Formulating Biphasic and Triphasic Products

Dear Valerie: Is a biphasic or triphasic product practical to manufacture? I’m formulating one of these now but want to keep in mind my budget for formula and fill costs. 

—Ina Phase

Dear Ina:

One of the first projects I worked on in the hair industry was a biphasic product with a water phase and silicone phase. One of the challenges we had was that a consumer would sometimes get a watery portion and sometimes get an oily portion on their hair while spritzing. Even though you shake the product before use, it quickly starts to separate back to its appropriate phase. It was never an even distribution! Additionally, as the consumers used the product, there was a disproportionate amount of oil to water they didn’t experience when the product was new. At the beginning of use, the product would spray more water because the dip tube in the sprayer drew from the bottom of the container (the oil sits in the top phase). As the bottle was consumed, the consumer was eventually left with so much oil in the product, the end-of-life output was predominantly our silicone phase. This is not a consistent user experience and while these products look cool, they have a low rate of consumer adoption.

But you didn’t ask me about marketing insights (although you’re welcome to print this column and drop it on the floor of your marketing department—oops!). You asked me about manufacturing. As inconsistent from a consumer experience it is to use multi-phasic products, they’re even more impractical to manufacture.

You can’t simply mix the two different phases in the same tank while filling. The mixture is never completely homogenous. I know this because we exhausted a significant effort in perfecting it. The two phases’ weights were all over the place once they separated in the bottle. They need to be separately dispensed. 

Most manufacturing facilities don’t have the equipment to simultaneously dispense two products at one time into a bottle. This equipment exists, but it’s not common, as these product formats are uncommon. If you have such a facility at your fingertips, you’re in a good position and can probably proceed assuming a little more cost is applied because two separate manufacturing tanks are needed, but not filling lines.

Most manufacturing facilities will have to pass the bottle through two filling lines, one after the other. Dispense the water phase, convey it down to a second filler and dispense the oil phase. If you have a third phase, a third filling head could be involved. And for that, you have two or three set up costs for cleaning and sanitizing the filling lines, as well as possibly doubling the labor. These product types aren’t inexpensive.

One last note: if you’re proceeding to market with this product type I recommend setting a tight tolerance on the dispensing for each fill, as you want to reduce the amount of variation. Most of these product formats are in clear packaging to showcase the multiple phases, and you want to ensure the biphasic line is consistent on shelf.

Valerie George

askvalerie@icloud.com

Valerie George is a cosmetic chemist, science communicator, educator, leader, and avid proponent of transparency in the beauty industry. She works on the latest research in hair color and hair care at her company, Simply Formulas, and is the co-host of The Beauty Brains podcast. You can find her on Instagram at @cosmetic_chemist or showcasing her favorite ingredients to small brands and home