SUBSTANTIALLY SILICONE-FREE GELLED COMPOSITIONS

Abstract

The present disclosure relates to substantially silicone-free gelled compositions.

Claims

1. A gelled composition comprising i) an aliphatic solvent, ii) one or more copolymers, and iii) an antioxidant.

2. The gelled composition of claim 1, wherein the aliphatic solvent is present in the gelled composition at a concentration of about 80% to about 99.9%.

3. The gelled composition of claim 1, wherein the aliphatic solvent is an isoparaffin.

4. The gelled composition of claim 3, wherein the isoparaffin is present in the gelled composition at a concentration of about 80% to about 99.9%.

5. The gelled composition of claim 1, wherein the aliphatic solvent is selected from the group consisting of a C7-8 isoparaffin, a C8-9 isoparaffin, a C10-11 isoparaffin, a C11-12 isoparaffin, a C11-13 isoparaffin, a C13-14 isoparaffin, and any combination thereof.

6. The gelled composition of claim 1, wherein the aliphatic solvent is an Isopar solvent or a compositional equivalent.

7. The gelled composition of claim 1, wherein the aliphatic solvent is an Isopar solvent.

8. The gelled composition of claim 7, wherein the Isopar solvent is selected from the group consisting of Isopar M, Isopar C, Isopar E, Isopar G, Isopar H, Isopar L, Isopar V, and any combination thereof.

9. The gelled composition of claim 7, wherein the Isopar solvent is Isopar M.

10. The gelled composition of claim 9, wherein the Isopar M is present in the gelled composition at a concentration of about 80% to about 99.9%.

11. (canceled)

12. (canceled)

13. (canceled)

14. (canceled)

15. The gelled composition of claim 1, wherein the gelled composition comprises a first copolymer, wherein the first copolymer is Kraton G 1702, and optionally comprises a second copolymer.

16. (canceled)

17. (canceled)

18. (canceled)

19. The gelled composition of claim 1, wherein the gelled composition comprises a first copolymer, wherein the first copolymer is Kraton G 1650, and optionally comprises a second copolymer.

20. (canceled)

21. The gelled composition of claim 1, wherein the gelled composition comprises two copolymers, wherein one copolymer is Kraton G 1702 and the second copolymer is Kraton G 1650.

22. (canceled)

23. (canceled)

24. (canceled)

25. (canceled)

26. The gelled composition of claim 1, wherein the gelled composition is substantially free of a silicone.

27. The gelled composition of claim 1, wherein the gelled composition does not comprise a silicone.

28. (canceled)

29. (canceled)

30. (canceled)

31. The gelled composition of claim 1, wherein the gelled composition has a viscosity from about 5,000 cps to about 10,000 cps.

32. The gelled composition of claim 1, wherein the gelled composition has a viscosity from about 10,000 cps to about 20,000 cps.

33. A composition comprising the gelled composition of claim 1 and an oil.

34. The composition of claim 33, wherein the oil is sunflower oil.

35. The composition of claim 33, wherein the oil is selected from the group consisting of apricot oil, avocado oil, borage oil, castor oil, coconut oil, evening primrose oil, gold of pleasure oil, grape seed oil, hazelnut oil, jojoba oil, macadamia oil, passionflower oil, peach kernel oil, rice bran oil, safflower oil, sesame oil, shea oleine oil, sweet almond oil, almond oil, wheat germ oil, sunflower oil, and any combination thereof.

36. (canceled)

37. (canceled)

38. (canceled)

Description

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0135] FIG. 1 shows the testing setup for evaluation of firmness, stickiness, stringiness, and adhesiveness.

[0136] FIG. 2 shows the firmness, stickiness, stringiness, and adhesiveness of Benchmark Composition B2.

[0137] FIG. 3 shows the firmness, stickiness, stringiness, and adhesiveness of Prototype Composition P5.

[0138] FIG. 4 shows the firmness properties (g) of Benchmark Compositions B1-B3 compared to Prototype Compositions P1-P6.

[0139] FIG. 5 shows the stickiness properties (g) of Benchmark Compositions B1-B3 compared to Prototype Compositions P1-P6.

[0140] FIG. 6 shows the stringiness properties (mm) of Benchmark Compositions B1-B3 compared to Prototype Compositions P1-P6.

[0141] FIG. 7 shows the adhesive work properties (g.Math.mm) of Benchmark Compositions B1-B3 compared to Prototype Compositions P1-P6.

[0142] FIG. 8 shows the testing setup for evaluation of lubricity.

[0143] FIG. 9 shows the lubricity (friction reduction) of Benchmark Composition B2.

[0144] FIG. 10 shows the lubricity (friction reduction) of Prototype Composition P5.

[0145] FIG. 11 shows the lubricity (g) of Benchmark Compositions B1-B3 compared to Prototype Compositions P1-P6.

[0146] FIG. 12 shows the Refractive Index of Benchmark Compositions B1-B3 compared to Prototype Compositions P1-P6.

[0147] FIG. 13 shows summary of product performance of various Prototype Compositions compared to the Benchmark Compositions.

[0148] Various embodiments of the invention are described herein as follows. In one embodiment described herein, a gelled composition is provided. The gelled composition comprises i) an aliphatic solvent, ii) one or more copolymers, and iii) an antioxidant.

[0149] In another embodiment, another gelled composition is provided. This gelled composition comprises i) an aliphatic solvent, ii) a silicone, iii) one or more copolymers, and iv) an antioxidant.

[0150] In yet another embodiment, composition comprising a gelled compositions and an oil is provided.

[0151] In another embodiment, a method of making a gelled composition is provided. The method comprises the steps of a) combining an aliphatic solvent, one or more copolymers, and an antioxidant, and b) mixing the combination to form the gelled composition.

[0152] In the various embodiments, the gelled composition comprises an aliphatic solvent. As used herein, an aliphatic solvent refers to a solvent that is non-aromatic. In some embodiments, the aliphatic solvent is an isoparaffin. As used herein, an isoparaffin refers to a branched chain hydrocarbon. For instance, isoparaffins may include the Isopar™ fluids, which are described at www.exxonmobilchemical.com/en/˜/media/EB0D6F350FFD4BF782664F57343486E6.ashx.

[0153] In the various embodiments, the gelled composition comprises one or more copolymers. In some embodiments, the copolymers can be one or more styrenic block copolymers, which are well known in the art. For instance, copolymers may include the Kraton™ brand of copolymers, which are described at www.kraton.com/.

[0154] In the various embodiments, the gelled composition comprises an antioxidant. For instance, an antioxidant may include the Tinogard® brand antioxidants.

[0155] In various embodiments, the gelled composition is substantially free of a silicone. In other embodiments, the gelled composition is substantially free of a thickener. As used herein, the term “substantially free” refers to zero or nearly no detectable amount of a material, quantity, or item. For example, the amount can be less than 2 percent, less than 0.5 percent, or less than 0.1 percent of the material, quantity, or item.

[0156] Various embodiments of the present disclosure, and combinations thereof, are found in the numbered embodiment list contained herein.

[0157] EXAMPLE 1

Preparation of Gelled Compositions

[0158] Gelled compositions of the present disclosure were prepared and evaluated for viscosity and for color. In the instant example, Iospar M was utilized as the exemplary aliphatic solvent. Furthermore, Kraton G 1702 and Kraton G 1650 were utilized as the exemplary copolymers. Tinogard was used as the exemplary antioxidant.

[0159] To prepare the gelled compositions of the present disclosure, the Iospar M, Kraton G 1702, Kraton G 1650, and Tinogard were first combined at about 170° F. The combination was then mixed at about 180° F. to about 190° F. for approximately six hours. Viscosity and color of the resultant gelled composition were then evaluated.

[0160] Four comparative gelled compositions containing silicone solvents (i.e., Dow Corning 3901 Liquid Satin) were prepared and evaluated in comparison to the gelled compositions of the present disclosure.

[0161] To prepare the comparative gelled compositions of the present disclosure, the Iospar M, Kraton G 1702, Kraton G 1650, and Tinogard were first combined at about 180° F. After one hour, the Dow Corning 3901 Liquid Satin was heated to 115° F. and added to the combination. This final combination was then mixed at about 180° F. to about 190° F. for approximately six hours. Viscosity and color of the resultant gelled composition were then evaluated.

Gelled Composition 1

[0162] The ingredients of the gelled composition were as follows:

TABLE-US-00001 90.0% Isopar M 9.68% Kraton G 1702 0.3% Kraton G 1650 0.02% Tinogard

[0163] Upon evaluation at 25° C. (T-C, 5 rpm), the viscosity of the gelled composition was 131,200 cps. The saybolt color of the gelled composition was 26.

Gelled Composition 2

[0164] The ingredients of the gelled composition were as follows:

TABLE-US-00002 91.9% Isopar M 7.78% Kraton G 1702 0.3% Kraton G 1650 0.02% Tinogard

[0165] Upon evaluation at 25° C. (T-C, 5 rpm), the viscosity of the gelled composition was 36,800 cps. The saybolt color of the gelled composition was 27.

Gelled Composition 3

[0166] The ingredients of the gelled composition were as follows:

TABLE-US-00003 92.68% Isopar M 7.00% Kraton G 1702 0.3% Kraton G 1650 0.02% Tinogard

[0167] Upon evaluation at 25° C. (T-C, 5 rpm), the viscosity of the gelled composition was 29,600 cps. The saybolt color of the gelled composition was 27.

Gelled Composition 4

[0168] The ingredients of the gelled composition were as follows:

TABLE-US-00004 93.68% Isopar M 6.00% Kraton G 1702 0.3% Kraton G 1650 0.02% Tinogard

[0169] Upon evaluation at 25° C. (T-C, 5 rpm), the viscosity of the gelled composition was 22,400 cps. The saybolt color of the gelled composition was 27.

Gelled Composition 5

[0170] The ingredients of the gelled composition were as follows:

TABLE-US-00005 94.53% Isopar M 5.15% Kraton G 1702 0.3% Kraton G 1650 0.02% Tinogard

[0171] Upon evaluation at 25° C. (T-C, 20 rpm), the viscosity of the gelled composition was 5,900 cps. The saybolt color of the gelled composition was 27.

Gelled Composition 6

[0172] The ingredients of the gelled composition were as follows:

TABLE-US-00006 94.18% Isopar M 5.50% Kraton G 1702 0.3% Kraton G 1650 0.02% Tinogard

[0173] Upon evaluation at 25° C. (T-C, 10 rpm), the viscosity of the gelled composition was 11,600 cps. The saybolt color of the gelled composition was 27.

Comparative Gelled Composition A

[0174] The ingredients of the comparative gelled composition were as follows:

TABLE-US-00007 85.0% Isopar M 5.0% Dow Corning 3901 Liquid Satin 9.68% Kraton G 1702 0.3% Kraton G 1650 0.02% Tinogard

[0175] Upon evaluation at 25° C. (T-C, 5 rpm), the viscosity of the comparative gelled composition was 70,400 cps. The saybolt color of the comparative gelled composition was very hazy and opaque.

Comparative Gelled Composition B

[0176] The ingredients of the comparative gelled composition were as follows:

TABLE-US-00008 80.0% Isopar M 10.0% Dow Corning 3901 Liquid Satin 9.68% Kraton G 1702 0.3% Kraton G 1650 0.02% Tinogard

[0177] Upon evaluation at 25° C. (T-C, 5 rpm), the viscosity of the comparative gelled composition was 76,400 cps. The saybolt color of the comparative gelled composition was very hazy and opaque.

Comparative Gelled Composition C

[0178] The ingredients of the comparative gelled composition were as follows:

TABLE-US-00009 88.68% Isopar M 5.0% Dow Corning 3901 Liquid Satin 6.00% Kraton G 1702 0.3% Kraton G 1650 0.02% Tinogard

[0179] Upon evaluation at 25° C. (T-C, 5 rpm), the viscosity of the comparative gelled composition was 23,400 cps. The saybolt color of the comparative gelled composition was very hazy and opaque.

Comparative Gelled Composition D

[0180] The ingredients of the comparative gelled composition were as follows:

TABLE-US-00010 89.18% Isopar M 10.0% Dow Corning 3901 Liquid Satin 5.50% Kraton G 1702 0.3% Kraton G 1650 0.02% Tinogard

[0181] Upon evaluation at 25° C. (T-C, 10 rpm), the viscosity of the comparative gelled composition was 12,500 cps. The saybolt color of the comparative gelled composition was very hazy and opaque.

[0182] Surprisingly, the addition of the silicone solvent was not as efficient as modification of the copolymers in order to control viscosity of the gelled compositions. In other words, viscosity of the gelled compositions was able to be altered without requiring the addition of silicones to the gelled composition. Furthermore, thickeners were not necessary to formulate the gelled compositions of the present disclosure. In summary, gelled compositions of the present disclosure were able to achieve desirable properties for personal care applications without the requirement of silicones and thickeners but, instead, by incorporating the aliphatic solvent.

EXAMPLE 2

Evaluation of Gelled Compositions

[0183] Various properties of gelled compositions of the present disclosure were compared to marketed, benchmark compositions. In particular, properties such as firmness, stickiness, stringiness, and adhesiveness were evaluated.

[0184] A gelled composition of the present disclosure was combined with an oil or oil-derived component to form a Prototype Composition. In particular, six Prototype Compositions (P1-P6) were formulated as follows using “Gelled Composition 6” as described in Example 1: [0185] Prototype Composition 1 (P1): 90% gelled composition (Isopar M, Kraton G 1702, Kraton G 1650, Tinogard)+10% sunflower oil [0186] Prototype Composition 2 (P2): 80% gelled composition (Isopar M, Kraton G 1702, Kraton G 1650, Tinogard)+20% sunflower oil [0187] Prototype Composition 3 (P3): 70% gelled composition (Isopar M, Kraton G 1702, Kraton G 1650, Tinogard)+30% sunflower oil [0188] Prototype Composition 4 (P4): 60% gelled composition (Isopar M, Kraton G 1702, Kraton G 1650, Tinogard)+40% sunflower oil [0189] Prototype Composition 5 (P5): 50% gelled composition (Isopar M, Kraton G 1702, Kraton G 1650, Tinogard)+50% sunflower oil [0190] Prototype Composition 6 (P6): 50% gelled composition (Isopar M, Kraton G 1702, Kraton G 1650, Tinogard)+50% dodecanol

[0191] In comparison to the six Prototype Compositions, three marketed, benchmark compositions (B1-B3) were also evaluated. The properties of the three marketed, benchmark compositions were as follows: [0192] Benchmark Composition 1 (B1): Cyclopentasiloxane, Dimethiconol, Fragrance, Sunflower oil, and Coconut oil [0193] Benchmark Composition 2 (B2): Dimethicone, Cyclopentasiloxane, Water, Fragrance, and Sea buckthorn oil [0194] Benchmark Composition 3 (B3): Cyclopentasiloxane, Isododecane, C12-C15 Alkyl Benzoate, Kukui oil, and Phenyl trimethicone

[0195] The testing setup for evaluation of firmness, stickiness, stringiness, and adhesiveness is depicted in FIG. 1. Testing parameters were as follows:

TABLE-US-00011 Test mode Compression Pre-test speed 3 mm/s Post-test speed 5 mm/s Target mode Distance Distance 10 mm Trigger type Auto (Force) Trigger force 2 g Probe TA-23 Points/s 200

[0196] FIG. 2 and FIG. 3 graphically demonstrate the firmness, stickiness, stringiness, and adhesiveness of Benchmark Composition B2 (FIG. 2) compared to Prototype Composition P5 (FIG. 3).

Firmness

[0197] The firmness (e.g., structure or ease of application) of the Benchmark Compositions B1-B3 were compared to Prototype Compositions P1-P6. Firmness was evaluated as the force of probe as it breaks the surface of the sample.

[0198] FIG. 4 displays the firmness properties (g) of B1-B3 compared to P1-P6. The three Benchmark Compositions had similar firmness. In comparison, Prototype Compositions P4, P5, and P6 had the most similar firmness values to the Benchmark Compositions.

Stickiness

[0199] The stickiness (e.g., tackiness) of the Benchmark Compositions B1-B3 were compared to Prototype Compositions P1-P6. Stickiness was evaluated as the force exerted by probe as it pulls up from the sample.

[0200] FIG. 5 displays the stickiness properties (g) of B1-B3 compared to P1-P6. The Benchmark Compositions B1 and B2 had similar stickiness. In comparison, Prototype Compositions P4, P5, and P6 had the most similar stickiness values to the Benchmark Compositions B1 and B2.

Stringiness

[0201] The stringiness of the Benchmark Compositions B1-B3 were compared to Prototype Compositions P1-P6. Stringiness was evaluated as the distance over which sample clings to retracting probe.

[0202] FIG. 6 displays the stringiness properties (mm) of B1-B3 compared to P1-P6. The Benchmark Compositions B1 and B2 had similar stringiness. In comparison, Prototype Compositions P4, P5, and P6 had the most similar stringiness values to the Benchmark Compositions B1 and B2.

Work of Adhesion

[0203] The work of adhesion of the Benchmark Compositions B1-B3 were compared to Prototype Compositions P1-P6. Work of adhesion was evaluated as the work done by the probe to free itself from the sample.

[0204] FIG. 7 displays the adhesive work properties (g.Math.mm) of B1-B3 compared to P1-P6. The Benchmark Compositions B1 and B2 had similar adhesive work. In comparison, Prototype Compositions P4, P5, and P6 had the most similar adhesive work values to the Benchmark Compositions B1 and B2.

EXAMPLE 3

Lubricity Evaluation of Gelled Compositions

[0205] Lubricity properties of gelled compositions of the present disclosure were compared to marketed, benchmark compositions.

[0206] A gelled composition of the present disclosure was combined with an oil or oil-derived component to form a Prototype Composition. In particular, six Prototype Compositions (P1-P6) were formulated as follows using “Gelled Composition 6” as described in Example 1: [0207] Prototype Composition 1 (P1): 90% gelled composition (Isopar M, Kraton G 1702, Kraton G 1650, Tinogard)+10% sunflower oil [0208] Prototype Composition 2 (P2): 80% gelled composition (Isopar M, Kraton G 1702, Kraton G 1650, Tinogard)+20% sunflower oil [0209] Prototype Composition 3 (P3): 70% gelled composition (Isopar M, Kraton G 1702, Kraton G 1650, Tinogard)+30% sunflower oil [0210] Prototype Composition 4 (P4): 60% gelled composition (Isopar M, Kraton G 1702, Kraton G 1650, Tinogard)+40% sunflower oil [0211] Prototype Composition 5 (P5): 50% gelled composition (Isopar M, Kraton G 1702, Kraton G 1650, Tinogard)+50% sunflower oil [0212] Prototype Composition 6 (P6): 50% gelled composition (Isopar M, Kraton G 1702, Kraton G 1650, Tinogard)+50% dodecanol

[0213] In comparison to the six Prototype Compositions, three marketed, benchmark compositions (B1-B3) were also evaluated. The properties of the three marketed, benchmark compositions were as follows: [0214] Benchmark Composition 1 (B1): Cyclopentasiloxane, Dimethiconol, Fragrance, Sunflower oil, and Coconut oil [0215] Benchmark Composition 2 (B2): Dimethicone, Cyclopentasiloxane, Water, Fragrance, and Sea buckthorn oil [0216] Benchmark Composition 3 (B3): Cyclopentasiloxane, Isododecane, C12-C15 Alkyl Benzoate, Kukui oil, and Phenyl trimethicone

[0217] The testing setup for evaluation of lubricity is depicted in FIG. 8. Testing parameters were as follows:

TABLE-US-00012 Test mode Tension Pre-test speed 15 mm/s Post-test speed 10 mm/s Target mode Distance Distance 45 mm Count 10 Trigger type Button Fixture Custom Syringe with 1 ml product & 500 g weight

[0218] FIG. 9 and FIG. 10 graphically demonstrate the lubricity (friction reduction) of Benchmark Composition B2 (FIG. 9) compared to Prototype Composition P5 (FIG. 10).

Lubricity

[0219] The lubricity (e.g., friction reduction) of the Benchmark Compositions B1-B3 were compared to Prototype Compositions P1-P6. Lubricity was evaluated as the friction is the force of the syringe tip moving against the post which is reduced by a drop of the product.

[0220] FIG. 11 displays the lubricity (g) of B1-B3 compared to P1-P6. The Benchmark Composition B2 was the most lubricious benchmark composition. In comparison, Prototype Compositions P4 and P5 had the most similar lubricity values to the Benchmark Composition B2.

EXAMPLE 4

Refractive Index Evaluation of Gelled Compositions

[0221] Refractive Index (RI) properties of gelled compositions of the present disclosure were compared to marketed, benchmark compositions. Refractive Index is an indicative test of formulations or individual products for their ability to impart Shine/Gloss on hair. Refractive Index was analyzed using the Abbemat 200 (Anton Paar Company) according to the standard operating procedure available, for instance, at www.anton-paar.com.

[0222] A gelled composition of the present disclosure was combined with an oil or oil-derived component to form a Prototype Composition. In particular, six Prototype Compositions (P1-P6) were formulated as follows using “Gelled Composition 6” as described in Example 1: [0223] Prototype Composition 1 (P1): 90% gelled composition (Isopar M, Kraton G 1702, Kraton G 1650, Tinogard)+10% sunflower oil [0224] Prototype Composition 2 (P2): 80% gelled composition (Isopar M, Kraton G 1702, Kraton G 1650, Tinogard)+20% sunflower oil [0225] Prototype Composition 3 (P3): 70% gelled composition (Isopar M, Kraton G 1702, Kraton G 1650, Tinogard)+30% sunflower oil [0226] Prototype Composition 4 (P4): 60% gelled composition (Isopar M, Kraton G 1702, Kraton G 1650, Tinogard)+40% sunflower oil [0227] Prototype Composition 5 (P5): 50% gelled composition (Isopar M, Kraton G 1702, Kraton G 1650, Tinogard)+50% sunflower oil [0228] Prototype Composition 6 (P6): 50% gelled composition (Isopar M, Kraton G 1702, Kraton G 1650, Tinogard)+50% dodecanol

[0229] In comparison to the six Prototype Compositions, three marketed, benchmark compositions (B1-B3) were also evaluated. The properties of the three marketed, benchmark compositions were as follows: [0230] Benchmark Composition 1 (B1): Cyclopentasiloxane, Dimethiconol, Fragrance, Sunflower oil, and Coconut oil [0231] Benchmark Composition 2 (B2): Dimethicone, Cyclopentasiloxane, Water, Fragrance, and Sea buckthorn oil [0232] Benchmark Composition 3 (B3): Cyclopentasiloxane, Isododecane, C12-C15 Alkyl Benzoate, Kukui oil, and Phenyl trimethicone

[0233] FIG. 12 displays the Refractive Index of B1-B3 compared to P1-P6. The three Benchmark Compositions had similar Refractive Index values. In comparison, all Prototype Compositions had higher RI compared to Benchmark Compositions B1-B3. The highest RI was observed for Prototype Composition P5.

[0234] A summary of product performance of various Prototype Compositions compared to the Benchmark Compositions is displayed in FIG. 13. Prototype Compositions P4, P5, and P6 exceed the Benchmark Compositions with respect to Lubricity and Refractive Index properties. Furthermore, Prototype Compositions are comparative to the Benchmark Compositions with respect to Structure (rheology and ease of application), Tackiness, Stringiness, and Work of Adhesion. As a result, the Prototype Compositions allow for versatility in various attributes—shine, rheology, lubricity—based on the unique needs required for formulation.

EXAMPLE 5

Rate of Evaporation Evaluation

[0235] The instant example compares rate of evaporation of compositions with various solvent systems: [0236] A. Exemplary gelled composition, formulated using “Gelled Composition 6” as described in Example 1 [0237] B. Isopar M [0238] C. Cyclopentasiloxane, a 89-90% Cyclomethicone D5 (available as Xiameter PMX-0245 ; https://consumer.dow.com/en-us/pdp.xiameter-pmx-0245-cyclopentasiloxane.01645196z.html?tab=overview&id=01645196z)

[0239] The compositions were evaluated as follows. First, an oven was equilibrated to 75° C. (167° F.) and the temperature was maintained. Thereafter, approximately 50 mL of each ingredient was placed in a graduated cylinder. The initial weight (sample+cylinder) was recorded, followed by hourly recordation of weight over 6 hours. Finally, the samples were left in the oven overnight and the weight was measured in the morning.

TABLE-US-00013 Time A. Gelled B. Isopar C. Cyclomethicone (h) composition (g) M (g) (PMX-0245) Initial 133 128 138 1 133 128 138 2 133 128 138 3 133 128 138 4 133 128 138 5 133 128 138 6 133 128 138 Overnight 133 128 138

[0240] There was no observed difference in rate of evaporation expected for the various compositions at physiologically relevant temperatures. However, the evaluation may not be sensitive enough to differentiate the rates of evaporation of the solvents. A more sensitive test involving both heating and rapid air movement across the surface using a fan is contemplated.