CHEMISTRY

INVESTIGATORY
PROJECT

NAME OF THE EXPERIMENT : FOAMING CAPACITY OF SOAPS

NAME OF THE STUDENT : AYUSHI MISHRA
CLASS & SECTION : XII – A
ROLL NO :
 Preface
 Soaps and detergents remove dirt and grease from skin and clothes.
But all soaps are not equally effective in their cleaning action. Soaps are
the Na and K salts of higher fatty acids such as Palmitic acid, Stearic
acid and Oleic acid.

 The cleansing action of soaps depends on the solubility of the long alkyl
chain in grease and that of the -COONa or the -COOK part in water.

 Whenever soap is applied on a dirty wet cloth, the non-polar alkyl

group dissolves in grease while the polar -COONa part dissolves in water.
In this manner, an emulsion is formed between grease and water which
appears as foam.

 The washing ability of soap depends on foaming capacity, as well as

the water used in cleaning. The salts of Ca and Mg disrupt the formation
of micelle formation. The presence of such salts makes the water hard and
the water is called hard water. These salts thus make the soap inefficient
in its cleaning action.

 Sodium Carbonate when added to hard water reacts with Ca and Mg

and precipitates them out. Therefore, sodium carbonate is used in the
treatment of hard water.
 This project aims at finding the foaming capacity of various soaps and
the action of Ca and Mg salts on their foaming capacity.
 Introduction
 Soap is an anionic surfactant used in conjunction with water for washing
and cleaning, which historically comes either in solid bars or in the form of a
viscous liquid. Soap consists of sodium or potassium salts of fatty acids and
is obtained by reacting common oils or fats with a strong alkaline in a process
known as saponification. The fats are hydrolysed by the base, yielding alkali
salts of fatty acids (crude soap) and glycerol.

 The general formula of soap is CH3-(CH2) n – COONa

 Soaps are useful for cleaning because soap molecules have both a hydrophilic
end, which dissolves in water, as well as a hydrophobic end, which is able to
dissolve non-polar grease molecules. Applied to a soiled surface, soapy water
effectively holds particles in colloidal suspension so it can be rinsed off with
clean water. The hydrophobic portion (made up of a long hydrocarbon chain)
dissolves dirt and oils, while the ionic end dissolves in water. The resultant
forms a round structure called micelle. Therefore, it allows water to remove
normally-insoluble matter by emulsification.

Commercial production of soap

 The most popular soap making process today is the cold process method,
where fats such as olive oil react with strong alkaline solution, while
some soapers use the historical hot process.
 Handmade soap differs from industrial soap in that, usually, an excess of
fat is sometimes used to consume the alkali (super fatting), and in that
the glycerine is not removed, leaving a naturally moisturizing soap and not
pure detergent. Often, emollients such as jojoba oil or Shea butter are added
'at trace' (the point at which the saponification process is sufficiently
advanced that the soap has begun to thicken), after most of the oils have
saponified, so that they remain unreacted in the finished soap.

Fat in soap
 Soap is derived from either vegetable or animal fats. Sodium Tallowate, a
common ingredient in much soap, is derived from rendered beef fat. Soap can
also be made of vegetable oils, such as palm oil, and the product is typically
softer.

 An array of saponifiable oils and fats are used in the process such as olive,
coconut, palm, cocoa butter to provide different qualities. For example, olive
oil provides mildness in soap; coconut oil provides lots of lather, while coconut
and palm oils provide hardness. Sometimes castor oil can also be used as an
ebullient.

 Smaller amounts of unsaponifiable oils and fats that do not yield

soap are sometimes added for further benefits.
 Preparation of soap
 In cold-process and hot-process soap making, heat may be required
for saponification.
 Cold-process soap making takes place at a sufficient temperature to ensure
the liquification of the fat being used. Unlike cold-processed soap, hot-
processed soap can be used right away because the alkali and fat saponify
more quickly at the higher temperatures used in hot-process soap making.
Hot-process soap making was used when the purity of alkali was unreliable.
 Cold-process soap making requires exact measurements of alkali and fat
amounts and computing their ratio, using saponification charts to ensure that
the finished product is mild and skin-friendly.

Hot process
 In the hot-process method, alkali and fat are boiled together at 80–100 °C
until saponification occurs, which the soap maker can determine by taste or by
eye.
 After saponification has occurred, the soap is sometimes precipitated from
the solution by adding salt, and the excess liquid drained off. The hot, soft
soap is then spooned into a mould.

Cold process
 A cold-process soap maker first looks up the saponification value of the fats
being used on a saponification chart, which is then used to calculate the
appropriate amount of alkali. Excess unreacted alkali in the soap will result
 in a very high pH and can burn or irritate skin. Not enough alkali and the
soap are greasy.
 The alkali is dissolved in water. Then oils are heated or melted if they are
solid at room temperature. Once both substances have cooled to approximately
100-110°F (37-43°C) and are no more than 10°F (~5.5°C) apart, they
may be combined. This alkali-fat mixture is stirred until "trace". There are
varying levels of trace. After much stirring, the mixture turns to the
consistency of a thin pudding. "Trace" corresponds roughly to viscosity.
Essential and fragrance oils are added at light trace.

Introduction to The Experiment

 Soap samples of various brands are taken, and their foaming capacities are
noted.
 Various soap samples are taken separately, and their foaming capacity is
observed. The soap with the maximum foaming capacity is thus, said to be
having the best cleaning capacity. The test requires to be done with distilled
water as well as with tap water. The test of soap on distilled water gives the
actual strength of the soaps cleaning capacity.
 The second test with tap water tests the effect of Ca2+ and Mg2+ salts on
their foaming capacities.
 Experiment no.1
 Objective: To compare the foaming capacity of various
soaps.
 Theory: The foaming capacity of soap depends upon the nature of the
soap and its concentration. This may be compared by shaking equal volumes
of solutions of different samples having the same concentration with same
force for the same amount of time. The solutions are then allowed to stand
when the foam produced during shaking disappears gradually. The time
taken for the foam to disappear in each sample is determined. The longer the
time taken for the disappearance of the foam for the given sample of soap,
greater is its foaming capacity or cleansing action.

 Requirements: Five 100ml conical flasks, five test tubes,

100ml measuring cylinder, test tube stand, weighing machine, stopwatch.
Five different soap samples, distilled water, tap water.

 Procedure:
1. Take five 100ml conical flasks and number them 1,2,3,4,5. Put 16ml of
water in each flask and add 8 gms of soap.
2. Warm the contents to get a solution.
3. Take five test tubes; add 1ml of soap solution to 3ml of water. Repeat the
process for each soap solution in different test tubes.
 4. Close the mouth of the test tube and shake vigorously for a minute. Do the
same for all test tubes and with equal force.
5. Start the timer immediately and notice the rate of disappearance of 2mm of
froth.

Observations:
 The following outcomes were noticed at the end of the experiment:

S. Types of Vol. of soap Vol. of water Time taken for

No. soaps solution added disappearance
of 2mm
Dove 8 ml 16 ml 11’42”
1.
Lux 8 ml 16 ml 3’28”
2.
3. Tetmosol 8 ml 16 ml 5’10”

Santoor 8 ml 16 ml 15’32”
4.
Cinthol 8 ml 16 ml 9’40”
5.
 Result:
 The cleansing capacity of the soaps taken is in the order:
Santoor > Dove > Cinthol > Tetmosol > Lux

Inference:
 From this experiment, we can infer that Santoor has the highest foaming
capacity, in other words, highest cleaning capacity.

 Lux, on the other hand is found to have taken the least amount of time for
the disappearance of foam produced and thus is said to be having the least
foaming capacity and cleansing capacity.
 Experiment no.-2
 Test for hardness in water
 Test for Ca2+ and Mg2+ salts in the water supplied
Test for Ca2+ in water:
H2O +NH4Cl + NH4OH + (NH4)2CO3  No precipitate
Test for Mg2+ in water:
H2O +NH4Cl + NH4OH + (NH4)3PO4  No precipitate

 The tests show negative results for the presence of the salts causing
hardness in water. The water used does not contain salts of Ca2+ and
Mg2+. The tap water provided is soft and thus, the experimental results
and values hold good for distilled water and tap water

BIBLIOGRAPHY
 Parts of this project have been referred from foreign sources and have
been included in this investigatory project after editing.
 References
 The references of the sources are as follows:

 Books:
Together With Lab Manual Chemistry-XII
Comprehensive Chemistry - 12

 Internet sources:
www.wikipedia.org
www.google.com
www.yahoo.com