hesitation and with a normal spray pattern. If the first round of sprayings gives good results, then repeated sprayings are almost always conducted. Poor results can be caused by excessive moisture in the formula—noting that the REACH compounds are quite hydroscopic and their containers must be kept dry and tightly closed. In fact, laboratory preparations are found 18 Spray August 2016 to be statistically higher in moisture than the equivalent production product, since the concentrate portion is exposed to the atmosphere for more time. Other spray problems may relate to valve orifices, flashing and to concentrate forced up the valve dip tube during Under-the Cap (U-t-C) propellant injection, without being flushed out by using a Through-the-Valve (T-t-V) gasser to add a portion of the propellant. There are other causes of poor spray results, including the formulation, but these are less likely. Antiperspirant Regulations Starting in late 1992, CARB began regulating the VOC content of AP/ Deos. It uniquely used the term of HVOC to cover propellants and LVOC to designate such volatile solvents as ethanol. Its limits under Section 9401(a)(1) are set forth in Table 2. The change from 0% MVOC to 40% MVOC is the only upward revision in the history of CARB regulations. It was done reluctantly when marketers convinced them that replacing the hydrocarbon MVOCs with HFC-152a (a non-VOC) would result in unpleasant chemical changes. However, the changes would never occur if a mixture of one Table 2: CALIFORNIA VOC LIMITS FOR AEROSOL ANTIPERSPIRANTS Active Ingredient MVOC Maximum LVOC Maximum 12/31/92 60% 20% 1/1/97 40% 10% 1/1/99 0 10% 1/1/01 40% 10% part HFC-152a to two parts of hydrocarbon were to be used. Since HFC- 152a and either propane, iso-butane or n-butane blends produce high pressure azeotropes, only the low pressure n-butane could be used in order for the 1:2 mixture to have a pressure less than the U.S. Dept. of Transportation (DOT) limit of 180 psi-g at 130°F. Consequently, aerosol antiperspirants made since 2001 have used 20% HFC-152a and 40% of n-butane in their formulas. Under Section 94502(d)(3)C)(1), CARB has directed antiperspirant marketers to provide them with annual reports showing that they have performed significant research toward the creation of commercially acceptable formulations with MVOC contents lower than 40%. The regulation specifically includes any research involving approved propellants other than HFC-152a. To date, industry efforts have been unsuccessful. The U.S. FDA (and Canada) regard all antiperspirants as OTC drugs, although many other countries do not. Under regulations developed several years ago, the FDA has required aerosol antiperspirants to use product labels that identify the INCI name and weight percentage of active ingredients—in this case “Aluminum Chlorohydrate XX%”. Below that, the usual listing of inactive ingredients is to be printed, using smaller type. Some other requirements apply, but these are the most distinctive. The AP/Deo segment is now doing quite well, with many marketers participating. The trend is now toward aluminum cans, often shaped. A popular fill weight is 3.8oz. (108g), but many others can be seen, and the percentage of ACH is usually in the 9–11% range. The competitive stick products are also doing well, although sales of roll-ons, squeeze bottles, pads, etc. have declined. Spray Dove Dry Spray from Unilever comes in an aluminum can, which has superseded steel cans in customer preference for AP/Deo products. New AP/Deo Dry sprays from Church & Dwight include Arm & Hammer Ultra Max and Arrid. Antiperspirant Aerosols... a Review
Spray August 2016
To see the actual publication please follow the link above