search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
TESTING


45


Data modeling to optimise use of sensory panels


Mark Cresswell, Mohamed Boosiri, Keir Joynson - Lucideon


Sensory panels play a pivotal role in evaluating sensory attributes of consumer products such as taste, aroma, texture, and appearance. Sensory panels of trained individuals are integral to the product development process, as their assessments are crucial for determining consumer acceptance and preference. Sensory panels operate under standardised conditions to ensure consistency and reliability in their evaluations. For oral healthcare products like toothpaste


and mouthwash, the sensory perception of performance is particularly vital. Consumer acceptance, preference, and continued use of these products rely on the complex sensory performance consumers experience in the mouth during use. This intricate process involves taste buds


on the tongue and olfactory receptors in the nose, creating a multisensory experience further influenced by texture, feel, consistency, and the emotional response to the individual experience. Sensory panels, therefore, are essential in ensuring these products meet consumer expectations and preferences.


Problem and solution Sensory panels can be time-consuming to organise, expensive to run, and subject to variability in results due to individual preferences and external factors such as panellist mood and environment. The need for extensive sensory panel testing is therefore a current pain point for industry, and as such there is a demand for a scalable technical solution that would reduce the quantity of sensory panel tests necessary for successfully executing new product launches. A recent study conducted in collaboration


between Lucideon and a prominent external partner was conceived, planned, and delivered with the aim of bridging the gap between objective analytical product performance data and the data derived from sensory panel evaluation. The goal was to discover replicable


correlations between the laboratory measured physical characteristics of foam quality of a range of toothpastes and the data obtained when these same toothpastes were evaluated by a trained sensory panel. The sensory panel evaluation of prototype


toothpaste formulations will always be one of the most important elements in targeting a new toothpaste product to satisfy an intended


www.personalcaremagazine.com


consumer demographic. It was hoped, however, that by developing


a data-led model to correlate objective toothpaste foam analytical data with sensory panel data, a larger number of toothpaste prototype formulations could be screened out from the development pathway on the basis of their physical foam characteristics to reduce the burden on the sensory panel. Ultimately, this could reduce the time and


resource constraint on the sensory panels involved in product development and reduce the time taken to launch new products. In the simplest terms, the original scope of


this study was to correlate the physical and analytical laboratory measured properties of prototype toothpaste formulations with the corresponding sensory panel data.


Traditional approach This study was split into multiple stages, beginning with the identification of suitable toothpaste foam characteristics and methodologies for measurement, which could then be linked to the sensory panel output data. Foams exhibit a wide variety of


characteristics that are crucial for their overall behaviour and consumer perception. These can be differentiated into features that define the bulk foam characteristics, and those that are more important for determining the microstructural behaviour. These features often have a time


dependency that impacts their perceived quality or performance. Features such as foam height, foam volume, volume of liquid present within the foam, drainage rate, and foam decay rate can all be used to describe bulk foam properties that contribute to the macroscopically perceivable behaviour of the foam. Conversely, properties such as bubble size,


bubble count, bubble shape, wall thickness, and wall elasticity are intrinsic to the surfactant system present within the base product, defining foam behaviour at the microscopic level.


The study of foam characteristics is


important to a wide variety of markets – food and drink, consumer healthcare products, the oil and gas industry (where anti-foaming behaviour is important), and others. As such, methods for their analysis are relatively mature in comparison to other physical phenomena. Several proprietary analytical instruments are suitable for the dynamic measurement of foam properties, simultaneously determining and exporting measurement data for multiple foam characteristics. No prior examples of projects linking sensory


panel data with foam analysis data were discovered during preparation for this work. To broaden the analysis, a foam analyser was used to measure as many parameters as possible simultaneously. Initially, the data set contained all possible analysable parameters, but through iterative


November 2024 PERSONAL CARE


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100