# Mysteries of the Carnauba Trade Part 1 - Fun With Volume



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Easter gave me the opportunity to get busy on the stove and try and address some of the issues about carnauba. After all, we had got a lot of questions about the percentage of carnauba in our new Supernatural wax, so it is obviously still a matter of interest to some.

My main problem has always been how easy it is to market carnauba in a particular way, so the quick or casual reader of a label could assume that a very high percentage of carnauba is in a product. You could legitimately only use carnauba wax in a product, rather than beeswax for example, and claim '100% carnauba' - but as a percentage of total wax content. I always believe that the method of measurement should be clear to the observer, as APR rates are made clear to homebuyers when it comes to mortgages.

What is even more intriguing is the industry's general inclination to measure carnauba 'by volume'. This is a Mystery of the Carnauba Trade and seems to have been started by one manufacturer years ago, then the rest jumped in.

I have a problem with 'by volume' as carnauba wax is a solid - not a liquid or gas. When you buy some Cadbury's Fingers and look on the back, it says 100g of product contains 27g of Fat, should you be interested in its nutritional value. You would therefore say that 27% of a Cadbury's Finger is fat. And you wouldn't be far wrong. They have to put that info up by law, and it tends to get independently tested occasionally.

'By volume' is a great way of measuring gases (say air, or the gas for your boiler measured in cubic metres) or bulky objects that weigh s0d all - like feathers. Hence why DHL will calculate 'volumetric' weight to try and prevent you moving an artic's worth of polystyrene packing for the cost of its actual weight.

But carnauba is neither a liquid nor a gas. It tends to come in flakes or powder, although it can be melted into a liquid with minimal effort. If you measure dry flakes by volume, you will be counting a lot of air - all the spaces between the flakes - as you fill up the flask.

Here's what I mean. The pic below shows 50ml of dry carnauba in a beaker. You could assume this was eventually going to take the form of a paste wax to fill a 100ml jar, perhaps.










It is difficult to measure 50ml precisely as the flakes 'stick up' but you can see that at least 50ml of carnauba is in the beaker.

FIRST TEST - how much did it weigh?










After zeroing the digital scales, it came up with a figure of 51g. Not bad, you might say. But then we are weighing both the beaker AND the carnauba. I therefore emptied the carnauba into my melting pot and weighed the beaker on its own.










Hmmm, not so good. The beaker weighs 20g dry. So there is actually 31g of carnauba in this 50ml measurement. That means to say that a DRY volume measurement could be just 62% of a DRY weight measurement.

But why measure carnauba by volume when dry? If it can take a liquid form, why not melt it into a liquid then add it to the wax by volume when WET? This would get rid of all those nasty inconsistencies caused by the flakes in our example.

So I chucked the carnauba into a small melting pot (I am using a GU mousse container instead of my larger double boiler as 50g is very small, and melting it in a saucepan with some water in).










After about ten minutes the carnauba had melted into an amber nectar that is as every bit as delicious as a cold tinny of Fosters to people like Rubbishboy and myself 










I then decanted the molten carnauba back into the beaker and measured it again. You always lose a little carnauba when transferring between containers as it cools so quickly; a coating was left in the GU jar. 4g to be precise, according to the scales:










So now we have 27g of carnauba in the beaker (47g minus the 20g beaker). This is molten carnauba and it will cool quite quickly into a solid block. Because of some splashback it is difficult to read the graduations on the beaker, but by nibbling off the 'crown' you can just about make out where the mass fills up to.










It is approximately 25ml, although accurate measurement is very difficult. It may be fractionally less, but then there was a bit of splash that could have filled up the pool of carnauba by half a mil. So let's say 25ml for the sake of argument.

That means 27g of carnauba when measured by WET volume translates to approx 25ml of carnauba in the beaker. Or rather, the wet volume is 93% of the dry weight. (Going on this percentage would means that 46.5ml of carnauba by wet volume = 50g by dry weight).

So this is why measuring carnauba is such a mysterious art.

50ml of carnauba by dry volume out of 100ml paste wax = '50% carnauba'

IS EQUAL TO

31g of carnauba by weight out of 100ml paste wax = '31% carnauba' (assuming 100ml of paste wax weighs around 100g... 1g of water by weight = 1ml of water by volume but we quickly get into things like specific density!).

IS EQUAL TO

28.8ml of carnauba by wet volume out of 100ml paste wax = '28.8% carnauba'

Or rather frighteningly, the wet volume measurement is just 57.6% of the dry volume measurement.

Now, before anyone asks, I have no idea how other manufacturers arrive at their results, and what they put on their labels is up to them. However, what I do believe, is that consumers tend to make quick and rash assumptions when presented with figures, unless they are adequately qualified. With all of this variation around, and possible inconsistency, it would be nice if there was 1) some form of industry standard for measuring carnauba, 2) adequate explanation of the measurement technique from those who make statements about carnauba content in percentage terms and 3) some form of independent testing. All of the above exist in the food industry, which is why you don't get the fat content in your Hobnobs measured in a different way from the fat content in your Wagon Wheels.

Apologies for such a long post. I hope some of you (apart from Mr Rubbishboy) found it enlightening and if there are any errors or mistakes in my science, please do let me know 

Regards
DF


----------



## ahaydock (Jan 4, 2007)

Interesting read Dom - thanks :thumb:


----------



## Epoch (Jul 30, 2006)

Cheers Dom, 

I would assume the difference would be significantly reduced when using fine power for the dry volume calculation, due to the lack of air spaces in total volume. And thinking logically if it's a hard substance you could mill to a very fine powder for measurement. 

Although, i know why would you if melting it gave even less air space?


----------



## Brazo (Oct 27, 2005)

Great post Dom:thumb:


----------



## zed3 (Dec 24, 2007)

great write up, can see why you don't like quoting carnuba content and sell the waxes by results and reputation instead


----------



## Finerdetails (Apr 30, 2006)

great post Dom, and one the statisticians will love to try to interrepate in many ways 

Speak soon

Iain


----------



## littlemissGTO (Feb 11, 2008)

This is truly helpful to a newb like myself. Thanks for posting this Dom.


----------



## Envy Car Care (Aug 17, 2006)

Hah, now I know you weren't in fact in Cardiff, but in the kitchen; with the rolling pin.
The %age figures are open to all sorts of interpretation and distortion, but great for bragging to your customers about the 61% wax they can have on their cars


----------



## 11068 (Dec 28, 2007)

Thanks Dom, great right up, but math is not my strong point,nor science.(and I struggle with spelling somtimes as well LoL)

Dom


----------



## rubbishboy (May 6, 2006)

And just to add a little bit more confusion to this can of worms.

A jar filled with 250ml of water (you can just about make out the level I think).










And a jar filled with 250ml of finished, ready to use wax (this jar is also labelled so will be slightly heavier)










When I fill the jars I have to overfill them so that when the wax is cooled it is at the right level, the warm wax has more volume than the cooled wax.


----------



## Envy Car Care (Aug 17, 2006)

And if you buy wax from US the oz figure relate to volume and not the actual weight (and generally its less!)


----------



## magic919 (Mar 11, 2007)

I understand some quote carnauba as a percentage of the total wax-only content. That would prop up the figures.


----------



## davep (Aug 19, 2007)

Hello DF - interesting topic. As you make reference to the food industry, where I have spent many years, I thought I would chip in with a few comments (!)

Essentially, as you say, if a food product is sold by weight then the % components are also (usually) declared in the same way.

It seems to me that if a wax product is sold by volume (which is logical as it is a liquid substance) then the % carnauba should also be declared by volume. This of course should be the "wet" measurement as any other is unreliable.

Clearly, the melted carnauba has a density lower than water and an apparent SG (specific gravity) of 0.98 - according to your calculations.

Therefore, ethically, if a 100ml wax product is marketed as having 50% carnauba by volume then it should contain 51.02g dry substance.

Not sure if all this has helped as clearly there are no standards for declaration of this ingredient!

Incidentally, it appears that your scale has a tare function, so you can use this to zero the display (to include the container weight) which will save you having to transfer between containers.


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Hi Dave

Yes, the scale has a tare function; I just liked the drama of 50ml of carnauba equalling about 50g in weight - until you removed the beaker 

The true specific gravity is something like 0.996 at 25 degrees C according to the interweb, it just came to 0.98 on my hob, LOL. I am not sure whether the temp has much to do with it, or my rudimentary methods. But yes, if measured by volume in the true wet sense than what you say is true. 50% carnaba by (wet) volume should contain 51g or so of dry ingredient.

And Epoch - yes, you can get powdered carnauba and that would obviously be far more accurate to measure out 'dry' as it's a pain to melt the carnauba separately first. Micronised carnauba (sometimes called 'white carnauba' due to its looks) would be best as the particle size is smallest.

All the best
DF


----------



## HeavenlyDetail (Sep 22, 2006)

I enjoyed that Dom...


----------



## Neil_S (Oct 26, 2005)

Interesting post Dom :thumb:


----------



## Bigpikle (May 21, 2007)

excellent and informative :thumb:

sticky??


----------



## Warduke (Sep 21, 2007)

Thanks for sharing dom intresting reading...:thumb:


----------



## VIPER (May 30, 2007)

Very interesting read that, Dom :thumb:


----------



## monzablue16v (Jan 24, 2008)

Interesting post, hand made supernatural could be expensive as you make them in a saucrpan in your kitchen to order :lol:


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Glad you guys like my amateur wax experimentation  Dodo Juice really did start with some GU pots in a saucepan and my 'Junior Drugdealer' electronic scales, but now people with chemistry degrees develop and manufacture it with me. A man has to know his limitations as Dirty Harry once said. My forte is coming up with daft names and saying 'make them smell like that' and 'hmmm, not purple enough, I want it PURPLE!!!!'.

If I made Supernatural at home in a saucepan it would be even harder to get hold of as my production rate was about four pots a night on a good day. Plus it would be rubbish compared to what's in the fancy wooden pot now. Sometimes you gotta get the experts in  I think Ben at Rubbishboy's is a better 'cottage industry' wax manufacturer than I ever got to be.


----------



## stupidmonkfish (Sep 4, 2006)

Interesting, so can you tell me, in my pot of bannana armour how much of it is carnuaba???


----------



## Dave KG (Feb 23, 2006)

A very interesting read


----------



## PJS (Aug 18, 2007)

stupidmonkfish said:


> Interesting, so can you tell me, in my pot of bannana armour how much of it is carnuaba???


Sufficient amount to do the job intended.


----------



## Sam08ST (Oct 27, 2007)

Very good explanation. It would be interesting to see a writeup/process like this one of how you actually make your waxes. Although perhaps too many secrets and methods could be given away i suppose!


----------



## stupidmonkfish (Sep 4, 2006)

PJS said:


> Sufficient amount to do the job intended.


im sure it is a sufficient amount  but how much is a suffcient amount???:wave:


----------



## GBS (Mar 21, 2008)

Interesting, so what's in store for the test batch of carnauba Dodo Factory???


----------



## *MAGIC* (Feb 22, 2007)

Great read Dom


----------



## wayne_w (Jan 25, 2007)

Very interesting read.
As a note of interest, motor vehicle & aviation fuels use an industry standard of 15 degrees C to calculate the 'Corrected' volume.

All fuel movements show volumes as Natural & Corrected ( ie @ 15C )

HTH


----------



## Ducky (Mar 19, 2007)

Always enjoy reading posts like these! :thumb:


----------



## bigjse (Mar 20, 2008)

very educational, excellent experiment:thumb:


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

A true measurement of carnauba by weight or by wet volume, would see Dodo Juice waxes with somewhere between 25-40% carnauba, but if I was to use a nicely misleading dry volume figure I would therefore have to state 44-70%, although I am not sure of an exact figure as the precise recipes are the intellectual property of the chemists and quite closely guarded. I can tell you this much - they sure as heck aren't 70% carnauba by wet volume as you wouldn't be able to use them as car wax. Simple.

So the answer is from approximately 25% to 70% depending on how you measure it.

To be honest, we couldn't care less.

We DO like car waxes, and above all, making decent car waxes at affordable prices. The results and independent tests will speak for themselves. We have never compared our waxes to Royale/Vintage/Divine - people have taken it upon themselves to make those comparisons themselves, and for that we thank them. Hopefully the people who willingly spend 1000 GBP plus on a wax are making an informed and edcuated decision, with the knowledge that there is a 'comparable' alternative (that may or may not be better) on the market for less money (that may or may not tick their boxes or float their boat). We are all for freedom of choice - but after some basic education as the wax industry has been quite reliant on 'smoke and mirrors' to market its products in the past. We prefer a little more transparency and communication. After all, it would be great to see a 'by volume' manufacturer directly answer a challenge to their claims on a forum like this.

We DON'T like misleading customers or meaningless figures (and high carnauba content isn't the be all and end all of a super premium wax... it is like saying that a 700bhp dragster is going to be quicker around the Nurburgring than a 150bhp Caterham, yet the dragster can't get around corners).

Therefore, as we have always said, Dodo Juice car waxes contain sufficient carnauba for their purpose, which is to do battle with more expensive rivals, whatever the pricepoint. Performance is what counts and always has done. Forget the label and look at the paintwork.

All the best
DF


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

GBS said:


> Interesting, so what's in store for the test batch of carnauba Dodo Factory???


Aha, I'm glad you asked 

The 31g block of 100% Carnauba Wax will be posted free to the next person on this thread to post:

"I believe everything I read on car wax labels, always look for the carnauba percentage figure and have an atlas not sat nav as everyone knows the world is flat."


----------



## MotorCity (Jan 26, 2008)

Dodo Factory said:


> Aha, I'm glad you asked
> 
> The 31g block of 100% Carnauba Wax will be posted free to the next person on this thread to post:
> 
> "I believe everything I read on car wax labels, always look for the carnauba percentage figure and have an atlas not sat nav as everyone knows the world is flat."


I am the winner...

great post Dom!


----------



## Sam08ST (Oct 27, 2007)

I believe everything I read on car wax labels, always look for the carnauba percentage figure and have an atlas not sat nav as everyone knows the world is flat.

You didnt actaully POST it though Motorcity you quoted it  lol


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Sadly for Mr MotorCity, Samzetec-s wins as he did indeed post the correct phrase. I really wanted to see someone post those hallowed words 

Sam, send me a PM with your postal address and some carnauba wax is on its way to you. Do with it what you will


----------



## scooby73 (Mar 20, 2007)

A good read, thanks for posting.:thumb:


----------



## MotorCity (Jan 26, 2008)

Dodo Factory said:


> Sadly for Mr MotorCity, Samzetec-s wins as he did indeed post the correct phrase. I really wanted to see someone post those hallowed words
> 
> Sam, send me a PM with your postal address and some carnauba wax is on its way to you. Do with it what you will


I posted the phrase and just couldn't hit send (even in jest), so I backspaced it out


----------



## little john (Jun 10, 2007)

I was thining about haveing a play with some carnauba, It doesnt cost that much from places Ive found selling T1 about £3 for 500g. I think I will get my chemistry set out of the attic again. Last time it was used I set fire to the dining room table.

Great post Dom, A pot of Supernatural is next on my list, I just need to wait for my tax refund cheque.


----------



## Affection to Detail (Jul 6, 2006)

Its a good job not all of us bother reading the labels and instead buy because of the finish it gives!


----------



## glyn waxmaster (Dec 20, 2006)

Fantastic read Dom, very informative.

i was going to do the same test my-self but went to the pub instead. lol


----------



## jonnie5 (Jul 21, 2007)

Great read and I like your thinking mind. Its great to find someone thats not in it just for the money. You actually want to see the customer getting the correct information and not being fobbed off with missleading facts that bend the truth.


----------



## VIPER (May 30, 2007)

As it's been so well received, what does 'part 2' have in store and when's it due?


----------



## Slewey (Feb 13, 2008)

Very informative read Dom!
Thanks for posting


----------



## Dodo Factory (Apr 11, 2007)

Hmmm, Part 2? I feel like the masked magician. I need to see what the lawyers say 

I haven't finished with Part 1 yet. Part 1b will be coming soon


----------



## Chris_R (Feb 3, 2008)

Its not that different than how the cheap audio manufacturers quote a value of MAX power or PMPO etc in comparison to actual RMS values. The figures are meaningless as they do not tell you how they arrived at the resulting value or at what THD % that it is at that the peak reading was taken.
Remember when you did maths at school? Half the marks where always in showing your working, even if the result was wrong LOL
Interesting read indeed, I wonder how many other manufacturers of these sort of products would be happy to show their "working out" ???


----------



## NewYaris (Sep 11, 2009)

its really a good write ... thnks


----------



## Racer (Oct 27, 2005)

Nice read :thumb:


----------



## -Kev- (Oct 30, 2007)

blimey - thread from the dead


----------

