing process, along with
the subsequent structural rearrangements in the emulsion. The particle size results showed a decrease
in kinetic stability for these systems with a mixture of emulsifiers containing BT-MS:CT-Cl (3:1) and
BT-MS:CT-Cl (1:3), due to the aggregation of the internal phase. The system that contained a surfactant
blend with HBD-Cl:CT (3:1), however, did remain stable, which suggests that this combination is
useful and may be an interesting alternative to formulations used for hair conditioners.

Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at http://www.mdpi.com/2079-9284/6/1/12/s1,

1. HLB calculated of Surfactants, 2. Required HLB of oil phase.
Author Contributions: P.A. made and analyzed the stability assay (from emulsion preparation to rheological
profile and viscosity), M.C.R. and J.D.E. made the surface and interfacial characterization, whereas D.R. did the
determination of required HLB. C.H.S. designed the experiments, analyzed, and discussed the data and wrote
the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Acknowledgments: The authors thank Icesi University for providing the funding for the execution of this research
work and Belleza Express S.A. from Colombia for providing the raw materials.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no commercial interest that could represent a conflict related to the study.

References
1. Im, S.H.; Jeong, Y.H.; Ryoo, J.J. Simultaneous analysis of anionic, amphoteric, nonionic and cationic surfactant
mixtures in shampoo and hair conditioner by RP-HPLC/ELSD and LC/MS. Anal. Chim. Acta 2008, 619,
129–136. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
2. Zhang, S.; Chen, J.; Perchyonok, V.T. Stability of high internal phase emulsions with sole cationic surfactant
and its tailoring morphology of porous polymers based on the emulsions. Polymer 2008, 50, 1723–1731.
[CrossRef]
3. Askvik, K.M.; Gundersen, S.A.; Sjöblom, J.; Merta, J.; Stenius, P. Complexation between lignosulfonates
and cationic surfactants and its influence on emulsion and foam stability. Colloids Surf. 1999, 159, 89–101.
[CrossRef]
4. Koh, A.; Gillies, G.; Gore, J.; Saunders, B.R. Flocculation and Coalescence of Oil-in-Water
Poly(dimethylsiloxane) Emulsions. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2000, 227, 390–397. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
5. Bataller, H.; Lamaallam, S.; Lachaise, J.; Graciaa, A.; Dicharry, C. Cutting fluid emulsions produced
by dilution of a cutting fluid concentrate containing a cationic/nonionic surfactant mixture. J. Mater.
Process. Technol. 2004, 152, 215–220. [CrossRef]
6. Bais, D.; Trevisan, A.; Lapasin, R.; Partal, P.; Gallegos, C. Rheological characterization of
polysaccharide–surfactant matrices for cosmetic O/W emulsions. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2005, 290, 546–556.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
7. Zhu, Y.; Jiang, J.; Liu, K.; Cui, Z.; Binks, B.P. Switchable pickering emulsions stabilized by silica nanoparticles
hydrophobized in situ with a conventional cationic surfactant. Langmuir 2015, 31, 3301–3307. [CrossRef]
8. BinKs, B.P.; Rodrigues, J.A.; Frith, W.J. Synergistic interaction in emulsions stabilized bya mixture of silica
nono particles and cationic surfactant. Langmuir 2007, 23, 3626–3636. [CrossRef]
9. Scott, G.V.; Robbins, C.R.; Barnhurst, J.D. Sorption of Ouaternary Ammonium Surfactants by Human Hair.
J. Soc. Cosmet. Chem. 1969, 20, 135–152.
10. Schmidts, T.; Schlupp, P.; Gross, A.; Dobler, D.; Runkel, F. Required HLB Determination of Some
Pharmaceutical Oils in Submicron Emulsions. J. Dispers. Sci. Technol. 2012, 33, 816–820. [CrossRef]
11. Pasquali, R.C.; Taurozzi, M.P.; Bregni, C. Some considerations about the hydrophilic–lipophilic balance
system. Int. J. Pharm. 2008, 356, 44–51. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
12. Taylor, P.; Pasquali, R.C.; Bregni, C.; Taurozzi, M.P.; Pasquali, R.C.; Bregni, C.; Taurozzi, M.P. New Values
of the Required Hydrophilic-Lipophilic Balance for Oil in Water Emulsions of Solid Fatty Acids and
Alcohols Obtained from Solubility Parameter and Dielectric Constant Values New Values of the Required
Hydrophilic-Lipophilic Balance for Oil in W. J. Dispers. Sci. Technol. 2009, 30, 328–331.
Cosmetics 2019, 6, 12 11 of 12

13. Guo, X.; Rong, Z.; Ying, X. Calculation of hydrophile–lipophile balance for polyethoxylated surfactants by
group contribution method. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2006, 298, 441–450. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
14. Barel, A.; Paye, M.; Maibach, H. Cosmetic Science and Technology, 3rd ed.; Informa Healtcare: New York, NY,
USA, 2009; ISBN 9781420069631.
15. Chen, G.; Tao, D. An experimental study of stability of oil–water emulsion. Fuel Process. Technol. 2005, 86,
499–508. [CrossRef]
16. Sztukowski, D.M.; Yarranton, H.W. Oilfield solids and water-in-oil emulsion stability. J. Colloid Interface Sci.
2005, 285, 821–833. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
17. Ma, Z.; Wydila, J.E.; Mark, D.I.; Brandt, L.M.; Neill, P.H. Leave-On or Rinse-Out Hair Care Conditioner
Compositions Containing Silicone Quaternary Compounds and Thickeners. U.S. Patent No. 6,696,053,
24 February 2004.
18. Tsai, P.-C.; Ding, W.-H. Determination of alkyltrimethylammonium surfactants in hair conditioners and
fabric softeners by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry with electron-impact and chemical ionization.
J. Chromatogr. A 2004, 1027, 103–108. [CrossRef]
19. Berry, J.D.; Neeson, M.J.; Dagastine, R.R.; Chan, D.Y.C.; Tabor, R.F. Measurement of surface and interfacial
tension using pendant drop tensiometry. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2015, 454, 226–237. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
20. Kahl, H.; Wadewitz, T.; Winkelmann, J. Surface Tension of Pure Liquids and Binary Liquid Mixtures. J. Chem.
Eng. Data 2003, 48, 580–586. [CrossRef]
21. Schroder, M. Work of Adhesion of a Sessile Drop to a Clean Surface. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 1999, 213, 602–605.
[CrossRef]
22. Schrader, M.E. Young- Dupre Revisited. Langmuir 1995, 11, 3585–3589. [CrossRef]
23. Stacy, R. Contact Angle Measurement Technique for Rough Surfaces. Master’s, Thesis, Michigan
Technological University, Houghton, MI, USA, 2009.
24. Klinkesorn, U.; Sophanodora, P.; Chinachoti, P.; McClements, D.J. Stability and rheology of corn oil-in-water
emulsions containing maltodextrin. Food Res. Int. 2004, 37, 851–859. [CrossRef]
25. Taherian, A.R.; Fustier, P.; Ramaswamy, H.S. Effect of added oil and modified starch on rheological properties,
droplet size distribution, opacity and stability of beverage cloud emulsions. J. Food Eng. 2006, 77, 687–696.
[CrossRef]
26. Posocco, P.; Perazzo, A.; Preziosi, V.; Laurini, E.; Pricl, S.; Guido, S. Interfacial tension of oil/water emulsions
with mixed non-ionic surfactants: Comparison between experiments and molecular simulations. RSC Adv.
2016, 6, 4723–4729. [CrossRef]
27. Azum, N.; Rub, M.A.; Asiri, A.M.; Bawazeer, W.A. Micellar and interfacial properties of amphiphilic
drug–non-ionic surfactants mixed systems: Surface tension, fluorescence and UV–vis studies. Colloids Surf.
A Physicochem. Eng. Asp. 2017, 522, 183–192. [CrossRef]
28. Kumar, S.; Mandal, A. Studies on interfacial behavior and wettability change phenomena by ionic and
nonionic surfactants in presence of alkalis and salt for enhanced oil recovery. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2016, 372, 42–51.
[CrossRef]
29. Lu, B. Évaluation of Physico-Chemical Properties of Biorefinery-Derived Amphiphilic Molecules and Their Effects on
Multi-Scale Biological Models; Université de Technologie de Compiègne: Compiègne, France, 2015.
30. Gavazzoni Dias, M.F.R. Hair cosmetics: An overview. Int. J. Trichol. 2015, 7, 2–15. [CrossRef]
31. Li, Y.; Puerto, M.; Bao, X.; Zhang, W.; Jin, J.; Su, Z.; Shen, S.; Hirasaki, G.; Miller, C. Synergism and
Performance for Systems Containing Binary Mixtures of Anionic/Cationic Surfactants for Enhanced Oil
Recovery. J. Surfactants Deterg. 2017, 20, 21–34. [CrossRef]
32. Xu, C.; Wang, D.; Wang, H.; Ma, L.; Zhu, X.; Zhu, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, F. Experimental investigation of coal
dust wetting ability of anionic surfactants with different structures. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2019, 121,
69–76. [CrossRef]
33. Schulz, E.N.; Ambrusi, R.E.; Miraglia, D.B.; Schulz, E.P.; García, S.G.; Rodriguez, J.L.; Schulz, P.C. Evaluation
of oil-in-water emulsions with cationic–anionic surfactants mixtures for potential use in the oil industry.
Colloids Surf. A Physicochem. Eng. Asp. 2016, 490, 145–154. [CrossRef]
34. Koiteh, Z. Conditioning Cleansing Cream. U.S. Patent No. 8,449,895, 28 May 2013.
35. Mirhosseini, H.; Tan, C.P.; Hamid, N.S.A.; Yusof, S. Effect of Arabic gum, xanthan gum and orange oil
contents on ζ-potential, conductivity, stability, size index and pH of orange beverage emulsion. Colloids Surf.
A Physicochem. Eng. Asp. 2008, 315, 47–56. [CrossRef]
Cosmetics 2019, 6, 12 12 of 12

36. Ryżak, M.; Bieganowski, A. Methodological aspects of determining soil particle-size distribution using the
laser diffraction method. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 2011, 174, 624–633. [CrossRef]
37. Bhushan, B. Nanoscale characterization of human hair and hair conditioners. Prog. Mater. Sci. 2008, 53,
585–710. [CrossRef]
38. Krongsin, J.; Nuisin, R.; Noppakundilograt, S.; Kiatkamjornwong, S. Preparation and Assessment of Chitosan
Encapsulated Menthol Microcapsules for Leave-on Conditioners. J. R. Inst. Thail. 2012, 37, 94–107.
39. Verica, J.; Sovilj, L.B.P. Influence of hydroxypropylmethyl cellulose–sodium dodecylsulfate interaction on
the solution conductivity and viscosity and emulsion stability. Carbohydr. Polym. 2006, 64, 41–49.

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).