etilene — etichetta CAS 74-85-1

etilene

0,99 €

Etylen, CAS 74-85-1

🔒 Modalità demo — questo articolo non è in vendita.

Sostanza legale. dhscientific.com è una dimostrazione della piattaforma MOL-GOD — non vendiamo nulla e nessun ordine viene evaso. Le sostanze vietate vengono bloccate qui automaticamente dal canone normativo (confronta ad es. l'eptacloro).

Audit della tua SDS — gratuito → · Contatti

MolGod_SDSCARD_1
REACH 2020/878
v2 · 21.07.2026
Category:
🧬 Visualizzatore di molecole 3D
Caricamento molecola...
Modello 3D Ethylene, CAS 74-85-1, formula molecolare C2H4, massa molare 28.05 g/mol
Panoramica chimica: EthyleneMolGod_OVERVIEW_1
Formula molecolareC2H4
Peso molecolare28.05 g/mol
Punto di fusione-169.11 °C
Punto di ebollizione-103.72 °C
LogP (lipofilia)1.2
Nome IUPACethene
SMILESC=C
InChIKeyVGGSQFUCUMXWEO-UHFFFAOYSA-N

Sinonimi: ETHYLENE · Ethene · Acetene · Elayl · Olefiant gas

Fonti dei dati: PubChem (NLM/NIH)
Ultimo aggiornamento: 2026-11-10

📊 Proprietà fisico-chimiche

Riferimento rapido

Formula: C2H4
MW: 28.05 g/mol
CAS: 74-85-1
Aspetto: Colorless gas
Odore: Sweet
Odore: Sweet

Proprietà dettagliate

Proprietà Valore Unità Conditions Source
Punto di fusione (mp) -169.11 °C (-272.4 °F) 1 atm
Punto di ebollizione (bp) -103.72 °C (-154.7 °F) 1 atm
Punto di infiammabilità -100.00 °C (-148 °F) closed cup
Solubilità in acqua 0.131 g/L 25 °C (77 °F)
🔬 Proprietà avanzate

Identificatori chimici

SMILES: C=C

Fonti dei dati: PubChem, NIST Chemistry WebBook, CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics (103rd ed.)

Ultimo aggiornamento: 2026-07-11

Stato normativo della sostanza
Questa sostanza è soggetta a requisiti normativi: gestione dei rifiuti pericolosi (BDO). Dettagli nella sezione "Stato normativo (REACH/ECHA/CLP)" e nella scheda SDS. Informazione normativa — non limita l'acquisto nel negozio.
🧮 Calcolatore stechiometricoMolGod_STOICH_1
🔍 Identificatori esterniMolGod_EXTID_1
12 su 16 sistemi ID75%
DatabaseIdentificatoreAzioni
CAS Registry Number74-85-1Apri →
PubChem CID6325Apri →
InChIKeyVGGSQFUCUMXWEO-UHFFFAOYSA-NApri →
InChIInChI=1S/C2H4/c1-2/h1-2H2
SMILESC=C
EC Number200-815-3Apri →
KEGG CompoundC06547Apri →
HMDBHMDB0029594Apri →
ChemSpider6085Apri →
MeSH UID (NLM)C036216Apri →
UNII (FDA)91GW059KN7Apri →
WikiData QIDQ151313Apri →

Fonti: PubChem (NIH), Wikidata SPARQL, KEGG, ChEMBL (EBI), CompTox CTX (EPA).

📡 Spettroscopia — CAS 74-85-1MolGod_SPECHUB_MAIN
📊 Spettri (NMR, IR, MS, UV-Vis) (1)

Tipi di spettri disponibili: IR

Spettro IR (KBr, 4000-400 cm⁻¹)

446 punti dati · Fonte: NIST WebBook · NIST ↗ · 📥 JCAMP-DX
📋 Tabella dei picchi (peak assignment)
Type Position Intensità Assegnazione
IR 454.01 1 —
IR 461.51 1 —
IR 469.02 1 —
IR 476.53 1 —
IR 484.04 1 —
IR 491.55 1.1 —
IR 499.06 1.1 —
IR 506.57 1.1 —
IR 514.08 1.1 —
IR 521.59 1.1 —
IR 529.1 1.1 —
IR 536.61 1.1 —
IR 544.12 1 —
IR 551.63 1 —
IR 559.14 1 —
IR 566.65 1.1 —
IR 574.16 1.1 —
IR 581.67 1.1 —
IR 589.17 1.1 —
IR 596.68 1.1 —
🎓 Guida all'interpretazione degli spettri (per studenti)
Come leggere uno spettro IR
  • 3200-3600 cm⁻¹ — stiramento O-H (picco allargato = legame a idrogeno)
  • 2850-3000 cm⁻¹ — stiramento C-H (sp³)
  • 1650-1750 cm⁻¹ — stiramento C=O (chetoni, aldeidi, esteri)
  • 1400-1600 cm⁻¹ — vibrazioni dell'anello aromatico
  • 1000-1300 cm⁻¹ — stiramento C-O (eteri, alcoli)
  • Nessun assorbimento = gruppo funzionale assente → confrontare con un riferimento

Fonti: LibreTexts ↗, Silverstein (Spectrometric ID) ↗

📚 Riferimenti scientifici (Chicago Author-Date) (9 sources)

📚 La bibliografia dei libri è in attesa di generazione. I manuali generali curati sono disponibili qui sotto; i libri di Google Books specifici per CAS possono essere scaricati dal pannello di amministrazione.

  1. National Institute of Standards and Technology. 2024. "NIST Chemistry WebBook, SRD 69." Gaithersburg, MD: NIST. Accessed 2025-01-01. ↗
  2. Spectral Database for Organic Structure Determination (SDBS). 2024. National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST), Japan. Accessed 2025-01-01. ↗
  3. Ulrich, Eldon L., Hideo Akutsu, John F. Doreleijers, Yoko Harano, Yannis E. Ioannidis, Jundong Lin, Miron Livny, et al. 2008. "BioMagResBank." Nucleic Acids Research 36 (D1): D402–D408. [DOI ↗]
  4. Horai, Hisayuki, Masanori Arita, Shigehiko Kanaya, Yoshito Nihei, Tasuku Ikeda, Kazuhiro Suwa, Yuya Ojima, et al. 2010. "MassBank: A Public Repository for Sharing Mass Spectral Data for Life Sciences." Journal of Mass Spectrometry 45 (7): 703–714. [DOI ↗]
  5. Linstrom, P.J., and W.G. Mallard, eds. 2024. NIST Chemistry WebBook, NIST Standard Reference Database Number 69. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology. ↗
  6. McDonald, M. Shane, Mike McAvoy, and Ajit Bhalerao. 1988. "JCAMP-DX: A Standard Form for Exchange of Infrared Spectra in Computer Readable Form." Applied Spectroscopy 42 (1): 151–162. [DOI ↗]
  7. PubChem. 2024. "PubChem Compound Database." National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health. Accessed 2025-01-01. ↗
📐 Proprietà fisico-chimiche (database) 6 campi MolGod Score: Nessuna fonte
Proprietà Valore Unità Conditions Source
Punto di fusione -169.11 °C 1 atm
Punto di ebollizione -103.72 °C 760 mmHg
Solubilità in acqua 0.131 g/L 25°C
Punto di infiammabilità -100.00 °C closed cup
Temperatura di autoaccensione 450.00 °C in air
logP (ottanolo/acqua) 1.200 — 25°C
📚 Riferimenti scientifici (Chicago Author-Date) (12 sources)
  1. Haynes, William M., ed. 2024. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 105th ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press/Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-1-032-55554-4. ↗
  2. National Institute of Standards and Technology. 2024. "NIST Chemistry WebBook, SRD 69." Gaithersburg, MD: NIST. Accessed 2025-01-01. ↗
  3. Yaws, Carl L. 2014. The Yaws Handbook of Physical Properties for Hydrocarbons and Chemicals. 2nd ed. Oxford: Gulf Professional Publishing.
  4. PubChem. 2024. "PubChem Compound Database." National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health. Accessed 2025-01-01. ↗
  5. Marrero, J., and R. Gani. 2001. "Group-Contribution Based Estimation of Pure Component Properties." Fluid Phase Equilibria 183–184: 183–208. ↗
  6. Joback, K. G., and R. C. Reid. 1987. "Estimation of Pure-Component Properties from Group-Contributions." Chemical Engineering Communications 57 (1–6): 233–243. ↗
  7. Sangster, J. 1997. Octanol-Water Partition Coefficients: Fundamentals and Physical Chemistry. Chichester: Wiley. ISBN 978-0-471-97397-3.
  8. Mannhold, Raimund, and Han van de Waterbeemd. 2001. "Substructure and Whole Molecule Approaches for Calculating Log P." Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design 15 (4): 337–354. ↗
  9. Perrin, Ditlev D., Boyd Dempsey, and E. P. Serjeant. 1981. pKa Prediction for Organic Acids and Bases. London: Chapman and Hall. ISBN 0-412-21090-5.
  10. Constantinou, Leonidas, and Rafiqul Gani. 1994. "New Group Contribution Method for Estimating Properties of Pure Compounds." AIChE Journal 40 (10): 1697–1710. ↗
  11. Ertl, Peter, Bernhard Rohde, and Paul Selzer. 2000. "Fast Calculation of Molecular Polar Surface Area as a Sum of Fragment-Based Contributions and Its Application to the Prediction of Drug Transport Properties." Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 43 (20): 3714–3717. ↗
🔄 Convertitore di unità di concentrazione LIVE MolGod_UNITCONV_1

Inserisci la concentrazione Ethylene in qualsiasi unità — il resto verrà calcolato automaticamente.

MW: 28.05 g/mol · IUPAC Gold Book ↗

⚗️ Formule di conversione + citazioni (per formula)
ConversionFormulaAccuratezzaSource
% (w/v) ↔ molarityc (mol/L) = (% × 10) / MW±0.5% rel. when density ≈ 1.0 g/mLIUPAC (2019)
millimolar ↔ molarc (mol/L) = mM × 10⁻³ExactCohen ER, Cvitaš T, Frey JG, Holmström B, Kuchitsu K, Marquardt R, Mills I, Pavese F, Quack M, Stohner J, Strauss HL, Takami M, Thor AJ (2007)
molarity (mol/L)c = n/V = (m/MW)/V±0.1% (depends on MW precision)IUPAC (2019)
parts per million (mg/L) ↔ molarityc (mol/L) = ppm / (1000 × MW); equivalently ppm = mg/L for dilute aqueous±1% (density-independent for dilute solutions)IUPAC (2019)
mg/mL ↔ molarityc (mol/L) = (mg/mL × 1000) / MW / 1000 = mg/mL / MW × 1±0.2%Cohen ER, Cvitaš T, Frey JG, Holmström B, Kuchitsu K, Marquardt R, Mills I, Pavese F, Quack M, Stohner J, Strauss HL, Takami M, Thor AJ (2007)
g/L ↔ molarityc (mol/L) = (g/L) / MW±0.1% (depends on MW precision)Cohen ER, Cvitaš T, Frey JG, Holmström B, Kuchitsu K, Marquardt R, Mills I, Pavese F, Quack M, Stohner J, Strauss HL, Takami M, Thor AJ (2007)
mmol/L ↔ molarityc (mol/L) = mmol/L × 10⁻³ExactCohen ER, Cvitaš T, Frey JG, Holmström B, Kuchitsu K, Marquardt R, Mills I, Pavese F, Quack M, Stohner J, Strauss HL, Takami M, Thor AJ (2007)
Celsius ↔ KelvinT(K) = t(°C) + 273.15±0.01 K (ITS-90 scale)BIPM (Bureau International des Poids et Mesures) (2019)
Celsius ↔ FahrenheitT(°F) = T(°C) × 9/5 + 32±0.1 °FThompson A, Taylor BN (2008)
density-corrected % ↔ molarityc (mol/L) = (%w/w × ρ × 10) / MW, ρ in g/mL±0.1% when ρ known to 3 decimalsCohen ER, Cvitaš T, Frey JG, Holmström B, Kuchitsu K, Marquardt R, Mills I, Pavese F, Quack M, Stohner J, Strauss HL, Takami M, Thor AJ (2007)
📚 Bibliografia (8 fonti autorevoli)
  1. Thompson A, Taylor BN (2008). Guide for the Use of the International System of Units (SI). NIST Special Publication 811 · DOI: 10.6028/NIST.SP.811-2008
    → Primary SI standard for US scientific usage
  2. Cohen ER, Cvitaš T, Frey JG, Holmström B, Kuchitsu K, Marquardt R, Mills I, Pavese F, Quack M, Stohner J, Strauss HL, Takami M, Thor AJ (2007). Quantities, Units and Symbols in Physical Chemistry — The IUPAC Green Book. RSC Publishing, 3rd ed. · DOI: 10.1039/9781847557889 · ISBN: 978-0-85404-433-7
    → Canonical IUPAC guide for chemistry quantities/units
  3. BIPM (Bureau International des Poids et Mesures) (2019). The International System of Units (SI), 9th edition. BIPM · ↗
    → International SI definitions (incl. redefined kilogram 2019)
  4. ISO/IEC (2022). Quantities and units — Part 1: General. International Organization for Standardization — ISO 80000-1:2022 · ↗
    → General rules for physical quantities and units
  5. ISO/IEC (2019). Quantities and units — Part 9: Physical chemistry and molecular physics. International Organization for Standardization — ISO 80000-9:2019 · ↗
    → Concentration / molality / amount-of-substance conventions
  6. Tiesinga E, Mohr PJ, Newell DB, Taylor BN (2021). CODATA recommended values of the fundamental physical constants: 2018. Rev. Mod. Phys. 93(2):025010 · DOI: 10.1103/RevModPhys.93.025010
    → Avogadro, gas constant, molar volume (2019 SI revision)
  7. IUPAC (2019). Compendium of Chemical Terminology — the IUPAC Gold Book (online). IUPAC · DOI: 10.1351/goldbook
    → Definitions of mass fraction, molality, normality, ppm, activity
  8. Mills IM, Cvitaš T, Homann K, Kallay N, Kuchitsu K (1988). Quantities, Units and Symbols in Physical Chemistry. Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1st ed. · ISBN: 0-632-01773-5
    → Historical predecessor of IUPAC Green Book
Compatibilità con i solventiMolGod_SOLV_1

Stima basata sulla solubilità in acqua e sul logP. Dati indicativi — non sostituiscono studi sperimentali.

SolventeCompatibilitàNoteRiferimenti
Water~ ModeratalogP moderato
EtOH+ BuonaEtOH — solvente polare universale
Acetone+ BuonaAcetone — buono per composti mediamente polari
DCM+ BuonaDCM — buono per composti apolari
DMSO+ BuonaDMSO — potente solvente aprotico
THF+ BuonaTHF — ampio intervallo di solubilità
Hexane- ScarsaScarsa solubilità in esano
CHCl3+ BuonaCHCl3 — buono per composti mediamente polari e apolari

Fonti dei dati per logP/solubilità: logP: 1.20

📚 Riferimenti scientifici per i solventi (Chicago Author-Date) — fare clic per espandere

Ogni solvente dispone di 5 fonti scientifiche indipendenti (NIST/CRC/IARC/Hansen/Reichardt/Smallwood/GESTIS). Citazioni complete di seguito.

Water · NIST CAS lookup ↗
  1. Rumble, John R., ed. 2023. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 104th ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. [link ↗]
  2. International Association for the Properties of Water and Steam (IAPWS). 1997. "Release on the Static Dielectric Constant of Ordinary Water Substance." IAPWS R8-97. [link ↗]
  3. Reichardt, Christian, and Thomas Welton. 2011. Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry. 4th ed. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH. https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527632220. [link ↗]
  4. Hansen, Charles M. 2007. Hansen Solubility Parameters: A User's Handbook. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420006834. [link ↗]
  5. IFA. n.d. "Water." GESTIS Substance Database. Institut für Arbeitsschutz der Deutschen Gesetzlichen Unfallversicherung. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
EtOH · NIST CAS lookup ↗
  1. Rumble, John R., ed. 2023. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 104th ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. [link ↗]
  2. Reichardt, Christian, and Thomas Welton. 2011. Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry. 4th ed. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH. https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527632220. [link ↗]
  3. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography. 3rd ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183. [link ↗]
  4. Smallwood, Ian M. 1996. Handbook of Organic Solvent Properties. London: Arnold. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-340-64578-9.X5000-9. [link ↗]
  5. IFA. n.d. "Ethanol." GESTIS Substance Database. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
Acetone · NIST CAS lookup ↗
  1. Reichardt, Christian, and Thomas Welton. 2011. Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry. 4th ed. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH. https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527632220. [link ↗]
  2. Hansen, Charles M. 2007. Hansen Solubility Parameters: A User's Handbook. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. [link ↗]
  3. Rumble, John R., ed. 2023. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 104th ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. [link ↗]
  4. Smallwood, Ian M. 1996. Handbook of Organic Solvent Properties. London: Arnold. [link ↗]
  5. IFA. n.d. "Acetone." GESTIS Substance Database. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
DCM · NIST CAS lookup ↗
  1. National Institute of Standards and Technology. n.d. "Methane, dichloro- (CAS 75-09-2)." NIST Chemistry WebBook, SRD 69. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
  2. Hansen, Charles M. 2007. Hansen Solubility Parameters: A User's Handbook. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. [link ↗]
  3. International Agency for Research on Cancer. 1999. "Dichloromethane." IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans 71: 251–315. [link ↗]
  4. Reichardt, Christian, and Thomas Welton. 2011. Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry. 4th ed. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH. [link ↗]
  5. IFA. n.d. "Dichloromethane." GESTIS Substance Database. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
DMSO · NIST CAS lookup ↗
  1. Wypych, George. 2019. Handbook of Solvents. Volume 1: Properties. 3rd ed. Toronto: ChemTec Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2018-0-02235-3. [link ↗]
  2. Reichardt, Christian, and Thomas Welton. 2011. Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry. 4th ed. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH. [link ↗]
  3. Hansen, Charles M. 2007. Hansen Solubility Parameters: A User's Handbook. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. [link ↗]
  4. National Institute of Standards and Technology. n.d. "Methane, sulfinylbis- (CAS 67-68-5)." NIST Chemistry WebBook. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
  5. IFA. n.d. "Dimethyl sulfoxide." GESTIS Substance Database. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
THF · NIST CAS lookup ↗
  1. Armarego, Wilfred L. F., and Christina Li Lin Chai. 2009. Purification of Laboratory Chemicals. 6th ed. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-85617-567-8.50003-3. [link ↗]
  2. Hansen, Charles M. 2007. Hansen Solubility Parameters: A User's Handbook. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. [link ↗]
  3. National Institute of Standards and Technology. n.d. "Furan, tetrahydro- (CAS 109-99-9)." NIST Chemistry WebBook. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
  4. Smallwood, Ian M. 1996. Handbook of Organic Solvent Properties. London: Arnold. [link ↗]
  5. IFA. n.d. "Tetrahydrofuran." GESTIS Substance Database. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
Hexane · NIST CAS lookup ↗
  1. National Institute of Standards and Technology. n.d. "Hexane (CAS 110-54-3)." NIST Chemistry WebBook. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
  2. Hansen, Charles M. 2007. Hansen Solubility Parameters: A User's Handbook. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. [link ↗]
  3. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography. 3rd ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. [link ↗]
  4. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. 1999. Toxicological Profile for n-Hexane. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. [link ↗]
  5. IFA. n.d. "n-Hexane." GESTIS Substance Database. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
CHCl3 · NIST CAS lookup ↗
  1. International Agency for Research on Cancer. 1999. "Chloroform." IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans 73: 131–182. [link ↗]
  2. National Institute of Standards and Technology. n.d. "Methane, trichloro- (CAS 67-66-3)." NIST Chemistry WebBook. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
  3. Hansen, Charles M. 2007. Hansen Solubility Parameters: A User's Handbook. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. [link ↗]
  4. Reichardt, Christian, and Thomas Welton. 2011. Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry. 4th ed. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH. [link ↗]
  5. IFA. n.d. "Chloroform." GESTIS Substance Database. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
Teoria della solubilità (applicata nella previsione della compatibilità):
  1. Yalkowsky, Samuel H., and Shri C. Valvani. 1980. "Solubility and Partitioning I: Solubility of Nonelectrolytes in Water." Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 69 (8): 912–922. https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.2600690814 — General Solubility Equation (GSE): logS = 0.5 − logP − 0.01(MP−25).
  2. Hansen, Charles M. 2007. Hansen Solubility Parameters: A User's Handbook. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420006834 — Tripletta HSP (dD, dP, dH) + formula Ra.
  3. Reichardt, Christian, and Thomas Welton. 2011. Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry. 4th ed. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH. https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527632220 — E_T(30) polarity scale, solwatochromia.
  4. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography. 3rd ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183 — Eluotropic series, polarity index.
  5. PubChem Compound Database — CAS 74-85-1 lookup ↗ — logP (XLogP3), water solubility experimental + predicted.

Bibliografia completa nell'accordion RIFERIMENTI (in fondo alla pagina) — Chicago Manual of Style 17th ed., Author-Date.

🛡️ Sicurezza — CAS 74-85-1MolGod_SAFEHUB_MAIN
Avviso sulle limitazioni dei dati. Le informazioni sulla sicurezza contenute in questa pagina hanno carattere informativo e non sostituiscono la scheda di dati di sicurezza (SDS) completa. Prima di utilizzare il prodotto, consultare la scheda di dati di sicurezza aggiornata del produttore e le linee guida GHS/CLP. La classificazione CLP riguarda la sostanza pura bulk, non i preparati commerciali.

Classificazione GHS/CLP — Regolamento (CE) n. 1272/2008 + UN GHS Rev. 9 (2021).

⚠️ Pericolo (Danger)
GHS02 — Infiammabile
GHS02 Infiammabile
GHS04 — Gas sotto pressione
GHS04 Gas sotto pressione
GHS07 — Irritante / nocivo
GHS07 Irritante / nocivo

🚨 Indicazioni di pericolo (H)

  • H220 — Gas altamente infiammabile.
  • H336 — Può provocare sonnolenza o vertigini.

🛡 Consigli di prudenza (P)

  • P203 — Procurarsi, leggere e seguire tutte le istruzioni di sicurezza prima dell’uso.

✓ Classificazione armonizzata ai sensi dell'allegato VI del regolamento CLP (CE) 1272/2008 (classificazione ufficiale, vincolante). Numero indice: 601-010-00-3.

Riferimento (Chicago): European Chemicals Agency. "ethylene, Index No. 601-010-00-3." In Table 3 of Annex VI to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 (CLP Regulation), 23rd Adaptation to Technical Progress. Helsinki: European Chemicals Agency, 2026. https://echa.europa.eu/information-on-chemicals/annex-vi-to-clp.

⚠ IARC — Gruppo 3: non classificabile quanto alla cancerogenicità per l'uomo (valutato dall'IARC). (Valutazione indipendente delle evidenze di cancerogenicità da parte di IARC/WHO — integra la classificazione CLP soprastante.)
Riferimento (Chicago): IARC. 2026. IARC Monographs on the Identification of Carcinogenic Hazards to Humans: CAS 74-85-1. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer, World Health Organization. https://monographs.iarc.who.int/list-of-classifications/. (Accessed 2026-11-12.)
Classificazione dall'elenco locale MOL-GOD (snapshot) — non verificata rispetto all'elenco IARC corrente. Verifica

Traduzioni: Regolamento CLP (CE) 1272/2008, Allegato III e IV. Dati: PubChem/NLM.

📚 Riferimenti scientifici consolidati — Chicago Author-Date 10 sources

Riferimenti raccolti da tutte le schede del Safety Hub. CAS: 74-85-1 · PubChem ↗

  1. Parlament Europejski i Rada UE. 2008. "Rozporządzenie (WE) nr 1272/2008 w sprawie klasyfikacji, oznakowania i pakowania substancji (CLP)." Dz.Urz. UE L 353. [↗] GHS, Normative
  2. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). 2021. "Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS), Ninth Revised Edition." United Nations, Geneva. [↗] GHS
  3. Goldfrank, Lewis R., Robert S. Hoffman, Mary Ann Howland, et al.. 2019. "Goldfrank's Toxicologic Emergencies, 11th ed.." McGraw-Hill Education, New York. ISBN 978-1-25-985961-8. Pierwsza pomoc, Toksykologia
  4. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). 2023. "NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards (DHHS Publ. 2005-149)." U.S. Department of Health and Human Services / CDC, Cincinnati, OH. [↗] Pierwsza pomoc, PPE, Toksykologia
  5. European Committee for Standardization (CEN). 2016. "EN 374-1:2016 — Protective gloves against dangerous chemicals and micro-organisms." CEN, Brussels. [↗] PPE
  6. UNECE. 2023. "European Agreement Concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road (ADR 2025)." United Nations, Geneva. [↗] Utylizacja, Regulacje
  7. National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). 2022. "NFPA 400 — Hazardous Materials Code." NFPA, Quincy, MA. [↗] Magazynowanie
  8. Urben, P.G. (ed.). 2017. "Bretherick's Handbook of Reactive Chemical Hazards, 8th ed.." Butterworth-Heinemann / Elsevier, Oxford. [↗] Magazynowanie
  9. Ministerstwo Klimatu i Środowiska RP. 2023. "Baza danych o produktach i opakowaniach oraz o gospodarce odpadami (BDO)." Ministerstwo Klimatu i Środowiska, Warszawa. [↗] Utylizacja
  10. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC / WHO). 2024. "IARC Monographs on the Identification of Carcinogenic Hazards to Humans — List of Classifications." WHO, Lyon. [↗] Toksykologia

Le schede con riferimenti propri (Emergency, PPE, Storage, Waste) contengono ulteriori voci bibliografiche all'interno delle rispettive sezioni.

📈 Statistica analitica (t-test · RSD · Grubbs · Q-Dixon) ICH Q2

Incolla una serie di misure replicate (CSV oppure un numero per riga). Il calcolatore calcolerà la media, la deviazione standard e il 95% CI, e rileverà gli outlier (Grubbs + Dixon Q).

Separatore: virgola, spazio, tab, nuova riga. Min 3 misurazioni.
📐 Formule statistiche
  • x̄ = Σxᵢ / n — media aritmetica
  • s² = Σ(xᵢ - x̄)² / (n-1) — varianza campionaria
  • s = √s² — deviazione standard
  • RSD% = (s / x̄) × 100% — deviazione standard relativa
  • CI₉₅ = x̄ ± t(0.05, n-1) × s / √n — Student's t
  • G = |xᵢ - x̄| / s — test di Grubbs
  • Q = |xsuspect - xnearest| / |xmax - xmin| — Dixon Q-test

Fonte: ICH Q2(R2) Validation of Analytical Procedures · ICH PDF ↗

🔬 Metodi HPLC/GC (3 metod)
📄
Identification of Phenolic Compounds in the Invasive Plants Staghorn Sumac and Himalayan Balsam: Impact of Time and Solvent on the Extraction of Phenolics and Extract Evaluation on Germination Inhibition
HPLC-DADPlants202488% ✓CC-BYResearch method (specificity, robustness)
Colonna: C18
Fase: mobile phases were used to separate the phenolic compounds: A (0
Rivelazione: UV 530 nm
Flusso: 0.60 mL/min
Temp.: 20.0 °C
Inj.: 20 μL
Gradient: program described by Mikulic-Petkovsek et al
Mikulic-Petkovsek M, Ravnjak E, Rusjan D. Identification of Phenolic Compounds in the Invasive Plants Staghorn Sumac and Himalayan Balsam: Impact of Time and Solvent on the Extraction of Phenolics and Extract Evaluation on Germination Inhibition. Plants. 2024;13:3339. doi:10.3390/plants13233339
🔗 DOI🏠 PMC📚 PubMed📄 PDF
An HPLC-MS-DAD analysis of phenolic compounds was carried out on the extracts of staghorn sumac (Rhus typhina L.) and Himalayan balsam (Impatiens glandulifera Royle). This study focuses on the influence of solvent type and extraction time on the phenolic extraction efficiency from both invasive plants. Methanol extraction resulted in a 4.2 times higher content of hydroxybenzoic acids, a 3.7 times higher content of hydroxycinnamic acids, a 3.2 times higher content of flavanols, a 9.6 times higher content of flavanones, and an 8.7 times higher content of flavonols in the Himalayan balsam extract compared to aqueous extraction. Anthocyanins were only detected in the alcohol-based extraction. In comparison, the aqueous extraction from staghorn sumac resulted in a higher yield of total hydroxybenzoic acids, hydroxycinnamic acids, and flavonols, while the methanol extraction resulted in a 1.4-fold lower total polyphenolic content compared to the aqueous extraction. The type of solvent had no significant effect on the total content of flavanols in staghorn sumac. Extraction time considerably affected the total phenolic content in both plant extracts. After 84 h of extraction, the staghorn sumac extract showed a 3.5-fold increase in the total phenolic content compared to the initial measurement. In contrast, the Himalayan balsam extract showed a 40% decrease in the total phenolic content after 84 h. The Himalayan balsam extract reduced the germination of perennial ryegrass seeds by 55%, while the staghorn sumac extract reduced it by 80%. Both extracts also inhibited shoot and root growth of perennial ryegrass, although the Himalayan balsam extract at a concentration of 0.125 g/mL stimulated root growth of perennial ryegrass. The strategic use of invasive alien plants could be an effective approach to control their spread in the environment, potentially reducing management costs. The effectiveness of this approach depends largely on the type and content of allelochemicals pr...
L.Roylephytochemistryphenolic componentsextraction efficiencyinvasive plant speciesgermination reduction
📄
Standardization of Juniperus macrocarpa Sibt. & Sm. and Juniperus excelsa M. Bieb. Extracts with Carbohydrate Digestive Enzyme Inhibitory and Antioxidant Activities
HPLCIranian Journal of Pharmaceutical Research202190% ✓CC-BYResearch method (specificity, robustness)
Colonna: CN, 5 μm
Fase: mobile phase contained 10% solvent A (acetonitrile:water: formic acid, 50:50:0
Rivelazione: UV 735 nm
Flusso: 1.00 mL/min
Temp.: 25.0 °C
Inj.: 20 μL
Gradient: system was started from the mobile phase contained 10% solvent…
Gök H, Orhan N, Özüpek B, Pekacar S, Selvi Ş, Orhan D. Standardization of Juniperus macrocarpa Sibt. & Sm. and Juniperus excelsa M. Bieb. Extracts with Carbohydrate Digestive Enzyme Inhibitory and Antioxidant Activities. Iranian Journal of Pharmaceutical Research : IJPR. 2021;20:441-455. doi:10.22037/ijpr.2021.114838.15055
🔗 DOI🏠 PMC📚 PubMed📄 PDF
Juniperus species growing in Turkey are used for various medicinal purposes in traditional folk medicine. We aimed to evaluate in-vitro antidiabetic (α-glucosidase and α-amylase inhibition assays), antiobesity (pancreatic lipase inhibition assay), and antioxidant (ABTS and DPPH radical scavenging activities, ferric reducing activity, metal chelating activity, and phosphomolybdenum assay) activities of the extracts obtained from branches, leaves, and fruits of Juniperus macrocarpa and Juniperus excelsa. The branch (IC50 = 67.1 ± 1.7 µg/mL) and leaf ethyl acetate extracts (IC50 = 83.4 ± 0.8 µg/mL) of J. macrocarpa exhibited the strongest activity on the α-glucosidase enzyme. Besides that, J. excelsa leaf methanol extract exerted remarkable α-amylase inhibitory activity (IC50 = 950.1 ± 3.5 µg/mL). Only J. macrocarpa branch and J. excelsa leaf ethyl acetate extract slightly inhibited pancreatic lipase enzyme with 2963.3 ± 736.4 and 2343 ± 557.8 µg/mL IC50 values, respectively. The RP-HPLC-DAD analysis results demonstrated that the more active J. macrocarpa extracts are richer in agathisflavone, amentoflavone, and umbelliferone than J. excelsa extracts. With this study, it is concluded that J. macrocarpa branch and leaf ethyl acetate extracts may be a new source of α-glucosidase enzyme inhibitory activity and agathisflavone, amentoflavone can be used in the standardization of the extracts.
AntidiabeticantioxidantJuniperus macrocarpaJuniperus excelsaRP-HPLC
📄
Phytochemical Characterization of Saudi Mint and Its Mediating Effect on the Production of Silver Nanoparticles and Its Antimicrobial and Antioxidant Activities
HPLCPlants202387% ✓CC-BYResearch method (specificity, robustness)
Colonna: C18, 5 μm
Fase: mobile phase, two buffers were used: buffer A (military Q water and…
Rivelazione: UV 280 nm
Flusso: 0.90 mL/min
Temp.: 30.0 °C
Inj.: 5 μL
Qanash H, Bazaid A, Binsaleh N, Alharbi B, Alshammari N, Qahl S, et al. Phytochemical Characterization of Saudi Mint and Its Mediating Effect on the Production of Silver Nanoparticles and Its Antimicrobial and Antioxidant Activities. Plants. 2023;12:2177. doi:10.3390/plants12112177
🔗 DOI🏠 PMC📚 PubMed📄 PDF
The green synthesis of nanoparticles (NPs) is attracting enormous attention as a new area of study that encompasses the development and discovery of new agents for their utilization in different fields, such as pharmaceuticals and food. Nowadays, the use of plants, particularly medicinal plants, for the creation of NPs has emerged as a safe, ecofriendly, rapid, and simple approach. Therefore, the present study aimed to use the Saudi mint plant as a medicinal plant for the synthesis of silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) and to evaluate the antimicrobial and antioxidant activities of AgNPs compared to mint extract (ME). A phenolic and flavonoid analysis that was conducted by using HPLC indicated the presence of numerous compounds in the ME. Through an HPLC analysis, chlorogenic acid at a concentration of 7144.66 µg/mL was the main detected component in the ME, while catechin, gallic acid, naringenin, ellagic acid, rutin, daidzein, cinnamic acid, and hesperetin were identified in varying concentrations. AgNPs were synthesized by using ME and were confirmed via UV–visible spectroscopy at 412 nm of the maximum absorption. The mean diameter of the synthesized AgNPs was measured by TEM to be 17.77 nm. Spectra obtained by using energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy indicated that silver was the main element formation in the created AgNPs. The presence of various functional groups, analyzed by using Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), indicated that the mint extract was responsible for reducing Ag+ to Ag0. The spherical structure of the synthesized AgNPs was confirmed by X-ray diffraction (XRD). Furthermore, the ME showed reduced antimicrobial activity (a zone of inhibition of 30, 24, 27, 29, and 22 mm) compared with the synthesized AgNPs (a zone of inhibition of 33, 25, 30, 32, 32, and 27 mm) against B. subtilis, E. faecalis, E. coli, P. vulgaris, and C. albicans, respectively. The minimum inhibitory concentration of the AgNPs was lower than that of the ME for all of t...
Saudi mintplant natural productsilver nanoparticles (AgNPs)antimicrobialantioxidant
📈 Validazione del metodo (ICH Q2)

Nessun dato di validazione. Contattare l'autore del metodo.

Parametri secondo: ICH Q2(R2) ↗

📋 Confronto dei metodi
Technique Colonna Tempo di analisi Rivelazione Fase mobile Source
HPLC-DAD C18 — UV 530 nm mobile phases were used to separate the phenolic… DOI ↗
HPLC CN — UV 735 nm mobile phase contained 10% solvent A (acetonitrile:water: formic… DOI ↗
HPLC C18 — UV 280 nm mobile phase, two buffers were used: buffer A… DOI ↗
🔧 Risoluzione problemi HPLC/GC
Picchi larghi / tailing
Cause: Colonna usurata, pH della fase errato, sovraccarico della colonna, dead volume
Soluzione: Sostituire la colonna, verificare il pH del tampone (±0.2), ridurre il volume di iniezione, controllare i raccordi
Deriva della linea di base
Cause: Fase mobile contaminata, gradiente, temperatura instabile
Soluzione: Degassare la fase, filtrare 0.22 µm, stabilizzare la temperatura della colonna, lavare il sistema
Nessun picco
Cause: Lunghezza d'onda errata, la sostanza non eluisce, decomposizione termica, fase errata
Soluzione: Verificare λmax, prolungare il gradiente, abbassare la temperatura, cambiare la fase mobile
Picchi fantasma (ghost peaks)
Cause: Contaminazione del sistema, carry-over, flaconcini contaminati
Soluzione: Pulire il sistema (MeOH/H₂O), usare nuove fiale, iniettare un bianco
Basso recupero
Cause: Adsorbimento sulle pareti, estrazione insufficiente, decomposizione
Soluzione: Aggiungi IS, silanizza la vetreria, ottimizza l'estrazione, verifica la stabilità

Fonti: Snyder, Kirkland & Dolan ↗, Waters ↗

📊 Validazione del metodo HPLC (ICH Q2(R1)) PARTIAL

3 metrics need experimental data

Parametro Valore Unità Criterio ICH Q2 Status
Linearità (R²) nessun dato unitless R² ≥ 0.999 (≥0.99 per la bioanalitica) —
LOD (S/N = 3:1) nessun dato ng/mL S/N ≥ 3:1 (concentrazione rilevabile più bassa) —
LOQ (S/N = 10:1) nessun dato ng/mL S/N ≥ 10:1 (LOQ ≥ 3×LOD tipicamente) —
Precisione (RSD intraday, n=6) nessun dato % RSD RSD ≤ 2% (intraday) / ≤ 3% (interday) per l'API —
Accuratezza (recupero, 3 livelli) nessun dato % (target 100±2%) Recovery 98-102% (target 100%) —
Intervallo di linearità nessun dato es. 0.1-100 ng/mL Min. 80-120% della concentrazione nominale —
Selettività/Specificità nessun dato qualitative Nessuna interferenza — picco dell'analita completamente risolto (Rs ≥ 2.0) —
Robustezza (robustness) nessun dato RSD < 2% con variazione del ±5% RSD < 2% con piccole variazioni dei parametri —
Legend: ✓ PASS ⚠ CAUTION ✗ FAIL — NO_DATA
📚 Riferimenti scientifici (Chicago Author-Date) — fare clic per espandere

Standard di convalida dei metodi analitici — 4 fonti indipendenti (ICH + USP + AOAC + Snyder).

  1. International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH). 2005. Validation of Analytical Procedures: Text and Methodology Q2(R1). ICH Expert Working Group. [link ↗] — Gold-standard ICH guideline — accepted by EMA, FDA, MHLW, NMPA
  2. United States Pharmacopeia (USP) Convention. 2024. USP General Chapter <621> Chromatography. USP-NF 2024 ed. USP. [link ↗]
  3. AOAC International. 2016. Appendix F: Guidelines for Standard Method Performance Requirements. AOAC INTERNATIONAL. [link ↗] — AOAC SMPR — alternative to ICH Q2 for food/dietary supplements
  4. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography. 3rd ed. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-0-470-16754-0. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183 [link ↗] — Industry standard textbook — Chapter 11 covers method validation
  5. Snyder, L. R., J. J. Kirkland, and J. L. Glajch. 1997. Practical HPLC Method Development. 2nd ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-0-471-00703-6. — Classic method-development reference (DryLab heritage).
  6. Rozet, Eric, et al.. 2013. Analysis of recent pharmaceutical regulatory documents on analytical method validation. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2007.03.111 [link ↗] — Comparison of FDA / EMA / ICH validation expectations — used for ICH Q2(R1) interpretation.
  7. Heyden, Yvan Vander, et al.. 2009. Robustness of pharmaceutical liquid chromatographic methods. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchromb.2008.10.052 [link ↗] — Plackett-Burman design for robustness — basis of ICH Q2 §3.7.
  8. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists. 2nd ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-1-119-31378-3. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793 [link ↗] — Modern (UHPLC) update of validation chapter — practical RSD/LOD examples.
  9. Meyer, Veronika R.. 2010. Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography. 5th ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-0-470-68218-0. — European pharmacopeial perspective — complements USP/AOAC.
  10. Kazakevich, Yuri V., and Rosario LoBrutto, eds.. 2007. HPLC for Pharmaceutical Scientists. Wiley-Interscience. ISBN 978-0-471-68162-4. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470087954 [link ↗] — Pharma-focused validation case studies (specificity, robustness).
  11. European Medicines Agency (EMA). 2011. Guideline on bioanalytical method validation EMEA/CHMP/EWP/192217/2009. EMA Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use. [link ↗] — EMA bioanalytical companion to ICH Q2(R1) for clinical samples.

· ⚠ Avvisi normativi SVHC/REACH ↑

🔧 Risoluzione dei problemi HPLC — albero decisionale 6 problemi comuni

Diagnostica dei 12 problemi HPLC più comuni con albero decisionale (5 passaggi per problema). Fonte: Snyder/Kirkland/Dolan 3rd ed. Chapter 17 + LCGC LC Troubleshooting columns 1989-2024.

Picchi allargati (broad peaks) medium

Sintomo: Tutti i picchi nel cromatogramma sono più larghi del previsto (FWHM > 2× della norma)

🔍 Albero diagnostico:
  1. 1. Verifica se tutti i picchi sono allargati o solo alcuni
    → SÌ: Tutti → problema strumentale (colonna o sistema)
    → NO: Solo alcuni → problema chimico (interazione con la colonna per analiti specifici)
  2. 2. Sostituisci con una colonna di prova — il problema scompare?
    → SÌ: COLONNA usurata — packing danneggiato, void nei primi mm. Sostituiscila.
    → NO: Problema nel sistema LC
  3. 3. Controllare il volume morto (dead volume) — loop di iniezione, connessioni, rivelatore
    → SÌ: Loop > 100 µL per una colonna da 4.6 mm o connessioni allentate → sostituire le ferrule, accorciare i tubi
    → NO: Continua diagnostica
  4. 4. Test di temperatura: aumentare la colonna da 25°C a 40°C
    → SÌ: Picchi più stretti → cinetica di trasferimento di massa troppo lenta (aumentare T)
    → NO: Continue
  5. 5. Controllare il flow rate rispetto al valore ottimale di van Deemter per questa colonna
    → SÌ: Ottimale per 4.6mm/5µm = 1.0 mL/min, per 2.1mm/3µm = 0.4 mL/min
    → NO: Continue
⚠️ Cause comuni:
  • Colonna usurata (>2000 iniezioni senza guard)
  • Volume morto del sistema > 100 µL (loop errato, tubi lunghi, ferrule allentate)
  • Temperatura troppo bassa (cinetica di trasferimento di massa)
  • Flow rate al di fuori dell'ottimale di van Deemter
  • Solvente del campione più forte della fase A
✓ Soluzioni:
  • ✓ Sostituire la colonna (quando >2000 iniezioni)
  • ✓ Controllare tutte le connessioni — tubi il più corti possibile
  • ✓ Aumentare la T della colonna a 40°C (se la sostanza è stabile)
  • ✓ Ridurre il flow all'ottimale di van Deemter
  • ✓ Sciogliere il campione nella fase A (non in organico puro)
Coda dei picchi (tailing, T > 1.5) high

Sintomo: I picchi presentano una "coda" prolungata sul lato di eluizione tardiva (asimmetria T = b/a > 1.5 secondo USP)

🔍 Albero diagnostico:
  1. 1. La sostanza contiene gruppi basici (ammino, piridina)?
    → SÌ: Sì → interazioni silanoliche! Aggiungere 0.1% TFA o 5-10 mM TEA alla fase A.
    → NO: Continue
  2. 2. Controllare il pH della fase mobile rispetto al pKa della sostanza
    → SÌ: pH = pKa ± 1 → ionizzazione parziale, peak split. Portare il pH a ≥ 2 unità di distanza dal pKa.
    → NO: Continue
  3. 3. Controllare l'età della colonna (>1500 iniezioni?)
    → SÌ: Sì → silanoli esposti (column bleed). Sostituire con una colonna con endcapping più elevato (XTerra, Symmetry).
    → NO: Continue
  4. 4. Il campione contiene metalli (Fe, Cu dalle fiale di vetro)?
    → SÌ: Sì → utilizzare fiale incolori di tipo II o PFA. EDTA 0.1mM nel campione.
    → NO: Continue
⚠️ Cause comuni:
  • Interazioni silanoliche (analita basico + silanoli liberi del gel di silice)
  • pH al limite del pKa dell'analita (peak split)
  • Colonna vecchia (column bleed, elevata attività silanolica)
  • Metalli nel campione (chelazione → tailing)
  • Sovraccarico della colonna (>50 µg su una colonna da 4.6mm)
✓ Soluzioni:
  • ✓ Aggiungere 0.1% TFA (UV) o 0.1% acido formico (LC-MS) alla fase A
  • ✓ Scegliere una colonna con endcapping ad alta purezza: Waters XBridge BEH, Phenomenex Kinetex
  • ✓ Lavorare a pH ≥ 2 unità di distanza dal pKa
  • ✓ EDTA 0.1mM nel campione (chelazione Fe/Cu)
  • ✓ Ridurre il volume di iniezione a ≤ 20 µL per una colonna da 4.6mm
Deriva della linea di base (baseline drift) medium

Sintomo: La linea di base aumenta o diminuisce sistematicamente per >5 minuti

🔍 Albero diagnostico:
  1. 1. Si sta utilizzando un gradiente (B% in aumento)?
    → SÌ: Sì → assorbimento diverso delle fasi A e B a dλ. Cambio di solvente nell'UV-cutoff. Controllare l'assorbanza UV del % di organico.
    → NO: Continua (isocratico)
  2. 2. Controllare la temperatura della colonna — è stabile a ±0.5°C?
    → SÌ: Sì (stabile) → continua
    → NO: Instabile → attivare il termostato della colonna (>25°C controllato)
  3. 3. Test: spegnere l'autosampler, far funzionare solo pompa+colonna+rivelatore
    → SÌ: La deriva scompare → contaminazione dell'autosampler (pulire l'ago, il septum)
    → NO: Continue
  4. 4. Controllare l'età della lampada (D2 per UV)
    → SÌ: Sì (>1500 ore) → sostituire la lampada
    → NO: Continue
⚠️ Cause comuni:
  • Eluizione a gradiente con UV-cutoff diverso delle fasi
  • T della colonna instabile
  • Contaminazione dell'ago/septum dell'autosampler
  • Lampada UV vecchia (>1500h)
  • Cella di flusso del rivelatore sporca
  • Colonna non equilibrata (<10 volumi di colonna)
✓ Soluzioni:
  • ✓ Pre-equilibrare la colonna per 10-15 volumi di colonna al 100% A
  • ✓ Termostato colonna attivo, T 30-40°C stabile
  • ✓ Pulire la flow cell del rivelatore con soluzione ACN:H2O 50:50
  • ✓ Sostituire la lampada D2 se >1500h
  • ✓ Usare la baseline subtraction (funzione nativa Chromeleon, Empower)
Nessun picco / picco perso (no peak) critical

Sintomo: Il picco atteso dell'analita non compare nel cromatogramma

🔍 Albero diagnostico:
  1. 1. L'iniezione è stata effettivamente eseguita?
    → SÌ: Controllare il log dell'autocampionatore, la pressione della pompa (dovrebbe calare durante l'iniezione)
    → NO: Problema dell'autocampionatore → controllare il loop, l'ago, il campione nella fiala
  2. 2. Il campione è nella fiala (volume corretto, non evaporato)?
    → SÌ: Continue
    → NO: Nessun campione — ri-pipettare
  3. 3. Stabilità del campione — preparato >24h fa?
    → SÌ: Sì → degradazione. Ri-preparare un campione fresco.
    → NO: Continue
  4. 4. Controllare la lunghezza d'onda di rilevazione rispetto al λmax della sostanza
    → SÌ: Rilevazione a λ NON corrisponde al λmax → nessun segnale. Scansione DAD 200-400nm.
    → NO: Continue
  5. 5. Test: iniettare uno standard puro (di concentrazione nota, fresco)
    → SÌ: Lo standard dà un picco → problema con il campione (matrice, derivatizzazione)
    → NO: Nessun picco anche con lo standard → problema di sistema (colonna, fase, gradiente)
⚠️ Cause comuni:
  • Campione non prelevato dalla fiala (bug dell'autocampionatore)
  • Campione degradato (>24h pH/temp/luce)
  • Rilevazione alla lunghezza d'onda errata
  • Fase mobile errata (es. TFA dimenticato)
  • Colonna invertita / fase stazionaria errata
  • La sostanza eluisce sul fronte (V0) → non trattenuta, non visibile
✓ Soluzioni:
  • ✓ Ri-preparare un campione fresco secondo il protocollo esatto
  • ✓ Scansione UV-Vis DAD 200-400nm + ricerca del λmax
  • ✓ Controllare la composizione della fase mobile — TFA aggiunto?
  • ✓ Testare la direzione inversa della colonna (con cautela!)
  • ✓ Per ritenzione <1 min — abbassare il % B, MeOH al posto di ACN
  • ✓ Controllare la tabella "expected_rt" in wp_molgod_hplc_methods
Pressione troppo alta (pressure too high) critical

Sintomo: Pressione della pompa > 80% del massimo della colonna o shutdown del sistema con errore high-pressure

🔍 Albero diagnostico:
  1. 1. Controllare che la colonna sia collegata correttamente (direzione della freccia)
    → SÌ: OK
    → NO: Colonna invertita → invertirla (non lavorare mai "al contrario")
  2. 2. Test: rimuovere la colonna dal sistema, far girare pompa+rivelatore da soli
    → SÌ: La pressione scende a <50 bar → problema nella colonna (intasata)
    → NO: La pressione rimane alta → filtro in-line intasato, frit sporco
  3. 3. Controllare il filtro pre-colonna (frit in-line)
    → SÌ: Sporco e brunastro → sostituire
    → NO: Continue
  4. 4. Retro-lavare la colonna con ACN:H2O 50:50 senza la colonna — scompare?
    → SÌ: Particelle bloccate nel primo mm — un flush di 30 min può recuperarla
    → NO: Sostituire la colonna
⚠️ Cause comuni:
  • Filtro in-line (frit) intasato da particelle
  • Salting-out del buffer (precipitazione ad alto %B)
  • Il campione contiene materiale in sospensione (filtrare a 0.22 µm prima dell'iniezione)
  • Colonna intasata (compattazione del letto della colonna)
  • Gradiente con fase buffer + molto organico → precipitazione del sale
✓ Soluzioni:
  • ✓ Filtrare SEMPRE il campione con PVDF 0.22 µm prima dell'iniezione
  • ✓ Sostituire il filtro in-line ogni 100 iniezioni (o quando la pressione aumenta >20%)
  • ✓ NON usare buffer fosfato >20mM + >70% ACN (il sale precipita)
  • ✓ Lavare la colonna per 30 min con ACN:H2O 50:50 in direzione inversa (quando il produttore lo consente)
  • ✓ Pre-colonna 4×3mm per proteggere la colonna principale
Picchi fantasma (ghost peaks) high

Sintomo: Picchi inspiegabili sul cromatogramma assenti nella calibrazione

🔍 Albero diagnostico:
  1. 1. Test: iniezione in bianco (solvente puro del campione)
    → SÌ: Compare un ghost → contaminazione del sistema o degli eluenti
    → NO: Compare solo con il campione → matrice
  2. 2. Il ghost cresce con il gradiente (eluisce ad alta %B)?
    → SÌ: Sì → colonna sovraccarica o composti fortemente trattenuti dalla corsa precedente
    → NO: Indipendente dal gradiente → carryover dell'autocampionatore
  3. 3. Increase carryover wash (between injections)
    → SÌ: Aiuta → il carryover era la causa. Protocollo di lavaggio più forte.
    → NO: Continue
  4. 4. Iniezione di acqua pura — c'è un picco?
    → SÌ: Sì → contaminazione della fonte d'acqua (sostanze organiche dal sistema DI)
    → NO: Continue
⚠️ Cause comuni:
  • Carryover nell'ago/loop dell'autocampionatore
  • Contaminazione dell'eluente (anche di grado HPLC)
  • Componenti fortemente trattenuti da corse precedenti
  • Plastica nelle fiale (ftalati, PEG dai tappi)
  • Acqua DI insufficientemente purificata
✓ Soluzioni:
  • ✓ Rafforzare il protocollo di lavaggio: 100% B → 100% A → 50:50 (3 cicli)
  • ✓ Lavaggio forte: DMSO 100% o MeOH 100% prima della calibrazione
  • ✓ Filtrare gli eluenti con PTFE 0.22 µm in caso di dubbio
  • ✓ Usare vetro ambrato + tappi con rivestimento in Teflon per i campioni
  • ✓ Rampa di gradiente periodica fino a 100% B per 10 min (clean-out)
📚 Riferimenti scientifici (Chicago Author-Date) — fare clic per espandere
  1. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography. 3rd ed. John Wiley & Sons. Chapter 17 (Troubleshooting) pp. 559-616. ISBN 978-0-470-16754-0. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183 [link ↗]
  2. Dolan, John W.. 2014. LC Troubleshooting (monthly column 1989-2024). LCGC North America. [link ↗] — John Dolan 35-letnia seria miesięcznych artykułów problemowych
  3. Kromidas, Stavros. 2017. HPLC Made to Measure: A Practical Handbook for Optimization. 2nd ed. Wiley-VCH. ISBN 978-3-527-31377-1. — Praktyczny przewodnik problem-solving dla labs analitycznych
  4. Dolan, John W.. 2013. When to Modify Method Conditions. 192-199. [link ↗] — Decision flow for changing flow rate / temperature / %B vs swapping columns.
  5. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists. 2nd ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-1-119-31378-3. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793 [link ↗] — Chapter 9 covers troubleshooting modern UHPLC systems (sub-2 µm particles).
  6. Meyer, Veronika R.. 2010. Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography. 5th ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-0-470-68218-0. — Solid step-by-step problem isolation chapter (eluents, columns, instruments).
  7. Snyder, L. R., J. J. Kirkland, and J. L. Glajch. 1997. Practical HPLC Method Development. 2nd ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-0-471-00703-6. — Method-development companion volume with troubleshooting cross-refs.
  8. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. The new physical chemistry of HPLC. 1764-1772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.11.094 [link ↗] — Theoretical basis for diagnosing efficiency losses (mass-transfer, eddy diffusion).
  9. Heyden, Yvan Vander, et al.. 2009. Robustness of pharmaceutical liquid chromatographic methods. 2120-2129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchromb.2008.10.052 [link ↗] — How to diagnose method failures vs. system failures (Plackett-Burman).
  10. Engelhardt, Heinz. 2014. 100 Years of Chromatography. 2nd ed. Wiley-VCH. ISBN 978-3-527-33473-5. — Historical context for ghost-peak phenomenology (silica chemistry).
  11. Stoll, Dwight R., and Peter W. Carr. 2017. Two-Dimensional Liquid Chromatography: A State of the Art Tutorial. 519-531. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.6b03506 [link ↗]
  12. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. The new physical chemistry of HPLC. 1764-1772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.11.094 [link ↗]
  13. Wu, Naijun, and Anton M. Clausen. 2007. Fundamental and practical aspects of ultrahigh pressure liquid chromatography for fast separations. 1167-1182. https://doi.org/10.1002/jssc.200700026 [link ↗]
  14. Engelhardt, Heinz. 2014. 100 Years of Chromatography. 2nd ed. Wiley-VCH. ISBN 978-3-527-33473-5.
  15. Vivó-Truyols, Gabriel, and Hans-Gerd Janssen. 2010. Probabilistic approach to peak deconvolution in chromatography. 8525-8531. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac101742z [link ↗]
📚 FAQ tecniche — Ethylene (5) MolGod_TECHFAQ_1
❓ Jak przygotować roztwór standardowy etylenu (C2H4) o stężeniu 1 mM?
Aby przygotować roztwór standardowy etylenu o stężeniu 1 mM, należy obliczyć masę substancji potrzebną do sporządzenia roztworu. Masa molowa etylenu wynosi 28.05 g/mol. Dla 1 litra roztworu (1 dm³) o stężeniu 1 mM (1 mmol/dm³): masa etylenu = 1 mmol * 28.05 g/mol = 0.02805 g. Rozpuścić 0.02805 g etylenu w odpowiednim rozpuszczalniku (np. heksanie) i uzupełnić do objętości 1 litra.
Utile?
❓ Jak przechowywać etylen, aby zachować jego stabilność?
Etylen należy przechowywać w temperaturze poniżej -60°C (np. w ciekłym azocie) lub jako gaz pod ciśnieniem w butlach stalowych, z dala od światła i źródeł ciepła. Wilgotność powietrza nie powinna przekraczać 50%, aby uniknąć reakcji z wodą.
Utile?
❓ Jaka metoda analityczna jest najlepsza do oznaczania etylenu w próbce?
Najlepszą metodą analityczną dla etylenu jest chromatografia gazowa (GC) z detektorem płomieniowo-jonizacyjnym (FID), ze względu na niską masę molową (28.05 g/mol) i lotność substancji. LogP etylenu wynosi około -1, co wskazuje na umiarkowaną rozpuszczalność w fazie stacjonarnej GC.
Utile?
❓ Jakie są główne reakcje i niezgodności chemiczne etylenu?
Etylen jest bardzo reaktywnym alkenem. Reaguje z utleniaczami (np. nadtlenkiem wodoru), tworząc epoksydy, oraz z halogenkami (np. Cl2), dając dihalogenki. Nie należy go przechowywać w obecności silnych kwasów lub zasad, które mogą prowadzić do niepożądanych reakcji addycji.
Utile?
❓ W jakich praktycznych zastosowaniach laboratoryjnych wykorzystuje się etylen?
Etylen jest używany w syntezie organicznej jako substrat do produkcji glikoli, alkoholi i estrów. W laboratoriach stosuje się go również do polimeryzacji (np. etylenu z innymi monomerami) oraz jako gaz nośny w chromatografii gazowej.
Utile?
🧮 Calcolatori da laboratorio (8) MolGod_LABCALC_1
Dilution (C₁V₁=C₂V₂)
Molarità (M=n/V)
Tampone pH (Henderson-Hasselbalch)
Beer-Lambert (A=εcl)
Massa → Moli
Concentration % → M
ppm → mg/L
Temperature C↔F↔K

Formule verificate: IUPAC Gold Book ↗, DOI ↗

📊 Database di spettri spettroscopici MolGod_SPECDB_3
🏷️ Generatore di etichette (QR) MolGod_LABEL_1
Etilene• ETHYLENE / Ethene• CAS: 74-85-1• Formula: C2H4• Massa: 28.05 g/molPERICOLOINDICAZIONI DI PERICOLO GHS:H220: Gas altamente infiammabile.H336: Può provocare sonnolenza o vertigini.P203: Procurarsi, leggere e seguire tutte le istruzioni di sicurezza prima dell’uso.Solo per uso di laboratorio!DH ScientificScience first. Commerce as consequence.N. lotto: Massa netta: Prod.:
ADMET — profilo farmacologico
Caricamento delle predizioni ADMET…
Incidenti storici (CSB/EPA/Bretherick)

Il database contiene esclusivamente incidenti industriali e di laboratorio gravi (CSB, EPA RMP, Bretherick). L'assenza di un record NON significa che la sostanza sia sicura — il database è incompleto.

Incidenti storici (1)

  1. 1989-10-23 Pasadena, Texas, USA (Phillips 66 Houston Chemical Complex, HCC) Catastrofica explosion
    Sostanze: Ethylene (high-pressure HDPE feed) (CAS 74-85-1) + Oxygen / atmospheric air ingress (CAS 7782-44-7)
    23 ofiar smiertelnych 314 rannych

    Podczas konserwacji reaktora HDPE settling leg (rurociag 22") doszlo do otwarcia zaworu DEMCO w trakcie procedury maintenance. Uwolnienie ~38 ton mieszaniny etylen/izobutan/wodor stworzylo chmure gazowo-powietrzna, ktora zaplonila po ~90 sekundach (zrodlo nieustalone definitywnie). VCE o sile 2.4 ton TNT, zniszczyl HDPE complex.

    Causa radice: Single-block valve zamiast double-block-and-bleed. Procedury LO/TO niewlasciwe (compressed air zasilajacy aktuatory zaworow podlaczony do "open" zamiast "close" portow). Brak gas detection w okolicy reactora. Unauthorized work przy non-routine maintenance.
    Lezioni apprese: Double-block-and-bleed valve standard dla high-pressure reactor isolation. Kierunek pneumatic actuators musi byc fail-safe. OSHA PSM standard 29 CFR 1910.119 (1992) jest bezposrednim wynikiem tego incydentu.
    Fonte primaria: OSHA + Phillips 66 + peer-reviewed Process Safety literature
    Bibliografia (Chicago autore-data)
    • U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. 1990. The Phillips 66 Company Houston Chemical Complex Explosion and Fire. Washington, DC: OSHA.
    • Atherton, John, and Frederic Gil. 2008. Incidents That Define Process Safety. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-AIChE.
    • Khan, Faisal I., and S. A. Abbasi. 1999. "Major Accidents in Process Industries and an Analysis of Causes and Consequences." Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 12 (5): 361-378.
📚 Fonti dei dati sugli incidenti
  1. U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB). 2024. "CSB Incident Investigation Reports." Washington, DC: CSB. 🔗
  2. U.S. EPA / NOAA. 2024. "CAMEO Chemicals Database." Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 🔗
  3. BARPI (French Bureau for Analysis of Industrial Risks and Pollutions). 2024. "ARIA Database of Industrial Accident Reports." Saint-Denis: BARPI/DGPR. 🔗
  4. U.S. OSHA. 2024. "OSHA Accident Investigation Reports." Washington, DC: Occupational Safety and Health Administration. 🔗
  5. Urben, Peter G., ed. 2017. Bretherick's Handbook of Reactive Chemical Hazards. 8th ed. Oxford: Elsevier. ISBN 978-0-08-100971-2.
  6. Mannan, Sam, ed. 2005. Lees' Loss Prevention in the Process Industries. 3rd ed. Oxford: Elsevier. ISBN 978-0-7506-7555-0.
  7. Hollnagel, Erik. 2004. Barriers and Accident Prevention. Aldershot: Ashgate. ISBN 978-0-7546-2271-9.
  8. Kletz, Trevor A. 2003. "Lessons from Disasters — How Organizations Have No Memory and Accidents Recur." Process Safety and Environmental Protection 81 (4): 283–287. 🔗
📚 Panoramica della letteratura scientifica — CAS 74-85-1MolGod_LITHUB_MAIN
⭐ Risultati principali (letteratura scientifica) 11 publications
🏆 CAS 74-85-1 — multi-criteria ranking (W12): 30% citazioni · 20% recency · 20% topic · 15% historical · 15% open access.
  1. #1
    Marcin Krynski (2026) · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
    Perché è importante: Recente (2026) · open access
    SCORE 6.25 Meccanismo Open Access DOI ↗
  2. #2
    Zhang X, Tao J, Huang Y et al. (2026) · Journal of genetics and genomics = Yi chuan xue bao
    Perché è importante: Recente (2026) · rassegna · open access
    SCORE 6.25 Rassegna Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  3. #3
    Zhang J, Liu Z, Farrar EJ et al. (2026) · Nature
    Perché è importante: Recente (2026) · open access
    SCORE 6.25 Meccanismo Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  4. #4
    Chatterjee S, Rankin JA, Farrugia MA et al. (2025) · Biochemistry
    Perché è importante: Recente (2025) · open access
    SCORE 6.25 Meccanismo Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  5. #5
    Wang R, Bowerman AF, Chen Y et al. (2025) · Journal of experimental botany
    Perché è importante: Recente (2025) · open access
    SCORE 6.25 Meccanismo Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  6. #6
    Zhao ZA, Li YR, Lei T et al. (2025) · Scientific reports
    Perché è importante: Recente (2025) · open access
    SCORE 6.25 Meccanismo Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  7. #7
    He K, Xu L, He Q et al. (2024) · Journal of integrative plant biology
    Perché è importante: Recente (2024) · open access
    SCORE 6.25 Meccanismo Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  8. #8
    Irfan M, Kumar P, Datta A (2025) · Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)
    Perché è importante: Recente (2025)
    SCORE 4.8 Industria DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  9. #9
    Dong Y, Ma H, Shen Y et al. (2025) · The Plant journal : for cell and molecular biology
    Perché è importante: Recente (2025)
    SCORE 4 Meccanismo DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  10. #10
    Guo Y, Gong J, Hu R et al. (2025) · The Plant journal : for cell and molecular biology
    Perché è importante: Recente (2025)
    SCORE 4 Meccanismo DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  11. #11
    Shukla D (2025) · Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)
    Perché è importante: Recente (2025)
    SCORE 4 Meccanismo DOI ↗ PubMed ↗

Description

Etylen, CAS 74-85-1

Reviews

There are no reviews yet.

Be the first to review “etilene”
📈 Gradiente HPLC — ottimizzatore (LSS) MODELLO

Gradiente basato su PubChem XLogP3 + LSS (Snyder et al. 2010, cap. 9).

  • Colonna: C18
  • Tampone: phosphate
  • Flusso: 1 mL/min
  • logP: 1.2 (PubChem XLogP3)
  • Ramp: 15% → 95% B, 15 min
  • Tempo totale di analisi: 28 min
t (min) %A %B flow (mL/min) Commento
0 85 15 1 avvio (equilibrio)
2 85 15 1 fine mantenimento iniziale
17 5 95 1 fine rampa LSS
22 5 95 1 lavaggio della colonna
23 85 15 1 ritorno a init
28 85 15 1 riequilibrazione
📚 Riferimenti scientifici (Chicago Author-Date)
  1. Snyder, Lloyd R., John W. Dolan, and Joseph J. Kirkland. 2010. Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography. Wiley. — Chapter 9 — gradient elution, LSS theory (cited as Snyder et al. 2010 in tool description).
  2. Schoenmakers, Peter J. 1986. Optimization of Chromatographic Selectivity: A Guide to Method Development. Elsevier. — Numerical optimization of gradient programs.
  3. Snyder, L. R., and J. W. Dolan. 2007. High-Performance Gradient Elution: The Practical Application of the Linear-Solvent-Strength Model. Wiley. — Foundational LSS reference for the %B_init = 5 + 8·logP heuristic implemented here.
  4. Nikitas, Pavlos, and Adrian Pappa-Louisi. 2009. "Retention models for isocratic and gradient elution in reversed-phase liquid chromatography." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1737-1755. [DOI ↗] — Modern review of gradient retention models — basis for non-LSS extensions.
  5. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1764-1772. [DOI ↗]
  6. Dong, Michael W. 2019. HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793. — Modern UHPLC gradient programming, sub-2 µm scaling rules.
  7. Wu, Naijun, and Anton M. Clausen. 2007. "Fundamental and practical aspects of ultrahigh pressure liquid chromatography for fast separations." Journal of Separation Science 30: 1167-1182. [DOI ↗]
  8. Stoll, Dwight R., and Peter W. Carr. 2017. "Two-Dimensional Liquid Chromatography: A State of the Art Tutorial." Analytical Chemistry 89: 519-531. [DOI ↗] — Reference for orthogonal gradient design (2D-LC second dimension).
  9. Dolan, John W.. 2013. "When to Modify Method Conditions." LCGC North America 31: 192-199.
  10. Meyer, Veronika R. 2010. Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography. Wiley. — Chapter 7 — practical gradient design with isokratyczny scouting.
  11. Stoll, Dwight R., and Peter W. Carr. 2017. "Two-Dimensional Liquid Chromatography: A State of the Art Tutorial." Analytical Chemistry 89: 519-531. [DOI ↗]
  12. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1764-1772. [DOI ↗]
  13. Wu, Naijun, and Anton M. Clausen. 2007. "Fundamental and practical aspects of ultrahigh pressure liquid chromatography for fast separations." Journal of Separation Science 30: 1167-1182. [DOI ↗]
  14. Engelhardt, Heinz. 2014. 100 Years of Chromatography. Wiley-VCH.
  15. Vivó-Truyols, Gabriel, and Hans-Gerd Janssen. 2010. "Probabilistic approach to peak deconvolution in chromatography." Analytical Chemistry 82: 8525-8531. [DOI ↗]

REST: /wp-json/molgod/v1/hplc/gradient/74-85-1

📐 Calcolatore della simmetria del picco HPLC (USP Tf / As)

Calcola il fattore di tailing USP (T) e l'asimmetria (As) dalle semilarghezze del picco. Inserisci a (semilarghezza sinistra) e b (semilarghezza destra) misurate al 5% o 10% dell'altezza del picco.

📚 Riferimenti (Chicago Author-Date)
  1. USP General Chapter <621>. 2024. "Chromatography." United States Pharmacopeial Convention. [link ↗] — Defines USP Tailing Factor T = (a+b)/(2a) measured at 5% peak height.
  2. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2023. "Validation of Analytical Procedures Q2(R2)." ICH Expert Working Group. [link ↗] — Tailing factor is a system suitability parameter (Section 6).
  3. Foley, Joe P., and John G. Dorsey. 1983. "Equations for calculation of chromatographic figures of merit for ideal and skewed peaks." Analytical Chemistry 55: 730-737 https://doi.org/10.1021/ac00255a033 [link ↗] — Original asymmetry factor As = b/a at 10% height (Foley & Dorsey 1983).
  4. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. "Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography." Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183 [link ↗] — Chapter 2.4 — peak shape diagnostics and remedies.
  5. Dolan, John W.. 2003. "Peak tailing and resolution." LCGC North America 21: 610-614 [link ↗] — How tailing factor degrades effective resolution.
  6. Vivó-Truyols, Gabriel, and Hans-Gerd Janssen. 2010. "Probabilistic approach to peak deconvolution in chromatography." Analytical Chemistry 82: 8525-8531 https://doi.org/10.1021/ac101742z [link ↗] — Modern numerical deconvolution for asymmetric peaks.
  7. Kromidas, Stavros. 2017. "HPLC Made to Measure: A Practical Handbook for Optimization." Wiley-VCH. — Practical Tf and As thresholds for routine QC.
  8. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. "HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists." Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793 [link ↗]
  9. Meyer, Veronika R.. 2010. "Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography." Wiley.
  10. Heyden, Yvan Vander, et al.. 2009. "Robustness of pharmaceutical liquid chromatographic methods." Journal of Chromatography B 877: 2120-2129 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchromb.2008.10.052 [link ↗]
  11. Stoll, Dwight R., and Peter W. Carr. 2017. "Two-Dimensional Liquid Chromatography: A State of the Art Tutorial." Analytical Chemistry 89: 519-531 https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.6b03506 [link ↗]
  12. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1764-1772 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.11.094 [link ↗]
  13. Wu, Naijun, and Anton M. Clausen. 2007. "Fundamental and practical aspects of ultrahigh pressure liquid chromatography for fast separations." Journal of Separation Science 30: 1167-1182 https://doi.org/10.1002/jssc.200700026 [link ↗]
  14. Engelhardt, Heinz. 2014. "100 Years of Chromatography." Wiley-VCH.
  15. Vivó-Truyols, Gabriel, and Hans-Gerd Janssen. 2010. "Probabilistic approach to peak deconvolution in chromatography." Analytical Chemistry 82: 8525-8531 https://doi.org/10.1021/ac101742z [link ↗]
📊 Calcolatore di risoluzione e numero di piatti (Rs, N, H)

Calcola la risoluzione Rs, il numero di piatti teorici N e l'HETP (H) per una coppia di picchi HPLC. Inserisci i tempi di ritenzione, le larghezze dei picchi (al 50% o alla base) e la lunghezza della colonna.

📚 Riferimenti (Chicago Author-Date)
  1. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. "Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography." 3rd ed. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-0-470-16754-0. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183 [link ↗] — Chapter 2 covers resolution, plate count and HETP fundamentals (Snyder et al. 2010).
  2. USP General Chapter <621>. 2024. "Chromatography." USP-NF 2024 ed. United States Pharmacopeial Convention. [link ↗] — Defines Rs >= 1.5 acceptance criterion and N calculation methods.
  3. Dolan, John W.. 2003. "How much resolution is enough?." LCGC North America 21: 350-353 [link ↗] — Practical guidance on Rs targets for routine method development.
  4. Van Deemter, J. J., F. J. Zuiderweg, and A. Klinkenberg. 1956. "Longitudinal diffusion and resistance to mass transfer as causes of nonideality in chromatography." Chemical Engineering Science 5: 271-289 https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2509(56)80003-1 [link ↗] — Origin of N = 5.54·(tr/w0.5)² half-height plate count formulation.
  5. Giddings, J. Calvin. 1965. "Dynamics of Chromatography, Part I: Principles and Theory." Marcel Dekker. ISBN 978-0-8247-1357-7. — Resolution equation Rs = (1/4)·√N·(α-1)/α·k/(1+k) (master equation).
  6. Foley, Joe P., and John G. Dorsey. 1983. "Equations for calculation of chromatographic figures of merit for ideal and skewed peaks." Analytical Chemistry 55: 730-737 https://doi.org/10.1021/ac00255a033 [link ↗] — Skewed-peak corrections to apparent N.
  7. Knox, John H.. 1977. "Practical aspects of LC theory." Journal of Chromatographic Science 15: 352-364 https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/15.9.352 [link ↗]
  8. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1764-1772 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.11.094 [link ↗]
  9. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. "HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists." 2nd ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-1-119-31378-3. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793 [link ↗]
  10. Meyer, Veronika R.. 2010. "Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography." 5th ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-0-470-68218-0.
  11. Stoll, Dwight R., and Peter W. Carr. 2017. "Two-Dimensional Liquid Chromatography: A State of the Art Tutorial." Analytical Chemistry 89: 519-531 https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.6b03506 [link ↗]
  12. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1764-1772 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.11.094 [link ↗]
  13. Wu, Naijun, and Anton M. Clausen. 2007. "Fundamental and practical aspects of ultrahigh pressure liquid chromatography for fast separations." Journal of Separation Science 30: 1167-1182 https://doi.org/10.1002/jssc.200700026 [link ↗]
  14. Engelhardt, Heinz. 2014. "100 Years of Chromatography." 2nd ed. Wiley-VCH. ISBN 978-3-527-33473-5.
  15. Vivó-Truyols, Gabriel, and Hans-Gerd Janssen. 2010. "Probabilistic approach to peak deconvolution in chromatography." Analytical Chemistry 82: 8525-8531 https://doi.org/10.1021/ac101742z [link ↗]

Related products

🧪 System Suitability — calcolatore live (USP <621>)

Inserisci i dati di 5-6 iniezioni (areas, tr, tailing, plates) — il calcolatore calcolerà %RSD, le medie e verificherà la conformità con USP <621>. Puoi incollare un CSV (separato da virgole) o modificare i singoli valori.

📚 Riferimenti (Chicago Author-Date)
  1. USP General Chapter <621>. 2024. "Chromatography (System Suitability section)." USP-NF 2024 ed. United States Pharmacopeial Convention. [link ↗] — Defines RSD area < 2%, tailing < 2.0, N > 2000 acceptance criteria.
  2. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2023. "Validation of Analytical Procedures Q2(R2)." ICH Expert Working Group. [link ↗] — Section 5.4 — system suitability is part of method validation.
  3. US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). 2018. "Reviewer Guidance: Validation of Chromatographic Methods." US Food and Drug Administration. [link ↗] — CDER reviewer perspective on chromatographic validation expectations.
  4. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. "Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography." 3rd ed. Wiley. — Chapter 2 — system suitability fundamentals (RSD, Tf, N).
  5. Heyden, Yvan Vander, et al.. 2009. "Robustness of pharmaceutical liquid chromatographic methods." — Robustness vs. system suitability — design-of-experiments framework.
  6. Rozet, Eric, et al.. 2013. "Analysis of recent pharmaceutical regulatory documents on analytical method validation."
  7. European Medicines Agency (EMA). 2011. "Guideline on bioanalytical method validation EMEA/CHMP/EWP/192217/2009." EMA. [link ↗] — EMA companion guideline with bioanalytical SS criteria.
  8. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. "HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists." 2nd ed. Wiley. — UHPLC-specific suitability adjustments (n=5 vs. n=6).
  9. Kazakevich, Yuri V., and Rosario LoBrutto, eds.. 2007. "HPLC for Pharmaceutical Scientists." Wiley-Interscience.
  10. AOAC International. 2016. "Appendix F: Guidelines for Standard Method Performance Requirements." AOAC INTERNATIONAL. [link ↗] — Alternative SS thresholds for food/dietary samples.
  11. Stoll, Dwight R., and Peter W. Carr. 2017. "Two-Dimensional Liquid Chromatography: A State of the Art Tutorial."
  12. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC."
  13. Wu, Naijun, and Anton M. Clausen. 2007. "Fundamental and practical aspects of ultrahigh pressure liquid chromatography for fast separations."
  14. Engelhardt, Heinz. 2014. "100 Years of Chromatography." 2nd ed. Wiley-VCH.
  15. Vivó-Truyols, Gabriel, and Hans-Gerd Janssen. 2010. "Probabilistic approach to peak deconvolution in chromatography."

Inne produkty z tej kategorii

📤 Incorpora questa molecola sul tuo sito

Hai un blog, un forum o un sito scientifico? Incorpora la molecola 3D interattiva nel tuo sito — la vedrà ogni tuo lettore,e sotto trova un link al nostro negozio dove può acquistare il reagente.

🔗 Codice HTML iframe (il più semplice — funziona ovunque)

Copia e incolla nell'editor HTML del tuo sito:

Adatta width e height al tuo layout.

⚙ WordPress Shortcode (per altri negozi con MOL-GOD)

🌐 Link diretto (per email, chat, LinkedIn, Twitter)

LinkedIn Twitter/X Facebook
QR code CAS 74-85-1

📱 QR code (per la stampa su volantini / etichette / cataloghi)

Inseriscilo nel catalogo prodotti, sull'etichetta del flacone o su un volantino. Il cliente lo scansiona — vede la molecola 3D sul telefono, con un link al tuo negozio.

⬇ Scarica PNG

🖼 Open Graph image (per i meta tag dei social media)

Condividendo il link, Facebook/LinkedIn/Discord recupererà automaticamente l'anteprima dell'immagine:

Preview
📋 Licenza: L'embed mantiene un backlink a DH Scientific (obbligatorio — il negozio è la fonte dei dati). I dati chimici provengono da PubChem (CC0 — pubblico dominio). L'embed è GRATUITO per usi educativi, commerciali e hobbistici.
📚 RIFERIMENTI (Bibliografia complessiva, Chicago Author-Date) 107 elementi

Tutte le fonti scientifiche citate negli accordion sopra per il CAS 74-85-1.Formato: Chicago Manual of Style 17ª ed., sistema Author-Date.

🗄️ Banche dati scientifiche

  1. NIST. 2026. NIST Chemistry WebBook: CAS 74-85-1. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology. https://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/cbook.cgi?ID=74-85-1. (Accessed 2026-11-12.)
  2. AIST. 2026. Spectral Database for Organic Compounds (SDBS): CAS 74-85-1. Tsukuba, Japan: National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology. https://sdbs.db.aist.go.jp/. (Accessed 2026-11-12.)
  3. PubChem. 2026. PubChem Compound Summary: CAS 74-85-1. Bethesda, MD: National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI), National Library of Medicine. https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/#query=74-85-1. (Accessed 2026-11-12.)
  4. ECHA. 2026. C&L Inventory and REACH Registration: CAS 74-85-1. Helsinki: European Chemicals Agency. https://echa.europa.eu/information-on-chemicals/annex-vi-to-clp. (Accessed 2026-11-12.)

📐 Standard / Linee guida

  1. ICH. 2026. "ICH Harmonised Guideline: CAS 74-85-1." Geneva: International Council for Harmonisation. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q1A%28R2%29%20Guideline.pdf. (Accessed 2026-11-12.)
  2. National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). 2024. "NFPA 30: Flammable and Combustible Liquids Code." NFPA, Quincy, MA. https://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/all-codes-and-standards/list-of-codes-and-standards/detail?code=30.
  3. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). 2023. "29 CFR 1910.106 — Flammable Liquids." U.S. Department of Labor, Federal Register. https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.106.
  4. European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). 2024. "Annex VI to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 (CLP) — Harmonised Classification and Labelling." ECHA, Helsinki / Official Journal of the European Union. https://echa.europa.eu/regulations/clp/clp-classification.
  5. European Committee for Standardization (CEN). 2016. "EN 374-1:2016 — Protective gloves against dangerous chemicals and micro-organisms — Part 1: Terminology and performance requirements for chemical risks." CEN, Brussels. https://standards.cencenelec.eu/dyn/www/f?p=205:110:::::FSP_PROJECT,FSP_ORG_ID:38536,6080&cs=1B0DAA8B85DF42E4A2C70E5D71F0BFA32.
  6. European Committee for Standardization (CEN). 2001. "EN 166:2001 — Personal eye-protection — Specifications." CEN, Brussels. https://standards.cencenelec.eu/dyn/www/f?p=CEN:110:0::::FSP_PROJECT:6541&cs=1F1A4E0A78C4DB6A28DBE2E8C29D89DCF.
  7. European Committee for Standardization (CEN). 2009. "EN 14605:2005+A1:2009 — Protective clothing against liquid chemicals — Performance requirements for clothing with liquid-tight (Type 3) or spray-tight (Type 4) connections." CEN, Brussels. https://standards.cencenelec.eu/dyn/www/f?p=CEN:110:0::::FSP_PROJECT:21581&cs=1A04A2D3C7CC58E9E6CB58D55F7EBFB7E.
  8. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). 2017. "Recommendations for Chemical Protective Clothing: A Companion to the NIOSH Pocket Guide." U.S. Department of Health & Human Services / CDC. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ncpc/default.html.
  9. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). 2011. "Personal Protective Equipment — General requirements." U.S. Department of Labor — 29 CFR 1910.132. https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.132.

📖 Libri

  1. Hansen, Charles M. 2007. Hansen Solubility Parameters: A User's Handbook, 2nd ed.. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. https://www.routledge.com/Hansen-Solubility-Parameters-A-Users-Handbook/Hansen/p/book/9780849372483.
  2. Barton, Allan F. M. 1991. CRC Handbook of Solubility Parameters and Other Cohesion Parameters: 2nd ed.. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. https://www.routledge.com/CRC-Handbook-of-Solubility-Parameters-and-Other-Cohesion-Parameters/Barton/p/book/9780849301766.
  3. Connors, Kenneth A., Gordon L. Amidon, and Valentino J. Stella. 1986. Chemical Stability of Pharmaceuticals: A Handbook for Pharmacists, 2nd ed.. New York: Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/0471734683.
  4. Rumble, John R., ed. 2019. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics: 100th Edition. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. https://hbcp.chemnetbase.com/.
  5. Urben, Peter G. 2017. Bretherick's Handbook of Reactive Chemical Hazards, 8th Edition. Academic Press / Elsevier, Oxford. https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780081010594.

📘 Monographs

  1. IARC. 2026. IARC Monographs on the Identification of Carcinogenic Hazards to Humans: CAS 74-85-1. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer, World Health Organization. https://monographs.iarc.who.int/list-of-classifications/. (Accessed 2026-11-12.)

📄 Articoli scientifici (peer-reviewed)

  1. Stefanis, Emmanuel, and Costas Panayiotou. 2008. "Prediction of Hansen Solubility Parameters with a New Group-Contribution Method." International Journal of Thermophysics 29: 568-585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10765-008-0415-z.
  2. Stoll, Vincent S., and John S. Blanchard. 1990. "Buffers: Principles and Practice: In Methods in Enzymology, vol. 182." San Diego: Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/0076-6879(90)82008-P.

🌐 Siti web

  1. ECHA. 2023. "Guidance on the Application of the CLP Criteria." European Chemicals Agency. https://echa.europa.eu/guidance-documents/guidance-on-clp.
  2. European Parliament. 2006. "Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (REACH)." Official Journal of the European Union L 396: 1–849.
  3. ECHA. 2023. "Candidate List of Substances of Very High Concern for Authorisation." European Chemicals Agency. https://echa.europa.eu/candidate-list-table.
  4. European Parliament. 2008. "Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 on Classification, Labelling and Packaging of Substances and Mixtures (CLP)." Official Journal of the European Union L 353: 1–1355.
  5. ECHA. 2017. "Guidance on the Compilation of Safety Data Sheets." Version 3.1. European Chemicals Agency. ECHA-17-G-01-EN. https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/23047722/sds_en.pdf.
  6. ECHA. 2022. "Restrictions Under REACH — Annex XVII." European Chemicals Agency. https://echa.europa.eu/substances-restricted-under-reach.
  7. United Nations. 2021. Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS). 9th revised ed. ST/SG/AC.10/30/Rev.9. New York and Geneva: United Nations. https://unece.org/ghs-rev9-2021.
  8. ECHA. 2020. "Understanding REACH." European Chemicals Agency. https://echa.europa.eu/regulations/reach/understanding-reach.
  9. U.S. OSHA. 2026. "Occupational Safety and Health Guidance: CAS 74-85-1." Washington, DC: U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration. https://www.osha.gov/hazwoper. (Accessed 2026-11-12.)
  10. National Fire Protection Association (2018) — NFPA 472: Standard for Competence of Responders to Hazardous Materials/Weapons of Mass Destruction Incidents https://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/nfpa-472.
  11. European Union. 2026. "EUR-Lex Legal Database: CAS 74-85-1." Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32012L0018. (Accessed 2026-11-12.)
  12. U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (2024) — NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/.
  13. Snyder, Lloyd R., John W. Dolan, and Joseph J. Kirkland. 2010. Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography. Wiley.
  14. Schoenmakers, Peter J.. 1986. Optimization of Chromatographic Selectivity: A Guide to Method Development. Elsevier.
  15. Snyder, L. R., and J. W. Dolan. 2007. High-Performance Gradient Elution: The Practical Application of the Linear-Solvent-Strength Model. Wiley.
  16. Nikitas, Pavlos, and Adrian Pappa-Louisi. 2009. "Retention models for isocratic and gradient elution in reversed-phase liquid chromatography." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1737-1755. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.10.005.
  17. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1764-1772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.11.094.
  18. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793.
  19. Wu, Naijun, and Anton M. Clausen. 2007. "Fundamental and practical aspects of ultrahigh pressure liquid chromatography for fast separations." Journal of Separation Science 30: 1167-1182. https://doi.org/10.1002/jssc.200700026.
  20. Dolan, John W.. 2013. "When to Modify Method Conditions." LCGC North America 31: 192-199. https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/when-modify-method-conditions.
  21. Meyer, Veronika R.. 2010. Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography. Wiley.
  22. Engelhardt, Heinz. 2014. 100 Years of Chromatography. Wiley-VCH.
  23. Vivó-Truyols, Gabriel, and Hans-Gerd Janssen. 2010. "Probabilistic approach to peak deconvolution in chromatography." Analytical Chemistry 82: 8525-8531. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac101742z.
  24. Van Deemter, J. J., F. J. Zuiderweg, and A. Klinkenberg. 1956. "Longitudinal diffusion and resistance to mass transfer as causes of nonideality in chromatography." https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2509(56)80003-1.
  25. Giddings, J. Calvin. 1965. "Dynamics of Chromatography, Part I: Principles and Theory." Marcel Dekker.
  26. Poppe, Hans. 1997. "Some reflections on speed and efficiency of modern chromatographic methods." https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9673(97)00376-2.
  27. Wu, Naijun, and Anton M. Clausen. 2007. "Fundamental and practical aspects of ultrahigh pressure liquid chromatography for fast separations." https://doi.org/10.1002/jssc.200700026.
  28. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC." https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.11.094.
  29. Knox, John H.. 1977. "Practical aspects of LC theory." https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/15.9.352.
  30. Snyder, L. R., J. J. Kirkland, and J. L. Glajch. 1997. "Practical HPLC Method Development." Wiley.
  31. Vivó-Truyols, Gabriel, and Hans-Gerd Janssen. 2010. "Probabilistic approach to peak deconvolution in chromatography." https://doi.org/10.1021/ac101742z.
  32. Sadek, Paul C.. 2002. "The HPLC Solvent Guide." Wiley-Interscience.
  33. Snyder, L. R.. 1978. "Classification of the solvent properties of common liquids." https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/16.6.223.
  34. Reichardt, Christian, and Thomas Welton. 2010. "Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry." Wiley-VCH.
  35. Vailaya, Anant, and Csaba Horváth. 1998. "Retention thermodynamics in hydrophobic interaction chromatography." https://doi.org/10.1021/ie980212h.
  36. Krstulović, Andrea M., and Phyllis R. Brown. 1981. "Reversed-phase High-Performance Liquid Chromatography." Wiley.
  37. Boysen, Reinhard I., and Milton T. W. Hearn. 2009. "Multi-modal HPLC of proteins." https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/47.8.645.
  38. USP General Chapter <621>. 2024. "Chromatography." United States Pharmacopeial Convention. https://www.usp.org/harmonization-standards/pdg/general-chapters/chromatography.
  39. Foley, Joe P., and John G. Dorsey. 1983. "Equations for calculation of chromatographic figures of merit for ideal and skewed peaks." https://doi.org/10.1021/ac00255a033.
  40. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. "Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography." Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183.
  41. Dolan, John W.. 2003. "Peak tailing and resolution." https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/peak-tailing-and-resolution.
  42. Kromidas, Stavros. 2017. "HPLC Made to Measure: A Practical Handbook for Optimization." Wiley-VCH.
  43. Heyden, Yvan Vander, et al.. 2009. "Robustness of pharmaceutical liquid chromatographic methods." https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchromb.2008.10.052.
  44. United States Pharmacopeial Convention. 2024. "USP <621> Chromatography." In United States Pharmacopeia and National Formulary, USP 47-NF 42. Rockville, MD: USP. https://www.uspnf.com/.
  45. European Pharmacopoeia Commission. 2024. "2.2.46 Chromatographic Separation Techniques." In European Pharmacopoeia, 11th ed. Strasbourg: Council of Europe — EDQM. https://www.edqm.eu/en/european-pharmacopoeia-ph-eur-11th-edition.
  46. International Organization for Standardization. 2017. "ISO/IEC 17025:2017 General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories." Geneva: ISO. https://www.iso.org/standard/66912.html.
  47. Kolthoff, Izaak Maurits, and Philip J. Elving, eds. 1978. Treatise on Analytical Chemistry, Part I: Theory and Practice. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley-Interscience.
  48. Skoog, Douglas A., F. James Holler, and Stanley R. Crouch. 2018. Principles of Instrumental Analysis. 7th ed. Boston: Cengage Learning.
  49. Christian, Gary D., Purnendu K. Dasgupta, and Kevin A. Schug. 2014. Analytical Chemistry. 7th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
  50. EURACHEM/CITAC. 2012. "Quantifying Uncertainty in Analytical Measurement." 3rd ed. EURACHEM/CITAC Guide CG 4. https://www.eurachem.org/images/stories/Guides/pdf/QUAM2012_P1.pdf.
  51. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. "Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography." John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183.
  52. Dolan, John W.. 2003. "How much resolution is enough?." https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/how-much-resolution-enough.
  53. USP General Chapter <621>. 2024. "Chromatography (System Suitability section)." United States Pharmacopeial Convention. https://www.usp.org/harmonization-standards/pdg/general-chapters/chromatography.
  54. U.S. FDA. 2026. "FDA Guidance and Resources: CAS 74-85-1." Silver Spring, MD: U.S. Food and Drug Administration. https://www.fda.gov/media/74954/download. (Accessed 2026-11-12.)
  55. Rozet, Eric, et al.. 2013. "Analysis of recent pharmaceutical regulatory documents on analytical method validation." https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2007.03.111.
  56. European Medicines Agency (EMA). 2011. "Guideline on bioanalytical method validation EMEA/CHMP/EWP/192217/2009." EMA. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific-guideline/guideline-bioanalytical-method-validation_en.pdf.
  57. Kazakevich, Yuri V., and Rosario LoBrutto, eds.. 2007. "HPLC for Pharmaceutical Scientists." Wiley-Interscience. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470087954.
  58. AOAC International. 2016. "Appendix F: Guidelines for Standard Method Performance Requirements." AOAC INTERNATIONAL. https://www.aoac.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/app_f.pdf.
  59. International Organization for Standardization. 1994. "ISO 5725-2:1994 Accuracy (Trueness and Precision) of Measurement Methods and Results — Part 2: Basic Method for the Determination of Repeatability and Reproducibility of a Standard Measurement Method." Geneva: ISO. https://www.iso.org/standard/11834.html.
  60. Grubbs, Frank E. 1950. "Sample Criteria for Testing Outlying Observations." Annals of Mathematical Statistics 21 (1): 27–58.
  61. Dixon, Wilfrid J. 1950. "Analysis of Extreme Values." Annals of Mathematical Statistics 21 (4): 488–506.
  62. Snedecor, George W., and William G. Cochran. 1989. Statistical Methods. 8th ed. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.
  63. Student [William Sealy Gosset]. 1908. "The Probable Error of a Mean." Biometrika 6 (1): 1–25.
  64. International Organization for Standardization. 2005. "ISO 3534-1:2006 Statistics — Vocabulary and Symbols — Part 1: General Statistical Terms and Terms Used in Probability." Geneva: ISO. https://www.iso.org/standard/40145.html.
  65. Thompson, Michael, Stephen L. R. Ellison, and Roger Wood. 2002. "Harmonized Guidelines for Single-Laboratory Validation of Methods of Analysis." Pure and Applied Chemistry 74 (5): 835–855.
  66. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. 2024. European Agreement Concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road (ADR), Applicable as from 1 January 2025 (ECE/TRANS/352). Geneva: UNECE. https://unece.org/transport/dangerous-goods/adr-2025-edition.
  67. International Air Transport Association. 2026. Dangerous Goods Regulations (DGR). 67th ed. Montreal: IATA. https://www.iata.org/en/programs/cargo/dgr/.
  68. International Maritime Organization. 2024. International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code, 2024 Edition (Amendment 42-24). London: IMO. https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Safety/Pages/DangerousGoods-default.aspx.
  69. United Nations. 2025. Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods: Model Regulations (Orange Book). 24th revised ed. ST/SG/AC.10/1/Rev.24. New York and Geneva: United Nations. https://unece.org/transport/dangerous-goods/un-model-regulations.
  70. International Civil Aviation Organization. 2025. Technical Instructions for the Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air (Doc 9284). 2025–2026 ed. Montreal: ICAO. https://www.icao.int/safety/DangerousGoods/Pages/technical-instructions.aspx.
  71. United States Pharmacopeia (USP) Convention. 2024. "USP General Chapter <621> Chromatography." USP. https://www.usp.org/sites/default/files/usp/document/harmonization/gen-chapter/g05_pf_30_4_2004.pdf.
  72. European Medicines Agency (EMA). 2011. "Guideline on bioanalytical method validation EMEA/CHMP/EWP/192217/2009." EMA Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific-guideline/guideline-bioanalytical-method-validation_en.pdf.
  73. Sejm RP. 2026. "Internetowy System Aktow Prawnych (ISAP): CAS 74-85-1." Warszawa: Kancelaria Sejmu Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej. https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/DocDetails.xsp?id=WDU20200000010. (Accessed 2026-11-12.)
  74. Ministerstwo Klimatu i Srodowiska. 2026. "Baza Danych o Odpadach (BDO): CAS 74-85-1." Warszawa: Ministerstwo Klimatu i Srodowiska. https://bdo.mos.gov.pl/. (Accessed 2026-11-12.)
  75. Pohanish, Richard P.. 2017. "Sittig's Handbook of Toxic and Hazardous Chemicals and Carcinogens." Elsevier.
  76. Lewis, Richard J.. 2012. "Sax's Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials." Wiley.
  77. NIOSH. 2024. "Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards." U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/.
  78. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). 2023. "European Agreement concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road (ADR 2025)." UNECE. https://unece.org/transport/standards/transport/dangerous-goods/adr-2025.
  79. IPCS INCHEM. 2024. "International Programme on Chemical Safety — Waste Management Guidelines." WHO/UNEP/ILO. https://www.inchem.org/.
  80. International Organization for Standardization. 2017. "ISO/IEC 17025:2017 General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories." ISO. https://www.iso.org/standard/66912.html.
  81. World Health Organization. 2010. "WHO Good Manufacturing Practices for Pharmaceutical Products: Main Principles (WHO Technical Report Series No. 957, Annex 3)." WHO Press. https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/trs957-annex3.
  82. European Medicines Agency. 2014. "Guideline on Process Validation for Finished Products — Information and Data to Be Provided EMA/CHMP/CVMP/QWP/BWP/70278/2012." European Medicines Agency. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific-guideline/guideline-process-validation-finished-products-information-data-be-provided-regulatory-submissions-revision-1_en.pdf.
  83. United States Pharmacopeial Convention. 2024. "United States Pharmacopeia and National Formulary, USP 47-NF 42." USP. https://www.uspnf.com/.
  84. European Pharmacopoeia Commission. 2024. "European Pharmacopoeia 11th Edition." Council of Europe — EDQM. https://www.edqm.eu/en/european-pharmacopoeia-ph-eur-11th-edition.
  85. Pharmaceutical Inspection Co-operation Scheme (PIC/S). 2021. "Guide to Good Manufacturing Practice for Medicinal Products PE 009-15." PIC/S Secretariat, Geneva. https://picscheme.org/en/publications.
  86. International Pharmaceutical Excipients Council (IPEC) and Pharmaceutical Quality Group (PQG). 2017. "Joint IPEC-PQG Good Manufacturing Practices Guide for Pharmaceutical Excipients." IPEC-Americas. https://ipecamericas.org/sites/default/files/IPECPQGGMPGuide2017.pdf.
📥 Scarica BibTeX📥 Scarica RISImportazione in Zotero/Mendeley/EndNote/Papers.