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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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

Physical & Chemical properties

Vapour pressure

Currently viewing:

Administrative data

Link to relevant study record(s)

Description of key information

Key value for chemical safety assessment

Vapour pressure:
2.21 hPa
at the temperature of:
25 °C

Additional information

The vapour pressure of the relevant constituents of Depanol I were calculated using the international accepted QSAR tool EPI WIN v3.20 using the module MPBPWIN v1.42. This information is considered to be Klimisch 2 information.

The calculated vapour pressures were(sequence according to the perceptual share in Depanol I):

1.45mm Hg (25°C) for Dipentene (Cyclohexene, 1 -methyl-4 -(1-methylethenyl)-; CAS 138 -86 -3)

1.00 mm Hg (25°C) for Terpinolene (Cyclohexene, 1 -methyl-4 -(1 -methylethylidene)-CAS 586 -62 -9).

1.66mm Hg (25°C) for alpha Terpinene (1,3 -Cyclohexadiene, 1 -methyl-4 -(1 -methylethyl)-; CAS 99 -86 -5)

1.15mm Hg (25°C) for gamma Terpinene (1,4-Cyclohexadiene, 1-methyl-4-(1-methylethyl)-; CAS 99 -85 -4)

Since the calculations were performed using an international accepted QSAR tool where reference data and calibration sets are available and the substance falls within the applicability domain, the obtained results are considered reliable and relevant for the risk assessment according to REACH Annex XI section 1.3.

Since the major constituents of Depanol I were considered, the vapour pressure and all were in the same range (1.00 to 1.66 mm Hg at 25°C) the results are also considered as relevant for the final product. The highest vapour pressure, i.e., 1.66 mm Hg (= 2.21 hPa) will be used for the risk assessment as this represents the worst case for the human risk assessment.