Registration Dossier

Physical & Chemical properties

Boiling point

Currently viewing:

Administrative data

Link to relevant study record(s)

Reference
Endpoint:
boiling point
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
Study period:
Initated 8th September 1999
Reliability:
1 (reliable without restriction)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
guideline study
Qualifier:
according to
Guideline:
OECD Guideline 103 (Boiling point/boiling range)
Deviations:
yes
Remarks:
See principles of method if other than guideline
Qualifier:
equivalent or similar to
Guideline:
EU Method A.2 (Boiling Temperature)
Principles of method if other than guideline:
Boiling point determination could not be made per the protocol due to compound behaviour, in spite of various experimental attempts.
GLP compliance:
yes
Type of method:
differential scanning calorimetry
Key result
Remarks on result:
not determinable
Remarks:
A sublimation onset temperature of 120.4 ± 0.03 °C was observed.

The test material sublimed, melted and evaporated during the test; boiling was not observed under the test conditions. A sublimation onset temperature of 120.4 ± 0.03 ºC was observed.

Conclusions:
Under the conditions of the test, the boiling of the test material was not observed. A sublimination onset temperature of 120.4 ± 0.03 °C was observed.
Executive summary:

In a GLP compliant boiling point study conducted in accordance with standardised guideline OECD 103, the boiling point of the test material was investigated using Differential Scanning Calorimetry.

Under the conditions of the test, boiling was not observed and a sublimination onset temperature of 120.4 ± 0.03 °C was determined.

Description of key information

No boiling was observed and a sublimination onset temperature of 120.4 ± 0.03 ºC was determined according to a study performed in line with OECD Guideline 103.

Key value for chemical safety assessment

Additional information

The key study (Malinksi, 1999) was performed in line with GLP and a standardised guideline with a sufficient level of detail to assess the quality of the study. The study was performed to a good standard and was assigned a reliability score of 1 using the principle for assessing data quality as set out in Klimisch (1997).