Chemists have always chased complex problems with simple ideas, and polyacrylamide comes from this pursuit. Born out of the search for better water treatment in the mid-20th century, scientists unlocked this polymer by playing with acrylamide monomers, stringing them together under free-radical polymerization. Early work, sparked by the post-war need for large-scale flocculants, pushed polyacrylamide into factories, water plants, and laboratories, each year building on shared knowledge. The market started off narrow, but interest from paper and oil industries nudged the field to grow, evolving techniques from rudimentary thermal initiators to finely tuned processes, including photopolymerization and advanced chain transfer methods. My experience digging through old chemical archives shows a trail of patents and research, which mirror the industrial booms and shifts of the last 70 years, always adapting to stricter environmental and performance needs.
Polyacrylamide, in its many forms, comes across as a powder or a viscous liquid. Whether it lands on a factory floor or in a research lab, the backbone remains the same—a long chain of repeating acrylamide units. The key differences lie in molecular weight, charge density, and whether the chain has extra functional groups. Some products lean towards cationic or anionic behavior, while others stick with the uncharged, nonionic approach. Labels often split between granular, emulsion, and solution forms, each aiming at a clear application need: flocculation, thickening, drag reduction, or gel formation. Having encountered suppliers from four continents, I’ve learned real-world labels rarely tell the full story, so users pore over technical datasheets, knowing one brand’s “high charge” grade can behave wildly different from another’s. Market demand draws in new varieties quickly, and staying on top of the catalog requires more than casual reading—it comes down to asking the right questions and checking third-party validation.
Look at polyacrylamide, and it’s usually white, odorless, and granular, sometimes sticky if it’s a gel or solution. Run your hands through the powder, it slips through your fingers, rarely clumps unless exposed to humidity. Its molecular weight can go from hundreds of thousands to the high millions. These high-mass polymers swell in water but don’t dissolve instantly—hydration time matters. The chemical structure, rich in amide groups, opens doors for hydrogen bonding, while the carbon backbone stands strong in a range of pH conditions except at extremes. The presence of residual acrylamide matters a lot, as it raises both performance and safety questions. Once dissolved, these molecules tend to form clear, viscous solutions; their ability to bridge suspended particles forms the foundation for their use in water treatment and as thickening agents. Temperature shifts affect viscosity, and with enough heat or acids, the polymer backbone begins to fall apart, which impacts longer-term applications exposed to harsh environments.
Technical sheets usually throw out terms like intrinsic viscosity, molecular weight, charge density, and residual monomer content. I’ve spent time sifting through sheets printed decades apart, and these numbers change as production methods get sharper. Labeling should highlight charge type (anionic, cationic, nonionic), recommended concentration for use, shelf life, and safe storage temperature. Some regulations in the EU and US force suppliers to print out acrylamide monomer residue, a nod to safety first, while Asian suppliers sometimes rely on QR codes and digital tracking. I’ve seen too many cases where missing key specs led to process headaches—incomplete labeling isn’t just annoying, it can derail a batch worth six figures. The best practice means using up-to-date, fully translated safety data sheets, which reflect regulations across borders and prevent misunderstandings that can cost both safety and money.
Making polyacrylamide starts with acrylamide, purified and often stabilized, then polymerized in water with an initiator like ammonium persulfate. The process isn’t just about tossing reagents together; operators adjust pH, temperature, and mixing rates to control chain length. From years on factory tours, I saw teams babysit reactors night and day, trying to keep conditions perfect for reproducible batches. The resulting mix either gets dried to a powder or concentrated as a gel, sometimes cross-linked for extra strength. Emulsion-grade polyacrylamide often spins through high-shear mixers with surfactants, then stabilized before shipping in drums. Process engineers know even subtle shifts—a draft in the plant, a fresh lot of initiator—can tip the balance between usable product and waste. With acrylamide’s toxicity and the need for trace removal, environmental protections hang over every step, and strict audits mean one missed control can cost a year’s reputation.
Polyacrylamide behaves like a quiet workhorse until chemists take it further. Hydrolysis of the amide group leads to carboxyl groups along the chain, shifting the polymer from nonionic to anionic, and that finds favor in mud drilling, ore processing, and textile operations. Reacting with cationic sites creates cationic derivatives for sludge dewatering and paper making. Cross-linking, whether with formaldehyde or N,N’-methylenebisacrylamide, creates hydrogels—a favorite in soil conditioning and biomedical fields. Research labs often graft side chains onto polyacrylamide to change water solubility or charge. Oxidation, reduction, and other chemical attacks offer new properties, but every change means another round of toxicity and stability testing. I’ve seen chemists push modification too far, ending up with products that work great in a dish but fall apart in field use. Anything sold outside a lab has to face the realities of shelf life, contamination, and handling in scale—real chemistry doesn’t forgive shortcuts.
Around the world, polyacrylamide hides under a shelf of synonyms. In technical circles, it goes by PAM. Suppliers pitch it as “flocculant,” “polyacrylamide powder,” or “polyacrylamide emulsion.” Names vary across countries: “Poliakrilamid” appears on bags in Russia and Turkey, “Poliacrilamida” in Spanish-speaking labs, with brand names layered over, from Magnafloc to Zetag. Paper companies stick with “retention aid,” while oil fields order “EOR polymer” for enhanced recovery. I’ve walked through plants using three names for the same grade, confusing workers and complicating training. Standardization helps, but acronyms and brand labels remain sticky, so double-checking product codes matters just as much as fast recognition.
Handling polyacrylamide on the job means more than just gloves. Raw acrylamide, even trace residues in the final product, poses neurotoxic risks, and good practice keeps closed drums, extractor fans, and dust controls in place. Industry insists on MSDS compliance, and Europe’s REACH regulation now flags monomer residuals below 0.05%. The US OSHA and EPA call for disposal plans, keeping the polymer away from water bodies unless properly treated. In my experience at wastewater plants and paper mills, local rules often go above federal ones, mandating shower stations and spill kits near every polyacrylamide room. Proper hydration before use cuts dust release, and training crews on spills and burns—the powder can get hot during mechanical handling—beats learning lessons in the emergency room. Safety audits now include digital systems, requiring real-time logs and batch traceability. Cutting corners in personal protection never pays, as accidents quickly lead to recalls or lawsuits, gnawing at both worker trust and company stability.
No single word sums up where polyacrylamide ends up. Water treatment plants lean on it to clump suspended solids for easier filtration, reducing turbidity and meeting stricter discharge rules. The oil and gas industry pumps it underground to push out crude in enhanced oil recovery, and every percent gain justifies its use. Paper makers stir it in to snare pulp fines, raising yield and machine speed. It thickens slurries in mining, helping separate ore from tailings. Cosmetic brands dabble in derivatives for hair gels and skin creams, where gel formation wins over rival surfactants. Agriculture chases soil conditioning and erosion control, relying on hydrogels to keep fields moist. Labs use it as an electrophoresis medium, separating DNA by molecule size. Every new application brings new scrutiny, as failures hit users hard in lost output or compliance costs. My time analyzing field failures shows most come from poor selection—a mismatch of charge or molecular weight—and that’s where supplier expertise, backed by real-world data, earns its keep.
Researchers keep unraveling possibilities with polyacrylamide—injecting nanoparticles, blending with biopolymers, grafting functional groups for drug delivery systems. A current push goes towards biodegradable versions, aiming to answer growing concerns about microplastic pollution. Teams develop “smart” hydrogels—materials that swell or shrink based on pH or temperature—chasing uses in sensors or controlled release. Machine learning now finds its way, with teams modeling optimal chain structures for faster filtration or higher oil recovery. I’ve sat in meetings that buzzed over small changes in side-chain chemistry, sparking multi-year projects. Scale-up remains tricky; what works in a beaker rarely performs in a 10,000-liter reactor. The best breakthroughs come from partnerships—suppliers willing to tailor grades, industries willing to test, and regulators open to new standards. Progress means keeping both eyes open for risks, benefits, and the real needs of those handling and relying on the product every day.
Acrylamide, the starting monomer for polyacrylamide, puts everyone on alert. Animal studies found neurotoxicity and cancer risks from chronic exposure, shifting regulations to mandate minimal residual levels in finished products. Polyacrylamide itself, as a polymer, tends to be non-toxic, unable to cross biological membranes easily; yet breakdown by hydrolysis or incineration may regenerate free acrylamide. Reports from environmental monitoring find traces downstream from wastewater plants, challenging the old assumptions about complete safety. Researchers run chronic exposure studies on aquatic life, finding effects only at very high doses, but this risk cannot be excused. Plant operators I’ve spoken with fear news headlines more than academic papers—one mishap can trigger massive public concern and lost contracts. Ongoing work focuses on better monomer removal, rapid onsite testing, and process control improvements, showing that real safety comes from system-level vigilance, not just chemical facts.
Demand for polyacrylamide keeps climbing, fueled by global water scarcity, stricter environmental discharge targets, and ambitions in energy recovery. Innovation leans toward greener manufacturing, aiming to slash monomer residues and carbon footprints. The march toward more bio-based alternatives runs alongside, with starch and cellulose blends promising to ease the microplastics burden. Smart polymers—those that respond to electrical fields, temperature, or contaminants—begin to move from lab scale to pilot plants, and new markets beckon in biotechnology and advanced materials. In my talks with young chemists and plant engineers, optimism mixes with caution—they want better sustainability, but reliability can’t suffer. Policies demanding full lifecycle assessments and end-of-life planning push suppliers to think years ahead. Ultimately, polyacrylamide’s story looks set for more chapters, shaped by the collaboration between science, industry, and the realities of our changing world.
Polyacrylamide pops up in conversation anytime someone starts talking about water treatment. People usually don’t picture endless tanks and whirring pumps, or imagine city drinking water ever shared space with the same materials used in a mining operation. Yet, polyacrylamide finds its place at both ends. I remember touring a water treatment plant. There were a few big bags of fine powder stacked near the clarifiers, and one technician said, “That stuff helps bind all the dirt, so it settles out.” Dirt, sand, small bits of organic junk—polyacrylamide wraps those particles up like a burrito. The water you fill your glass with owes some thanks to this odd polymer. It’s used in places with strict quality standards and places where folks just want less mud in their water. Polyacrylamide doesn’t get the headlines, but it makes cities healthier and rivers a little cleaner down the line.
Anyone who’s watched a combine roll across a farm field after a rainstorm will notice water running in brown streaks. That soil doesn’t always stay put. Farms use polyacrylamide to keep soil on the fields and out of waterways. Toss a tiny amount onto a furrow and it sticks the soil together, cuts down on erosion, and saves nutrients along with it. Farmers in California and Arkansas gave a fair bit of feedback to land-grant researchers, and some university studies found sediment losses dropping by more than 70% in certain conditions. These aren’t just numbers in a paper. They’re money kept on the acre and less clogging up rivers miles away.
Mines put polyacrylamide powders in their operations too. Pulling minerals out of ore can leave a soupy mess behind. If those small solids drift downstream, whole ecosystems pay. Polyacrylamide helps sludge clump up and get scooped out, keeping tailings ponds and surrounding areas safer for people and critters.
I walked through an old mill once, and one of the workers showed me how the paper pulp spun through wide tanks, looking like runny porridge. Polyacrylamide plays a role there, too. It acts like a glue for fibers, trapping them faster, draining water more efficiently, and making paper sheets tougher without bulking things with extra chemicals. This adds up, given how many tons of paper get churned out worldwide every year.
Oil and gas crews sweat plenty over mud. In drilling, wells can collapse if the mud moving downhole gets too thin, too quickly. A little polyacrylamide turns boring old mud into the sort of thickener that keeps equipment safe, pumps running, and shows up in nearly every hydrofracturing operation. It’s used in “slickwater” processes, making it easier to recover oil while reducing the grit that wears out machinery.
Polyacrylamide isn’t risk-free. News stories pop up about acrylamide—a related substance known to be toxic—lingering in small traces after manufacturing. Regulators from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the European Food Safety Authority keep tabs on this, making sure limits stay safe. Research from the World Health Organization keeps guiding limits lower as more data comes in. Communities ought to keep eyes on outcomes, especially where recycled wastewater ends up growing food or flowing through local creeks.
Polyacrylamide keeps vital industries running, from water treatment to mining and agriculture. If we pay close attention to sourcing, transparency in reporting, and investment in safer manufacturing, its benefits can keep stacking up without growing new fears. The science points to careful, steady use instead of chasing quick solutions. Polyacrylamide may not make the news, but for those working to keep water, food, and landscapes intact, it stays indispensable.
Polyacrylamide pops up in more places than most people realize. It shows up in our drinking water plants, in the treatment tanks cleaning wastewater, and even on farms where it cuts soil erosion. I've noticed it in personal care items, too. Its job is to pull tiny particles together so they settle out or can be filtered—essential when you want clean water or a smooth face mask.
It’s a slippery, polymer-based compound, made by stringing tiny acrylamide units together. Here’s the sticking point: the worry doesn’t come from the finished polymer itself but from unreacted acrylamide left over after manufacture. That’s a totally different substance and far from harmless; animal studies suggest acrylamide can damage nerves and, with enough exposure, increase cancer risk. Polyacrylamide used in water is supposed to contain only trace levels of acrylamide, below what health authorities consider risky.
As someone who reads water quality reports pretty closely, I’ve seen polyacrylamide’s safety debated. Drinking water treatment plants stick to strict rules for residual acrylamide in treated water. For example, in the U.S., the Environmental Protection Agency sets a limit at 0.5 parts per billion. Regulators in Europe and Asia review polyacrylamide applications with the same microscope.
Research from independent labs backs up the idea that polyacrylamide, as long as it’s properly manufactured and used at recommended concentrations, stays locked in big molecules that won’t absorb through skin or break down quickly inside us. The risk comes if manufacturers cut corners or users pour on too much. Cutting costs in the factory could leave more unreacted acrylamide; doubling up in the field could push total levels over safety lines. Monitoring matters, and I’d argue better labeling could give peace of mind.
Farmers and engineers like polyacrylamide because it settles silt and keeps soil put, which keeps rivers cleaner. But nothing in chemistry is a free lunch. Wild runoff or spills, especially from mine or construction sites, can dump both polyacrylamide and acrylamide into streams. Acrylamide itself breaks down over days or weeks but causes a spike in toxicity for aquatic life in the meantime. Fish and frogs don’t handle it well. I’ve read about small fish kills near certain release sites, typically when handling standards fell short.
Polyacrylamide itself tends to stick to soil and sediment instead of hanging out in water for long. Most plants and animals can’t digest the long chains, so it doesn’t build up. Scientists keep an eye on whether microplastics, including very fine polyacrylamide particles, may cause subtle impacts over many years. So far, these haven’t shown up as a widespread ecosystem threat, but research continues.
Anyone using polyacrylamide—farmers, water companies, mining outfits—owes it to the wider community to follow best handling practices. That means sourcing material from companies with real track records and third-party safety audits. Testing water downstream before and after large-scale use can spot issues early. Alternatives exist for some uses: new biodegradable soil additives, and mechanical silt screens. They don’t always match polyacrylamide’s cost or convenience, but they keep options open.
Polyacrylamide can play a useful role, especially when clean water is short and soil loss is real. Trust in safety comes down to strict standards, good manufacturing, and accountability for mistakes. Cutting corners isn’t just risky for users—it spills out into neighborhoods, wetlands, and watersheds downstream.
Polyacrylamide pops up a lot these days—in water treatment, mining, even farming. From my time working near wastewater plants and chatting with folks in agriculture, I’ve noticed a common thread: chemicals like polyacrylamide help solve big problems, but ignoring smart handling can open the door to serious risks. This substance wants a certain kind of respect, not just for its own sake, but for the safety of everyone who comes near it.
Anyone dealing with polyacrylamide should know it stays happiest far from sunlight and high temperatures. A dry, cool spot—preferably between 0°C and 35°C—lets it keep its properties longer. Don’t stash it next to oxidizing agents or acids, since reactions can get messy or even dangerous. Many folks make the mistake of leaving these powders or gels open to the air, and moisture sneaks in before you know it. After opening a bag or drum, close it tightly. Failing to do so leads to clumping and sometimes even reduces how it performs during use.
Some supplies will come with their own manufacturer’s guidelines. If I’ve learned anything from working with chemicals, following that advice never hurts. The difference between a smoothly running plant and one that has to halt for cleanup or a safety scare often comes down to those instructions. In farms, skipping steps around chemicals can mean downtime or lost crops.
A little preparation goes a long way. Polyacrylamide dust lingers in the air if you pour it too fast or use fans near open containers. That’s not good for breathing or for anyone with sensitive skin. Gloves and long sleeves keep rashes and sneezing at bay. If the powder drifts around, a simple dust mask does more good than most folks realize.
Using spills as an example, water makes polyacrylamide slick—think ice rink, not living room floor. Mop up dry powder with a vacuum or dry sweep, never with water. Once, in a processing plant, I saw a small spill ignored and then someone added water to try and clean it. A few seconds later, slipping hazards popped up everywhere. Remind workers to treat these areas seriously, and always have warning signs ready.
Though polyacrylamide solves problems in wastewater or soil, some forms can harm aquatic life if they escape into rivers or drains. I’ve seen regulations tighten in places where runoff became an issue. It doesn’t take much effort to use sealed drainage and secondary containment. These steps keep product where it should be and help everyone sleep better at night, workers and neighbors alike.
Training stands out as the cure for most handling mistakes, whether your job is shipping, preparing solutions, or cleaning up. Bringing new people up to speed isn’t just about reading a sheet of paper. Walk them through storage areas and cleanup routines. The best-run operations I’ve encountered spend time on drills before something goes wrong.
Polyacrylamide brings a lot of value, but that doesn’t excuse cutting corners around it. Taking care of storage, using the right gear, thinking about the environment, and teaching people what to do—all these steps mean fewer emergencies and smoother days at work. No matter which industry brings someone into contact with this substance, these habits form the backbone of a safer workplace and a cleaner community.
Growing up in a small town near paper mills, I saw how large industries depend on proper water treatment and processing. Polyacrylamide usually comes up whenever wastewater hits the spotlight, whether on factory tours or in technical discussions. It’s not a one-size-fits-all solution. Understanding its forms—anionic, cationic, and nonionic—matters for more than just chemistry labs. Choices here ripple out, affecting local waterways, industrial output, and operational safety.
Anionic polyacrylamide works best with suspended solids carrying a positive charge. Think of river water chock-full of organic debris: the anionic version gathers those particles and helps form flocs, which easily get filtered out. Industries using mineral processing and municipal wastewater often reach for anionic types to capture heavy loads of clay, mud, or earthy contaminants. The same goes for oil recovery and sludge dewatering, where muddy water would otherwise clog up the works.
Field operators favor it because it doesn’t introduce harsh side effects into water handling systems. Fewer complaints about post-treatment corrosion and less worry about hurting aquatic life mean anionic types get chosen with future accountability in mind.
Look at a wastewater tank from a textile plant, and you’re likely dealing with plenty of negatively-charged impurities. Cationic polyacrylamide draws them out like a magnet. I remember an engineer explaining that cationic types help bind the gunk in sewage treatment, especially where biological sludge poses a challenge. Sludge thickening and dewatering rely on cationic formulations for speed and clean separation.
People pay close attention here because overdosing cationic products leads to fish kills and foam problems downstream. Responsible use demands constant checks and training—skipping these steps risks environmental blowback and regulatory headaches.
Some water treatment systems need a neutral touch. Nonionic polyacrylamide fits in where water contains both organic and inorganic stuff, but charges stay balanced or pretty low. Power plants often treat cooling water with nonionic variants. I watched paper mill workers use nonionic solutions to hasten filtration without harming equipment.
Because these polymers offer mild activity, they’re often picked for sensitive ecosystems and recycled water setups. No harsh side effects like those seen with highly charged options. Nonionic types help keep things running without raising eyebrows among health and safety inspectors.
Every plant operator faces trade-offs: higher purity versus chemical cost, easy operation versus stricter oversight. The choice between anionic, cationic, and nonionic polyacrylamide gets shaped by the actual mix of pollutants, required discharge limits, and concerns about environmental safety. I’ve seen firsthand how wrong choices create headaches—equipment fouling, permit violations, or worse, damage to nearby rivers and neighborhoods.
A few things help keep problems at bay: detailed lab testing, steady monitoring onsite, and a regular review of treatment recipes. The science keeps changing, with new formulations reducing complexity and improving safety. Yet, even in a world of automation and remote sensing, basic hands-on training and field checks matter. People working on the front lines know what works because they see the water before and after treatment.
It’s easy to focus on formulas, but in the end, it’s about responsibility. Factories and municipalities can’t cut corners on making smart choices—it’s all about protecting the people and places that depend on clean water.
Clean water shapes the health and growth of every community. Over years of working in industries touched by water regulation, I’ve seen how small changes in water treatment bring huge results. Polyacrylamide, often shortened to PAM, plays a powerful role in this story. It’s not some high-tech silver bullet only engineers understand, but a practical, versatile tool that works quietly behind the scenes, keeping everything from city tap water to factory discharge safe.
Anyone who’s watched muddy water settle in a bucket knows how patience and gravity help particles drop to the bottom. But for big water systems, waiting isn’t an option. Polyacrylamide accelerates that process. Acting as a flocculant, its molecules reach into the water, latch onto dirt, clay, and other debris, and pull these particles together into larger clumps. These clumps settle quickly, leaving clearer water above.
During my time in municipal project consulting, plants often wrestled with fluctuating river quality, especially after heavy rains lifted all sorts of natural and industrial runoff. By adding just the right amount of polyacrylamide to the system, techs could dramatically improve clarity and reduce the strain on subsequent filters and pumps. This meant fewer breakdowns, lower running costs, and lower risks of contamination breaches.
Plenty of other chemicals pull impurities from water, but many carry trade-offs. Aluminum and iron salts, for example, have their place, but tend to create large volumes of waste sludge and sometimes introduce their own environmental headaches. Polyacrylamide, by comparison, can target fine particles without vastly swelling the waste stream.
Safety matters too. Not all forms of polyacrylamide are equal, but research and regulatory oversight focus on minimizing the possibility of its raw material, acrylamide, staying in treated water. Modern quality controls push residual concentrations to extremely low levels, well beneath what's considered harmful.
Many industries using large amounts of water—textiles, food processing, and electronics—keep a close watch on treatment substance choices. With growing pressure for greener and safer operations, they want effective chemicals that don’t pile up environmental costs. Polyacrylamide fits this demand as plants can dial in precise dosages, achieving clean discharge standards without excessive chemical loads.
Globally, water scarcity concerns keep rising. As pipes age and regulations become stricter, plants must handle nastier water sources. PAM steps into this gap, allowing more sites to rely on recycled or lower-grade sources for non-potable uses, taking pressure off limited freshwater reserves.
Smart application of polyacrylamide hinges on collaboration. Water system operators need training, not just in dosages but in ongoing monitoring of results. Companies developing PAM have a responsibility to share transparent data about safety profiles. Regulators must keep pushing for improvements, particularly with biodegradable options that cut long-term risk. For those working in the weeds—utility crews, lab techs, small-town water boards—the message isn’t about switching allegiances to some wonder-chemical. It’s about making real-world decisions using practical, proven tools, and keeping public trust front and center.
Years of hands-on experience show that polyacrylamide, used wisely, can lift heavy burdens in the world of water treatment. The challenge now: keep refining its use, keep measuring results, and stay open to fresh ideas that keep water safe, sustainable, and available to everyone.
| Names | |
| Preferred IUPAC name | poly(2-propenamide) |
| Other names |
Acrylamide polymer PAM Polyaerylamide |
| Pronunciation | /ˌpɒli.əˈkrɪl.ə.maɪd/ |
| Identifiers | |
| CAS Number | 9003-05-8 |
| Beilstein Reference | 1400107 |
| ChEBI | CHEBI:53489 |
| ChEMBL | CHEMBL1201180 |
| ChemSpider | 20212 |
| DrugBank | DB14045 |
| ECHA InfoCard | 100.115.452 |
| EC Number | 231-673-0 |
| Gmelin Reference | 67617 |
| KEGG | C17260 |
| MeSH | D010927 |
| PubChem CID | 159238 |
| RTECS number | ASD4943300 |
| UNII | 9G2MAD120V |
| UN number | UN3260 |
| Properties | |
| Chemical formula | (C₃H₅NO)ₙ |
| Molar mass | Variable |
| Appearance | white powder |
| Odor | Odorless |
| Density | 1.3 g/cm³ |
| Solubility in water | Soluble in water |
| log P | -2.8 |
| Vapor pressure | Negligible |
| Acidity (pKa) | ~16 |
| Basicity (pKb) | 8.9 |
| Magnetic susceptibility (χ) | -8.0e-6 |
| Refractive index (nD) | 1.47 |
| Viscosity | 100-1000 cps |
| Dipole moment | 1.68 D |
| Thermochemistry | |
| Std molar entropy (S⦵298) | 300 J·mol⁻¹·K⁻¹ |
| Std enthalpy of formation (ΔfH⦵298) | -176.9 kJ/mol |
| Std enthalpy of combustion (ΔcH⦵298) | -548.8 kJ/mol |
| Pharmacology | |
| ATC code | S01KA18 |
| Hazards | |
| Main hazards | May cause eye, skin, and respiratory irritation; dust may cause mechanical irritation; harmful if swallowed. |
| GHS labelling | GHS07, GHS09 |
| Pictograms | GHS07,GHS05 |
| Signal word | Warning |
| Hazard statements | H319: Causes serious eye irritation. |
| Precautionary statements | P261, P273, P280, P305+P351+P338, P337+P313 |
| NFPA 704 (fire diamond) | 1-1-0 |
| Flash point | > 200°C (392°F) |
| Autoignition temperature | Autoignition temperature: 390°C (734°F) |
| Lethal dose or concentration | LD50 Oral Rat > 5,000 mg/kg |
| LD50 (median dose) | 5900 mg/kg (rat, oral) |
| NIOSH | RQ8310000 |
| PEL (Permissible) | Not established |
| REL (Recommended) | 0.3 mg/m³ |
| Related compounds | |
| Related compounds |
Acrylamide Poly(N-isopropylacrylamide) Polysodium acrylate Polyacrylic acid Poly(methyl acrylate) Polystyrene sulfonate |
