© 2026 Nanjing Finechem Holdings Co., Ltd,
All Right Reserved
Some things in chemistry evolve quietly, shaping whole industries without anyone outside the lab taking much notice. Saturated alkanes in the C7-C30 range have played that kind of role for decades, keeping the wheels of science and commerce moving. These standards first cropped up when folks needed a reliable way to benchmark hydrocarbon tests – think back to the early days of anything involving petroleum, synthetic lubricants, or chromatographic analysis. Back then, precision testing often depended on what the refinery spit out that week or whatever was sitting on the shelf. Gradually, laboratories learned you can’t bank on consistency that way. Chemical suppliers and national labs started producing tighter, more reliable standards. These mixtures began shaping everything from fuel testing protocols in the 1950s to complex hydrocarbon fingerprinting in forensic labs. New techniques, like gas chromatography, sparked a demand for known, high-purity standards to anchor measurements against. Over the years, these saturated alkane benchmarks turned into a scientific backbone for fields as diverse as environmental science and cosmetics.
Talking about a C7-C30 saturated alkane standard isn’t flashy, but it saves plenty of headaches in quality control or method validation. Anyone who’s worked with hydrocarbon analysis knows the frustration of drift or baseline confusion in a chromatogram. N-heptane, n-octane, and all the straight-chain cousins through n-triacontane take their places in the lineup, providing predictable retention times and pure chemical profiles. The mixture doesn’t just deliver numbers – it provides a foundation. If your sample of crude oil or cosmetic emollient doesn’t match this standard, further questions follow. Nowadays, reputable chemical providers supply alkane standards in glass ampoules or bottles, often pre-mixed in solvent or neat, guaranteeing contents through documentation and rigorous batch testing. These reference materials have become a staple in analytical labs across research, energy, food packaging, and air quality monitoring.
Folks in the lab learn early that the jump from C7 to C30 brings lots of physical variety. Lower alkanes like heptane and octane pour like thin solvents, evaporating quickly and filling the air with that familiar gasoline odor. Mid-range molecules such as dodecane and hexadecane edge past the volatility of gasoline or lighter fuels; they creep up on motor oil territory, getting thicker and leaving less vapor behind. By the time you reach the upper end of this scale with triacontane, you’re handling waxy solids, impossible to confuse with lighter fractions. Chemically, all these molecules share a simple, saturated backbone – single bonds only, hydrogen wrapping every carbon atom, forming a solid, reliable chain. The lack of double bonds keeps them relatively unreactive under standard conditions, giving users a predictable standard, free from complicating side reactions. Their melting points, boiling points, and solubility gradations become critical for instrument calibration, especially across broad temperature gradients.
Labs dealing with high-stakes samples demand certainty, not just about what’s in a bottle but also about batch purity, blending accuracy, and traceability. Genuine C7-C30 standards trade on their certificates of analysis. This isn’t bureaucratic box-ticking; it’s a shield against costly rework or legal pushback. High-purity means more than 99% single-component content, often confirmed by multiple tests—gas chromatography, sometimes even mass spectrometry. Documentation spells out everything: lot number, preparation date, method of analysis, impurities down to the ppm level. Some research fields, like food safety or environmental remediation, treat this chain of custody and transparency as non-negotiable. Mislabeling, even a decimal point off, can muddy up datasets for months, wasting thousands of dollars and hours of lab time. The practice of meticulously labeling, tracking, and specifying standards has grown alongside regulatory demands and advances in analytical technology.
Creating a trustworthy alkane standard isn’t as simple as tossing a handful of powders into a vial. Take it from anyone who’s tried: contaminants creep in everywhere, and small errors in weighing or mixing can throw analytical results totally out of whack. Modern suppliers work in cleanrooms, relying on precision balances, glassware treated to remove all trace residues, and solvents distilled until only the intended ingredients remain. Personal experience in chemical prep taught me nothing replaces careful work and double-checking. Single-component alkanes often require distillation, crystallization, or both, followed by storage under inert gas. Blending the series together—whether neat or in a fixed solvent—is a slow, deliberate process, mixing carefully by weight and always running the finished product through a confirmation analysis before bottling. Every step chases contaminants like unsaturated hydrocarbons, water, or even plasticizers leaching from storage bottles. Those who skip steps end up fielding customer complaints and damaging reputations.
Alkanes in this group keep chemists honest, since their stubbornly unreactive character resists most casual lab mishaps. Nothing dramatic happens unless you push hard: strong oxidizers, halogenation, or specific catalytic cracking. Someone wanting to tweak an alkane standard might try controlled chlorination, developing standards for environmental testing of breakdown products. Most times, the point of the mixture is to serve as an anchor, so stability trumps novelty. Anecdotally, laboratories that overcomplicate modification or try “custom blending” without full controls run into problems with trace side-reactions or contamination, impacting their results. Real progress often comes from blending rigor rather than clever chemistry.
Across catalogs and journal articles, names for these standards can trip up even a seasoned chemist. Purists refer to the standard as “n-alkane mixture C7–C30,” but others list every component by full name—heptane through triacontane—or simply “saturated hydrocarbon reference.” In practice, most labs call for “alkane ladder” or “C7–C30 standard” when restocking supplies or communicating method details. I’ve been caught by language differences too, finding “paraffin hydrocarbon mix” or “normal alkane series” in old university stores. The lesson: check the label, not just the invoice or handbook. Miscommunication around synonyms triggers expensive mistakes, especially during audits or compliance reviews. Getting every name and definition clear in training and documentation can save money and prevent late-night troubleshooting.
Though saturated alkanes don’t carry the notorious hazards of aromatic hydrocarbons or active reagents, real-world safety standards still matter. Volatile lower-end alkanes, like heptane and octane, bring fire and explosion risks—no one forgets the nerve-racking hum of a fume hood cluttered with flammable labels. The heavier fractions demand less caution around fumes but still present slip or fire hazards if spilled. Careful grounding and bonding, tight storage protocols, and respect for Material Safety Data Sheets keep labs running without incident. Having witnessed a few too many near-misses, safety-first habits like working under local exhaust or with grounded cans become second nature. People sometimes get complacent with “nonreactive” chemicals, but the real professionals in the field know small mistakes around flammable liquids can lead to big problems. Regulatory inspections only reinforce this, and most advanced labs now carry regular safety drills and written procedures tailored to these chemicals.
C7-C30 alkane standards underpin a surprising breadth of work. In petroleum testing, refining, and fuel quality labs, these mixtures anchor chromatographic retention times, giving clarity to complex samples full of hundreds of unknowns. Environmental scientists use these standards to gauge hydrocarbon contamination, track atmospheric pollutants, or study marine oil spills, translating chemical signatures into evidence for cleanup or litigation. Cosmetic chemists and materials scientists turn to these mixtures to analyze waxes, skin creams, and barrier coatings, making sure preparations meet regulatory limits and perform as advertised. Having used these compounds myself, method development in gas chromatography becomes nearly impossible without a reliable alkane ladder for retention time indexing. Their role in validating analytical equipment, aligning methods across sites, and ensuring regulatory compliance explains why so many organizations keep them on hand, year after year. Even plastics and packaging researchers draw on these standards to understand barrier properties and trace leachables in contact with foods.
R&D keeps finding new spaces for these alkanes, especially as analytical and environmental regulations keep tightening. Next-generation chromatography methods chase lower detection limits, requiring even purer, broader standards. At the same time, evolving fields like renewable fuels and bio-based waxes call for fresh ways to quantify carbon footprints and breakdown rates, sometimes establishing method standards based on alkane profiles. The explosion of mass spectrometry and two-dimensional gas chromatography technologies in the last decade has also brought more refined demands—trace impurities that weren’t detectable before now become central to the conversation. Having wrestled with method development in academic and commercial labs, nothing beats a trusted standard for sorting out whether it’s your sample or the instrument causing changes. Plenty of collaborative work now involves standard-setting organizations and government agencies, all looking to update specifications and keep up with fast-changing scientific tools.
Folks sometimes treat long-chain alkanes as “safe” because they don’t bioaccumulate like heavy metals or spark cancer concerns like some aromatic compounds. Real-world experience and the research tell a more nuanced story. Highly volatile low-chain alkanes can bring headaches or dizziness with poor ventilation, and all flammable organics carry their own risks for first responders. Larger molecules have low acute toxicity, rarely causing harm unless ingested in large volumes or inhaled as fine particulates. Some studies examine their fate in soil and water, noting the slow breakdown and potential for persistence in certain environments. So far, the risk assessments haven’t linked them with major chronic effects or environmental imbalances under typical lab or application use. Many jurisdictions continue to monitor workplace exposure levels and set personal protective equipment guidelines just in case. I’d argue from my own experience that anyone handling volatiles daily learns to respect both chemical behavior and institutional safety practices. Better research and surveillance, especially around chronic low-level exposure, should stay a top priority.
The story of C7-C30 alkane standards won’t stay static, especially as industries and regulators move toward more sustainability, precision, and automation. As demand rises for renewable fuels or bio-based chemical products, labs face pressure to broaden the coverage of reference standards, accounting for more isomers and minor impurities. Technological progress in analytical chemistry drives the creation of new, tighter mixtures, allowing labs to push accuracy further and troubleshoot subtle instrument shifts or contamination faster. Some institutions invest in digital tools to track reference standard usage, pairing chemical data with barcodes and automated chain-of-custody to keep up with rising compliance pressures. The push for greener chemistry and micro-scale analysis could prompt the packaging of alkane standards in more sustainable, lower-waste formats. Over the years, I’ve watched the dialogue change from crude performance checks to deep dives into purity, environmental impact, and data integrity. It feels clear that saturated alkane standards have more to offer, not just as calibration benchmarks, but as anchors in a moving landscape where measurement, trust, and responsible stewardship matter more every day.
Folks working in labs or refineries eventually come across a row of bottled standards labeled “C7-C30 Saturated Alkanes.” At first glance, these look like just another collection of chemicals, but getting down to basics tells us more about their value in the real world.
This standard packs a set of straight-chain hydrocarbons, stretching from heptane (C7H16) up to triacontane (C30H62). The count starts at seven carbons and rolls up one at a time, each with fully saturated hydrogen bonds—no double bonds or fanciness. You’ll find heptane, octane, nonane, decane, then onward through the teens, twenties, all the way to triacontane. Each molecule belongs to a family called n-alkanes, running in single-file structure.
Every alkane has a unique number of carbons and hydrogens. The lighter end—heptane, octane, nonane—tends to stay liquid and clear at room temperature. Stomp into the C20 and above crowd, the alkanes grow waxier and thicker, nearly solid in a room with no heat. This shift matters for testing in fields like environmental analysis, petroleum, or petrochemical quality checks. A chemist might use this particular set of standards for gas chromatography (GC) to pin down retention times or to spot contamination from odd or trace hydrocarbons.
Some might wonder: Why pick seven carbons as a starting point and stop at thirty? Most gasoline components show up starting around heptane, and refining folk like to keep track of everything through the paraffin waxes you find in heavy oils. Beyond thirty carbons, compounds tend to act more like solids at common temperatures, shifting out of the fluid sample range. Nobody in the refinery cares much for samples heavier than triacontane, since their behavior in a GC column gets unpredictable and sticky.
Scientists rely on standards to get their detectors calibrated. Without a known set, a GC experiment turns into guesswork. More than a dozen times, I’ve leaned on a good C7-C30 standard to spot carryover or equipment drift in the chromatograms. A trusted standard gives consistent response factors, keeps batch results honest, and tightens quality control for fuels or environmental samples.
The C7-C30 mixture usually comes dissolved in a non-reactive carrier like isooctane or hexane. Each alkane gets weighed and pipetted to strict tolerances, so concentrations stay known and reproducible. Some versions load all 24 odd-numbered n-alkanes in equal weights. Others might tailor the proportions to match a given application or regulatory method. The supplier’s certificate spells out the concentrations, purity (often above 99% per component), and measurement method. No one appreciates an impurity that throws off the retention time, so keeping these alkanes as pure as possible matters for every run.
Routine measurement with these standards underpins everything from consumer fuel sales to major environmental studies. If refinery output creeps off spec or a groundwater investigation shows spikes, the root of the call usually tracks back through a run involving the C7-C30 standard set. Given the critical role of these compounds, people in the know treat each bottle with respect—labeling, tracking storage temperature, cross-checking expiration dates. An expired or mis-handled standard risks more than a wasted day; it can mean real-world costs or regulatory headaches.
Living in a world packed with gadgets, household products, and machinery, the significance of technical standards often escapes daily conversation. In my own experience working with manufacturing teams, I’ve learned that these standards act as guide rails, not only for compliance but for building consumer trust. People want to know that what they buy is safe. A product following this standard signals hours of testing, careful review, and countless tweaks—all so someone can flip a switch or pour a drink without a second thought.
At a hospital, confusion or chaos carry serious risks. Medical staff rely on equipment that meets strict standards—think sterilization, electronic safety, and interoperability of devices. Blood pressure monitors from one brand connecting smoothly with hospital data systems from another doesn’t just happen; it’s the result of deep technical agreements, often spelled out in this kind of standard. I remember chatting with a nurse friend who’s seen what happens when an infusion pump doesn’t play nice with the electronic health record system—patients get frustrated, and errors creep closer.
Everyone expects safe food and clean water. Complex supply chains mean ingredients travel thousands of miles, changing hands along the way. This standard sets guardrails, whether the focus is on packaging, handling, chemical content, or labeling. I’ve visited food processors where inspectors reference the standard every day, checking temperature logs and ingredient lists by the book. They know a slip can mean a recall, or worse, a public health crisis.
Think of your phone charger, laptop adapter, or smart home plug. Interchangeability matters when grabbing an off-brand cable or plugging into a train station outlet. Consumers run into trouble fast when devices fry or fizzle because some corner got cut. Adherence to technical standards levels the playing field, so these everyday accessories fit and perform as expected. Having gone through my fair share of frayed cords, I value certification marks now more than ever.
The push for energy efficiency can’t succeed without common reference points. Solar panels, wind turbines, and smart thermostats connect into a larger grid thanks to wide adoption of such standards. In my neighborhood, more homes install rooftop solar every year. It’s not just early adopters making a statement—city inspectors and local utilities require these installations to follow the right standards. That assures grid stability and guards homes from electrical mishaps.
Roadways, railways, and public transport networks hinge on technical alignment. Drivers, cyclists, and train commuters gain a safer journey when traffic systems, vehicle components, and supporting software all speak a common language. I’ve seen real-time navigation apps bring city traffic to a crawl because signals or data feeds weren’t compatible. Clear, widely shared standards close those gaps and keep people moving.
No standard works in a vacuum. As technology advances, continuous updates and open feedback keep these standards relevant. Manufacturers, researchers, medical staff, and regulators each bring a different stake to the table. From what I’ve seen, ongoing training and transparent discussions drive the most successful outcomes. In the end, applying these standards connects safety, efficiency, and trust—way beyond the stuff of technical manuals.
Lab work depends on trust—trust in measurements, in materials, and in the accuracy of every standard stored in a cabinet or freezer. Most folks overlook the importance of storing reference standards the right way, yet these colorless liquids are the backbone of reliable chromatography analysis. C7-C30 Saturated Alkanes Standard lets chemists calibrate GC instruments, check hydrocarbon blends, and prove method validity for environmental and petrochemical checks. Careless storage can turn a sharp, dependable standard into a questionable mix in no time.
Once a standard gets tainted, it’s tough to know. Room temperature, everyday light, and even loose caps can chip away at purity. If the standard absorbs moisture or gets exposed to air, some lighter alkanes, like heptane or octane, might start to evaporate. This throws off the mix’s true signature and undermines performance. More than that, exposure to UV light slowly breaks down certain chains, leading to unexpected background peaks or loss of key components.
Having handled these standards before, it’s easy to see why leading labs stow them in cool, dark, and dry environments. Most set storage fridges at 2–8°C and make sure the glass bottles stay sealed tightly with secure PTFE-lined caps. A standard left out overnight acts differently the next day—a small detail, but one with outsized consequences during method validation or routine quality checks.
A good habit is to note every opening and transfer on the container label. Sometimes, even the best material becomes questionable if its chain of custody is vague. Smart labs use digital tracking or at least a handwritten log showing batch number, receipt date, and every pipette session. This might seem fussy, but it proves its worth when an auditor reviews the chain from supplier to final injection. One mistake often seen—reusing pipettes for different standards—invites cross-contamination and headaches down the line.
Manufacturers of these standards provide expiry dates and show clear instructions for storage and handling. Anyone ignoring these recommendations risks not just their own data, but every report and certificate built on those results. Using a degraded standard can hide true contaminants and mislead downstream analysis. In some cases, poor storage led directly to product recalls—wasted time and broken trust.
Real improvement starts with simple actions. Get the right storage temperature. Shield the material from direct sunlight and ozone sources. Tell colleagues about temperature logs and emphasize why never leaving the bottle open matters. Swap pipettes between compounds and even the most careful protocols can fall apart.
Regulations from bodies like ISO or ASTM ask for documentation and stability, but pride in lab work goes deeper than rules. Every time someone lifts a bottle for a run, they should expect consistency and trust the results. Building a culture around disciplined storage means fewer data corrections, better results, and smoother audits down the road.
If the storage area gets too warm, or labels fade, extra risk sneaks in. Investing in alarmed fridges and light-proof cabinets pays off over time, especially with expensive standards. I’ve seen managers run weekly checks and log corrective actions quickly—the upfront rigor soon becomes second nature for the whole crew.
So much of modern chemistry rides on the back of these small bottles. Taking simple steps to store C7-C30 Saturated Alkanes Standard properly—in the dark, cold, dry, and organized—helps everyone hold onto accuracy, confidence, and trust each day.
Cracking open the details inside a mixture of alkanes always made me think of checking the label on a bottle of painkillers. You want to know exactly what you’re putting in, what the makeup looks like, and how it might behave down the line. Alkanes show up in things humans interact with every day, like fuels that keep buses moving and industry running. If you ever spilled gasoline and caught a whiff—what you’re smelling includes a bunch of these simple hydrocarbons. The catch? The exact mix of each alkane often changes the game for efficiency, pollution, and even safety, way beyond just the name “alkane” on a test sheet. Companies and labs make decisions based on those concentrations, so accuracy in measurement isn’t a throwaway task.
Let’s take a memory from my undergrad days, standing in that chemistry lab after hours, hunched over gas chromatographs. Even if you love the way technology handles minute details, you run into trouble the moment things get too crowded in your sample. The process feels a bit like sorting coins out of a piggy bank under bad lighting: you use a method called gas chromatography, where each alkane zips through a column at its own pace. As each one exits, detectors give you a spike—each spike corresponds to a specific alkane. Once you’ve got the results, you compare the peaks to known standards. That translates into actual concentrations for each compound in the blend.
People sometimes trust these machines a little too much, but as someone who’s seen sample contamination mess up entire weekends of work, human checks play a huge part. Having a second set of eyes reviewing the standard curve or watching for baseline drifts saves resources and prevents data from steering teams down the wrong path. The focus on accuracy ties back to regulatory frameworks, which look for truth in reporting, whether it’s the oil refining sector, food processing, or even clinical settings.
Errors slip in, sometimes because of overlapping peaks (when two alkanes are so close in behavior they trick the machine), or sometimes through contaminated samples. As a result, numbers might not add up, and small mistakes could have major impact down the line. For example, too much of a light alkane in a fuel blend might bump up volatility, increasing the risk of accidents or poor engine performance. The human side of chemistry means taking a step back if something looks odd, rather than just ticking boxes on a checklist.
Labs that take care with their calibration routines and sample prep see better results. I’ve worked with teams that invest in fresh reagents, run blanks, and double-check standards. That extra step cuts down on confusion when reporting concentrations to clients or regulatory bodies. Honest science means calling out outliers rather than smoothing them over.
Open conversations between analytical chemists, managers, and policy teams drive better decision-making. Instead of seeing concentration checks as a chore, treating them as a foundation for safety and efficiency leads to real outcomes. Training new lab techs to recognize a red flag, giving them room to dig into data, and keeping up with updates in analytical equipment all support reliable work.
Every blend tells a different story, but getting the right numbers down for each alkane isn’t just a math exercise—it means better fuel performance, safer workplaces, and stronger trust in the data flowing through labs worldwide. Solid concentration tracking gives everyone a better shot at using these compounds for good, not just profit.
Chromatography labs often rely on a saturated alkanes standard that runs from C7 up to C30 for instrument testing and calibration work. Most people in the field use Gas Chromatography with Flame Ionization Detection (GC-FID) to analyze hydrocarbons. So, a common question pops up: does this type of standard actually work well with GC-FID systems?
Saturated alkanes in this range show up as straightforward, well-defined peaks because they don’t have any double or triple bonds to complicate things. In my own lab work, I learned firsthand how these compounds behave inside a GC column: clean separation, reliable retention times, and a clear elution pattern when the temperature ramps up. This simplicity stands out during method checks and instrument validation.
GC-FID, as a technology, responds best to molecules with lots of carbon-hydrogen bonds, making alkanes an easy target. The detector ionizes these bonds efficiently, sending out a signal in direct proportion to how many are coming through the column. That direct link means calibration and quantification can be both predictable and repeatable.
Quality assurance teams want measurement repeatability. They rely on the C7–C30 standard to create calibration curves, check retention index patterns, or monitor system performance. I have set up runs in both industrial and environmental labs, and this standard always helped ensure instruments were giving honest results.
The benefit gets stronger for complex mixtures. Analyzing crude oil, motor fuel, or petrochemical fractions, you get a whole parade of hydrocarbon peaks, often overlapping. The C7–C30 mix tells you where to expect each type of alkane and whether the column is holding up as expected. This is crucial for accurate identification of unknowns. FID’s linearity with hydrocarbon concentration also helps in quantification, letting analysts track down even small shifts in composition.
Even with a strong pairing like this, issues still creep up if the system isn’t well maintained. Ghost peaks can pop up if contaminants build up in the injector. Baseline drift shows up with old columns or leaky septa. From my experience, the solution starts with running a common standard and checking for ragged peaks or shifting retention times. A clean baseline and a series of evenly spaced peaks from C7 through C30 will show that everything is working together.
The range of the standard has limits. Heavier hydrocarbons past C30 won’t show up, and lighter compounds below C7 will run straight through or get lost. To cover these, labs often choose additional standards, especially when working with volatile samples or heavy oils. Careful sample loading also matters — too much can overload the column, while too little means faint signals.
Regulatory agencies and auditors want to see solid traceability. Commercially prepared C7–C30 standards tick this box since they arrive with certified values and supporting certificates of analysis. Labs also keep close records of lot numbers, instrument response factors, and all method changes to back up their work with evidence.
For anyone considering long-term reliability, frequent checks with the alkane standard identify looming problems early. Routine preventive maintenance — changing liners, verifying split ratios, keeping syringes clean — keeps the system sharp and the data dependable.
| Names | |
| Preferred IUPAC name | heptane-triacontane mixture |
| Other names |
Paraffin Hydrocarbon Mixture n-Alkane Standard Saturated Hydrocarbon Standard |
| Pronunciation | /siː sɛvən tuː siː θɜːrti sæˈtʃʊreɪtɪd ælˈkeɪnz ˈstændəd/ |
| Identifiers | |
| CAS Number | 68855-29-4 |
| Beilstein Reference | 1718731 |
| ChEBI | CHEBI:131669 |
| ChEMBL | CHEMBL4308811 |
| ChemSpider | 21566508 |
| DrugBank | DB14004 |
| ECHA InfoCard | 03ca4b37-71b7-4b0f-8046-ae957b97060b |
| EC Number | 271-635-8 |
| Gmelin Reference | 87513 |
| KEGG | C00570 |
| MeSH | D000325 |
| PubChem CID | 135893164 |
| RTECS number | MJ7560000 |
| UNII | VH4947E14M |
| UN number | UN1993 |
| CompTox Dashboard (EPA) | DTXSID30894847 |
| Properties | |
| Chemical formula | CnH2n+2 |
| Molar mass | Molar mass: 98.19–422.83 g/mol |
| Appearance | Colorless liquid |
| Odor | Liquid; Odorless |
| Density | 0.765 g/mL at 25 °C |
| Solubility in water | insoluble |
| log P | 3.5 to 10 |
| Vapor pressure | <0.013 kPa (25 °C) |
| Acidity (pKa) | >60 |
| Basicity (pKb) | <0.5 |
| Refractive index (nD) | 1.425 |
| Viscosity | 0.766 cP (25 °C) |
| Dipole moment | 0.00 D |
| Thermochemistry | |
| Std molar entropy (S⦵298) | 505.21 J·mol⁻¹·K⁻¹ |
| Std enthalpy of formation (ΔfH⦵298) | -416.0 kJ/mol |
| Std enthalpy of combustion (ΔcH⦵298) | –44.74 kJ/g |
| Pharmacology | |
| ATC code | V04CX |
| Hazards | |
| GHS labelling | GHS02, GHS07 |
| Pictograms | ["flame", "exclamation mark", "health hazard", "environment"] |
| Signal word | Warning |
| Hazard statements | H304: May be fatal if swallowed and enters airways. |
| Precautionary statements | P210, P233, P240, P241, P242, P243, P273, P280, P303+P361+P353, P304+P340, P312, P331, P370+P378, P403+P235, P405, P501 |
| NFPA 704 (fire diamond) | Health: 1, Flammability: 3, Instability: 0, Special: - |
| Flash point | <0 °C |
| Autoignition temperature | 222 °C (432 °F) |
| Lethal dose or concentration | Lethal dose or concentration: "LD50 Oral (Rat): > 5,000 mg/kg |
| LD50 (median dose) | > 5,000 mg/kg (oral, rat) |
| NIOSH | UN1230 |
| PEL (Permissible) | 1000 mg/m³ |
| REL (Recommended) | 0.1 mg/m³ |
| Related compounds | |
| Related compounds |
C7-C30 Isoalkanes Standard C7-C40 Paraffins Standard C5-C40 Saturated Alkanes Standard C10-C40 Saturated Alkanes Standard |
