Registration Dossier

Data platform availability banner - registered substances factsheets

Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.

The new ECHA CHEM database has been released by ECHA, and it now contains all REACH registration data. There are more details on the transition of ECHA's published data to ECHA CHEM here.

Diss Factsheets

Administrative data

Endpoint:
vapour pressure
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
Study period:
07 - 18 Jul 2017
Reliability:
1 (reliable without restriction)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
guideline study

Data source

Reference
Reference Type:
study report
Title:
Unnamed
Year:
2017
Report date:
2017

Materials and methods

Test guideline
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
OECD Guideline 104 (Vapour Pressure Curve)
GLP compliance:
yes
Type of method:
gas saturation method

Test material

Constituent 1
Chemical structure
Reference substance name:
Pyridine-2-carboxylic acid
EC Number:
202-719-7
EC Name:
Pyridine-2-carboxylic acid
Cas Number:
98-98-6
Molecular formula:
C6H5NO2
IUPAC Name:
pyridine-2-carboxylic acid

Results and discussion

Vapour pressure
Key result
Temp.:
25 °C
Vapour pressure:
0.028 Pa

Any other information on results incl. tables

Test results are shown as follows. No peak was detected at the peak position of test item in the analysis of trap solvent in the second trap and the blank.

 

Test temperature (°C)

Flow rate (mL/min)

Vapor pressure (Pa)

Measured value

Average

35

20

30

40

9.73E-2

1.01E-1

9.67E-2

9.83E-2

40

20

30

40

1.94E-1

1.70E-1

1.93E-1

1.85E-1

45

20

30

40

3.26E-1

3.15E-1

3.23E-1

3.21E-1

 

The regression equation and the vapor pressure are shown as follows:

 

Regression equation: log P (Pa) = -5039.49 x 1/T + 15.3511

Vapor pressure at 25 °C: 2.81E-2 Pa

 

It is considered that the carrier gas was sufficiently saturated with the test item at each flow rate because three measured values at each temperature were very near. It is also considered that the measured vapor pressure was well-correlated to the test temperature because the regression equation obtained by plotting the logarithm of vapor pressure (log P) versus the reciprocal number of test temperature (1/T) was a straight line. Therefore, it is concluded that the test results are acceptable.

Applicant's summary and conclusion