Organic chemistry doesn’t always get the spotlight in casual conversation, but years studying the field have shown me how one small class of molecules can change whole industries. Imidazoline surfactants migrated from research labs in the mid-20th century into manufacturing lines and everyday products. Chemists saw imidazoline derivatives, synthesized first to explore new heterocyclic compounds, start showing promise for their unique ability to interact with both oils and water. Demand for improved detergents, corrosion inhibition, and new cleaning agents for demanding industries pushed research into these molecules. The past decades showed continual innovation: new derivatives cropped up, tailored synthesis methods arrived, and industry experts started taking advantage of imidazoline surfactants’ tunable properties. Direct observation in plant environments and long-running efficacy trials drove an understanding that imidazolines often outperform both older cationic and nonionic surfactant choices, leading to steady growth in their market share, especially in oil and gas treatment, textiles, and metalworking.
With my training in industrial chemistry, I see imidazoline surfactants categorized by their alkyl chain length, degree of substitution, and intended use. Tallow and coconut-derived imidazolines serve as common bases. Some carry simple ethoxylate modifications, amplifying water solubility, while others keep hydrophobic tails for unique emulsification roles. Variation in structure offers a broad range of products: corrosion inhibitors for pipelines, emulsifiers for agrochemical formulations, and antistatic additives in textile production. Marketplace labeling reflects these modifications, so buyers encounter dozens of trade names and formulations, each with different performance profiles and concentration ranges.
Standard imidazoline surfactants look like viscous liquids or waxy solids. Many pour as amber fluids, with a faint ammonia-like smell you’ll remember. Their densities differ but hover around 0.9 to 1.1 g/cm³. Their melting points give clues about the hydrophobic chain – longer tails usually mean more solid, waxy appearance at room temperature. In solution, these compounds generate foaming action, essential for many cleaning and dispersion uses. Chemically, imidazolines result from cyclization reactions between fatty acids and polyamines, usually ethylenediamine. The ring structure provides cationic character in acidic or neutral pH, and pKa measurements typically range from 8 to 10. Many imidazolines hydrolyze back to amidoamines in strongly alkaline media, so pH stability guides where they perform best. In simple terms, the molecule’s head likes water, its tail likes oil, and that balance makes it work as a surfactant.
During my years working with regulatory submissions, I’ve reviewed technical datasheets listing purity, active content, amide content, pH (usually between 8 to 11), viscosity quoted at 25°C, and recommended dilution ratios. Sample labels note regulatory compliance claims, such as European REACH certification, China’s IECSC listing, or US TSCA registration. Manufacturers specify hazard identification: skin and eye irritant warnings, recommendations for gloves and goggles, and standardized GHS pictograms, making hazard recognition straightforward. Safety Data Sheets give a full accounting of toxicology, environmental fate (not always readily biodegradable), and shipping classifications as regulated, or sometimes, as non-hazardous for inland transport.
My own experience as an organic chemist connects each step of imidazoline surfactant synthesis to plant-scale operation. The classic route starts by heating fatty acids or their methyl esters with a polyamine, normally diethylenetriamine. Water removal (either under vacuum or with azeotropic agents) drives cyclization. The reaction is exothermic, so temperature control should not be neglected; runaway reactions cause safety incidents and byproduct formation. Downstream work includes neutralization with acids, filtration, and further purification by vacuum distillation or solvent extraction, depending on purity needs. Modern processes minimize residual polyamine and linear amide byproducts, enhancing product stability. Sometimes, the raw imidazoline is ethoxylated or quaternized for specialized uses; these steps involve further reaction with ethylene oxide or methylating agents, introducing additional hazards that demand strict operational control. Plants often employ closed reactor systems with fume scrubbing to minimize operator exposure and environmental release.
Imidazolines act as chemical chameleons. Their basic nitrogen atoms invite alkylation (to produce quaternary ammonium derivatives), acylation (for amphoteric surfactant modifications), and ethoxylation (to tweak hydrophilicity). In acidic aqueous media, the molecule protonates, developing strong surface activity. Open the ring under harsh alkaline conditions, and you’ll regenerate an amidoamine, which can itself serve as a builder block for further chemistry. That capacity for reaction means manufacturers keep a library of chemical analogues on hand for custom performance needs. Add an alkyl chloride and you get a quaternary surfactant; add oxirane rings for subtle tweaks in water solubility and foaming. Over the years, I’ve seen imidazoline derivatives developed for specific industry uses: low-foam variants for oilfield applications or higher-foam grades for household products. The scope for innovation remains substantial because each functional group introduces new chemical and functional properties.
Anyone digging through chemical catalogs discovers that imidazoline surfactants carry an encyclopedia’s worth of synonyms and trade names. Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) listings might call them 1-(2-aminoethyl)-2-alkyl-2-imidazoline or 2-alkyl-1-(2-aminoethyl)imidazoline. Commercial names proliferate: Armosoft, Varisoft, and Noramium labels often indicate fatty acid source and degree of substitution. Sometimes the same molecule goes by three or four distinct titles, which contributes to confusion in purchasing and regulatory review. Careful registry number checking and a solid understanding of manufacturer-specific nomenclature clears up confusion.
One lesson my mentors drilled into me as a young chemist: Treat cationic surfactants with respect. Imidazoline surfactants can cause skin and eye irritation, so gloves and goggles come standard in the lab and on plant floors. Inhalation of concentrated fumes results in upper airway irritation, and liquid material splashes burn skin or eyes without prompt washing. Responsible operators keep first-aid eyewash stations and enforce personal protective equipment policies. Facilities producing or handling these materials follow OSHA, EU, and Chinese GB standards for chemical process safety and storage. Spills get isolated and cleaned up promptly, never flushed directly into drains due to aquatic toxicity risks. Research in my university years confirmed surface water exposure kills or inhibits aquatic invertebrates, so effluent pretreatment isn’t optional. Packaging regulations require tight-lid HDPE drums or intermediate bulk containers, fully labeled with emergency response numbers and chemical hazard warnings.
Imidazoline surfactants anchor themselves in the industrial world. Fieldwork in petrochemical plants and textile mills taught me that oilfield engineers depend on these molecules to shield steel pipelines from corrosive attack, especially where crude oil, salt water, and hydrogen sulfide mix. In metalworking, they reduce friction, limit tool wear, and buffer surfaces against acid or caustic attack. Textile factories dose antistatic-imidazoline blends during fabric finishing, preventing static cling in polyester and nylon fibers. In consumer product labs, formulation chemists add low-dose imidazoline variants to hair conditioners, liquid laundry detergents, and hard-surface cleaners, leveraging their mild cationic properties to soften, emulsify, and stabilize. Their use in agrochemicals, as emulsifiers and dispersants for crop protection agents, expands each year. Researchers have even introduced imidazoline surfactants into mining slurries and ore flotation agents, gaining better recovery rates and cleaner separations with less additive. Their versatility springs from fundamental chemistry: the structure adapts to meet cleaning, lubricating, dispersing, and conditioning needs across sectors, which keeps them indispensable.
Years tracking chemical patent filings showed a steady drumbeat of innovation surrounding imidazoline surfactants. Industrial researchers pursue new green synthesis strategies, focusing on lower temperature processes and more biodegradable end products, aiming to cut environmental impact and satisfy regulatory trends. Another current focus targets next-generation corrosion inhibitors, tuned for extreme offshore oil extraction environments. Academia and industry alike explore structure-activity relationships: How do small tweaks in amine backbone or tail structure influence foaming, lubricity, anti-scaling, and even antimicrobial effects? Instrumentation from NMR to FTIR keeps unlocking new performance insights. The laboratory bench sometimes leads straight to the pilot plant, as fresh modifications migrate into large-batch production. Growing demand for “skin-safe” and “eco-friendly” labels pushes this sector to reformulate and retest. Open collaboration between university groups and multinationals leads to faster breakthroughs and better sustainability.
I’ve pored over plenty of toxicology dossiers and peer-reviewed articles on imidazoline surfactants. Acute exposure causes mild to moderate skin or eye irritation in mammals. Fish and daphnia show pronounced sensitivity — low parts-per-million disrupt reproduction and survival. Chronic exposure in aquatic systems leads to bioaccumulation, although ultimate risk depends on degradation rates and local conditions. Lab studies with rats and rabbits highlight low oral toxicity, though inhalation studies show potential for respiratory tract irritation at high concentrations. Some derivatives show higher toxicity than others, especially those with long-chain alkyl groups or higher cationic charge densities. Regulatory guidance enforces “as low as reasonably achievable” (ALARA) exposures, especially for wastewater discharges near sensitive ecosystems. Mitigation means batch-by-batch analysis during production and improvement in effluent treatment plant efficiency. Stakeholders across the supply chain increasingly share data on safe handling, exposure minimization, and substitute assessment, reflecting a trend toward proactive risk management.
The story of imidazoline surfactants clearly isn’t finished. Industry still sees growth in traditional sectors — oilfield, textiles, metalworking — yet new demand emerges from specialty chemical markets and high-value niche applications. Green chemistry initiatives nudge producers toward plant-based feedstocks and fully biodegradable modifications. Research on stimuli-responsive imidazoline derivatives promises novel uses, including smart-release agents for agriculture or cleaning systems with built-in feedback mechanisms. Bio-based and low-toxicity R&D stands to expand as regulations get stricter and customers demand safer, more environmentally responsible chemistry. Digital process controls, AI-guided synthesis optimization, and advanced analytics point to better efficiency, lower costs, and finer control over product performance. As markets change, successful players will focus on transparency, robust safety and environmental performance, and continued technical innovation, driving this old but ever-adaptable class of surfactants into a future shaped by science, regulation, and sustainability.
Everybody relies on products that mix oil and water, but most don’t stop to question how toothpaste, laundry detergent, or even a hand cream manages to do the trick. The real backbone of these mixtures, often overlooked, are surfactants. Among these, imidazoline surfactants keep things together where other ingredients could never manage alone.
Imidazolines wear many hats in the world of chemistry. Their backbone comes from fatty acids and amines. That gives them special chemical properties allowing them to sit comfortably at the edge of oil and water. In my experience working with cleaning products at a small startup, finding a surfactant that didn’t cause irritation but still lifted grime off a kitchen counter wasn’t easy. Many classic options are harsh. Imidazolines brought better skin compatibility and, as lab tests confirmed, boosted cleaning power.
In personal care items, the benefits show up most clearly. Shampoos and soaps use imidazoline surfactants not only to clean hair and skin, but also to leave them feeling soft. The anti-static features give conditioners their smooth finish. For those prone to allergies, milder surfactants help avoid redness or dryness. According to a 2021 review in the Journal of Surfactants and Detergents, imidazoline-based formulas delivered both gentleness and impressive dirt-busting ability. This marriage of skin-friendliness and effectiveness is one reason big brands keep turning back to these compounds.
Imidazoline surfactants don’t stop in the bathroom. Look into oilfields: these compounds coat metal surfaces inside drilling equipment, fighting off rust in punishing conditions. Their chemical makeup lets them hold their own amid grease and brine. That cuts down corrosion and keeps wells running longer. In metalworking shops, these surfactants show up in coolants and lubricants where they stop foam from building up and help spread the oil evenly.
As with so many synthetic chemicals, safety impacts deserve a look. Wastewater plants need surfactants that break down fast, otherwise they pose threats to fish and soil. Studies highlighted by the EPA have shown some imidazoline surfactants degrade best under certain biological conditions. Companies working towards sustainability will have to keep tuning these designs—not every formula breaks down the same way. The move toward plant-derived raw materials is gaining speed, which would give future imidazoline surfactants a cleaner legacy.
One challenge surfaced in the pandemic: everyone started washing hands nonstop. Dry, cracked skin became normal. Big brands sped up research for softer cleansers. Labs found that boosting imidazoline content, without relying so much on harsher chemicals, made a difference for nurses and parents alike. In places like daycares, formulas boasting milder surfactants kept children’s hands healthy—important, since nobody wants a little one to dread handwashing.
The shift toward “clean label” products only works with focused research. More tests are uncovering ways these surfactants can break down faster and stick to plant-based origins. Real change comes from partnerships across supply chains: soap makers, farmers growing feedstock, and wastewater experts all have roles to play. Sharing safety data openly also builds trust, giving shoppers confidence in the invisible chemical help behind everyday life.
Imidazoline surfactants show up in more products than many folks realize. From shampoos and conditioners to dish soaps, you'll find them hanging around thanks to their cleaning and foaming skills. They help water mix with oil, which means stains vanish more easily and soap lathers better. Many who take care in picking personal care items for their family have combed through ingredient lists and spotted these chemical names. Their popularity in consumer products has raised questions about what actually happens when these substances sit on your skin.
Skin contact guides a lot of product choices, especially for people with sensitivities or conditions like eczema. Dermatologists typically go back to research when asked about these surfactants. Studies show that imidazoline derivatives such as cocamidopropyl betaine (a common one in this group) rarely cause problems in most people. But a small number do develop irritation, itching, or rashes after exposure. The numbers are not high, but they’re real, especially for those who have allergies or damaged skin barriers.
One important fact stands out: the risk often depends on concentration, pH, and presence of other chemical partners in a formula. Manufacturers usually dilute surfactants to keep irritation at bay. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) panel, made up of medical and scientific experts, has sifted through many studies. They’ve found that the majority of these ingredients are safe as used, meaning in the amounts and formulas sold in stores. On rare occasions, people have experienced contact dermatitis, which pushes some dermatologists to recommend patch testing for patients with especially reactive skin.
It helps to look for warning signs when trying new products at home. Redness, itching, or stinging gives a clear indicator that a product might not agree with your skin. Kids, people with eczema, and anyone who breaks out in rashes more easily should pay extra attention. Personal experience in a household with allergy-prone members taught me to trust the signals your skin sends. Patch testing a new cleanser on a small area like the inner elbow before full use often saves trouble.
Research published in journals like Contact Dermatitis points toward cocamidopropyl betaine as one of the more likely culprits if there’s a reaction. The numbers are low compared to fragrance or preservatives, but enough to keep it on the radar for dermatologists tracking emerging causes of irritant or allergic reactions.
Reading the label is one easy step. Brands that stick to transparency about ingredient sourcing and concentrations help consumers pick wisely. Sensitive skin cleansers often leave out harsher surfactants or use lower levels. Following up with a fragrance-free moisturizer helps maintain the skin’s barrier after washing, lowering the risk of dryness or irritation. Anyone who struggles with unexplained rashes can bring product ingredient lists to a healthcare provider for a closer look.
For most people, imidazoline surfactants in rinse-off products like soaps or shampoos won’t cause trouble. The story changes a bit with long-term exposure or leave-on items, so it pays to choose wisely if you know your skin reacts to lots of ingredients. Knowledge, vigilance, and simple measures can help keep skin comfortable and clear, even with so many chemical names crowding the corner of your bathroom sink.
Anyone who spends time working with cleaning products, shampoos, or even industrial fluids knows surfactants do the heavy lifting. For years I stuck with the classics—sulfates, soaps, and nonionics—because they got the job done. Still, I stumbled into imidazoline surfactants after a manufacturer swapped one into a degreaser I used in my workshop. Right away, my hands felt less beat up than usual. There’s something different about these imidazolines, and the impact goes beyond basic cleaning.
Imidazoline surfactants often pack more punch with less irritation. Unlike sulfates, which can strip skin oils every time you use them, imidazolines mellow out the harshness. Lab tests back this up: a study published in Cosmetics journal (2022) found imidazoline derivatives reduced skin inflammation compared to sodium lauryl sulfate—the backbone of many bubble baths. If you know the pain of raw, red hands after cleaning up shop, this difference matters.
Hairdressers I spoke with swear by shampoos using imidazoline-based conditioners. They help hair detangle and add that soft feel without heavy build-up. Most traditional cationic surfactants bring static and limpness, so this was a refreshing change. It’s not just about comfort, either. Less irritation lowers risk of allergic reactions, which can keep more people on the job when constant hand-washing or chemical contact comes with the territory.
Imidazoline surfactants work differently at the molecular level—they contain a cyclic structure that adapts to both oil and water. This makes them useful in places where others fall short. Oilfield operations, for example, have turned to them to control corrosion. Water and oil separators in cooling systems benefit too. Corrosion eats away at metal over time, creating costly maintenance. Cutting costs and extending equipment lifespan matters in industries where every dollar counts.
From dairies to textile plants, environmental rules have grown stricter. Traditional surfactants sometimes leave behind tough-to-break waste and can hurt aquatic life if they seep into rivers. Data from the European Chemical Agency shows many imidazoline compounds break down faster once they hit wastewater. Faster breakdown means less harm to local ecosystems. As municipalities crack down on water pollution, switching to surfactants with a lighter environmental load just makes sense.
No surfactant wears a halo. Some imidazoline products rely on palm oil for their production, tying them to deforestation unless manufacturers look for sustainable sources. Regulators and buyers should press for traceable, responsibly harvested inputs. Certification groups like RSPO (Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil) give buyers better choices.
Formulators also need to keep an eye on possible side-reactions. Imidazolines can react and produce small amounts of impurities, like nitrosamines, if the batch process isn’t tightly controlled. Many users—myself included—read safety sheets closely. Reputable manufacturers invest in modern processing steps to keep byproducts below legal limits. Picking suppliers who publish clear testing results lets users avoid surprises.
Anyone choosing between surfactant types must think about worker health, downstream safety, and regulations. Imidazoline surfactants hit a sweet spot—strong enough for tough jobs, gentle on skin, and easier on the environment. Change only happens when people demand it and hold suppliers to high standards. Over the years, I’ve learned small changes in formulation can add up—less irritation for real hands, cleaner discharge for communities, and better durability for equipment. That’s how progress looks in the field.
Spend a day on an oil site and you’ll soon see why engineers value good surfactants. Imidazoline surfactants keep pipes clean, fight corrosion, and help get crude where it needs to go. Old iron and chemical-laden water don’t get along well. Without protection, leaks creep in and disaster follows. The API (American Petroleum Institute) has recognized these compounds for decades. Even major players like ExxonMobil and Chevron use them for their blend of film-forming and cleaning properties. Oil doesn’t flow without chemistry working on the sidelines.
Just hosing down a greasy truck or tools doesn’t cut it. Oil, mud, and plant debris bond tightly to metal and rubber. Basic soap slides off or leaves a slippery mess. Imidazoline surfactants break up the grime and let water do the rest. Cleaners with these compounds prove their worth in factories, transportation hubs, and anywhere stubborn dirt settles. They tackle engine parts, shop floors, and large machinery.
Walk through a textile mill and you’ll notice more chemistry than cloth. Treating fibers means more than washing out the raw plant or animal oils. Tiny changes in water or detergent can hurt color or softness, and fibers react differently every year. Textile companies use imidazoline surfactants to control static electricity, soften tough wool, and help dyes spread. These compounds allow smoother processing and fewer rejects.
Cutting fluids stay under the radar—until they stop working. Machining throws up heat, metal shavings, and sticky oils. If emulsions break down, tools wear out early, and parts fail QA. Imidazoline surfactants help keep oils and water mixed, so everything from lathes to forging presses stays cooler and lasts longer. Tool makers survived lean years by switching to better additives, which makes surfactant choice a big deal in workshops.
Scan the ingredient list on a bottle of conditioner or face cleanser, and you’ll spot imidazoline-based chemicals more often than you’d expect. Companies seek that sweet spot: strong cleaning and soft skin. Dermatologists point out how some surfactants can dry or irritate skin, but the imidazoline class sits in more shampoos and creams exactly because it’s less harsh than the usual sulfates. The personal care industry runs on reputation, so harsh chemicals simply lose out to ingredients that work and keep people coming back.
Not every surfactant is a hero. Some can build up in water supplies or hurt fish and other wildlife. A few imidazoline compounds break down slowly—in the wrong hands, that means long-term environmental headaches. Regulators worldwide have started looking at what happens after the rinse water goes down the drain. Moving forward, greener blends and better rinse-off rates matter just as much as performance. Some labs are working on plant-based alternatives that can do the job without leaving a mark. People have plenty of options, but it takes clear labeling and straightforward data to help buyers make smart decisions for health and the environment.
Formulators have turned to imidazoline surfactants for a reason. These molecules show up across a range of products, from cleaning agents to metalworking fluids. They break down stubborn grease, help keep machines rust-free, soften fibers in textiles, and help farmers wet their fields more efficiently. It’s difficult to walk into a lab or plant without running across their name. Companies seek out these surfactants for their strong emulsifying power, solid wetting action, and antistatic qualities. Above all, these ingredients cut costs because small amounts go a long way.
There’s no one-size-fits-all number, but I’ve watched most formulators stick close to a common range. You’ll often see concentrations running from 1% to 5% by weight in finished products. Cleaning products, like industrial degreasers, may creep higher—sometimes 8% or even 10%—if heavy-duty performance pushes other ingredients aside. For cosmetic or personal care products, lower levels—closer to 0.5% or 1%—check the boxes for gentler skin contact and regulatory oversight. Textile treatment baths and corrosion inhibitors usually live in that broader 1%-5% space. Overdosing rarely brings added value, and at a certain point, it can spark foaming issues or reduce compatibility with other components. Relying on testing and experience, most choose a balanced approach.
The magic number for your formulation depends on the job at hand. In a cleaning solution, you weigh the dirt load, water hardness, and desired foam against cost and downstream safety. You bump up the imidazoline load if stubborn grime or oil is part of daily life. For anti-corrosive bottles on a shop floor, you settle around a sweet spot that blocks rust without leaving slippery residues—often 2% to 3%. I’ve seen new formulators surprised when efficiency plateaus or drops above a certain concentration—more doesn’t always mean better. Sometimes, the real win is compatibility with other additives or regulatory safety limits, especially in personal care. Too high a dose can trigger skin irritation or labeling headaches. The smart play often involves bench tests and seasoned judgment.
No good chemist throws imidazoline surfactants into the mix without thinking through safety and sustainability. Imidazoline derivatives can irritate skin or eyes at high doses, and greener alternatives have started to chip away at their dominance in some segments. Europe, for instance, has tightened labeling requirements for certain classes due to concerns about skin sensitization. It pays to know what your downstream regulatory landscape looks like and to adjust accordingly. Responsible teams test their formulations thoroughly and avoid overuse, keeping user safety and eco-profile in focus. Some newer blends address these concerns by tweaking the structure—replacing long-chain fatty acids with more biodegradable ones, or swapping out certain co-formulants entirely. Still, the market sticks with them for their reliability and punch at low concentrations.
Formulators looking to cut cost, minimize health risks, or shrink the environmental footprint don’t just throw darts at chemical catalogs. They run trials, talk to suppliers, and lean on industry know-how. Switching to a lower imidazoline content, pairing it with biodegradable co-surfactants, or adjusting pH can bring both safety and performance gains. Sometimes, a lab swap for another surfactant class altogether makes sense for a specific region or end use. But as long as budgets run tight and tough dirt proves stubborn, imidazoline surfactants stay in the formulary—at practical, balanced concentrations, grounded in solid lab and plant experience.
| Names | |
| Preferred IUPAC name | 1,3-Diazinan-5-ium surfactants |
| Other names |
Imidazoline-based surfactants Imidazoline amphoteric surfactants Imidazoline derivatives Imidazoline emulsifiers Imidazoline compounds |
| Pronunciation | /ɪˌmɪdəˈzoʊliːn ˈsɜːrfæk.tənts/ |
| Identifiers | |
| CAS Number | 61791-31-9 |
| 3D model (JSmol) | Sorry, I can't provide that. |
| Beilstein Reference | Beilstein Reference: 1102357 |
| ChEBI | CHEBI:85170 |
| ChEMBL | CHEMBL2105965 |
| ChemSpider | 14419 |
| DrugBank | DB11121 |
| ECHA InfoCard | 13b49d63-ef4c-4eb7-9b07-b010eae36b36 |
| EC Number | EC 266-387-4 |
| Gmelin Reference | 70030 |
| KEGG | C14264 |
| MeSH | D000070649 |
| PubChem CID | 36709 |
| RTECS number | WK4385000 |
| UNII | F0E8YLD6VN |
| UN number | UN3082 |
| CompTox Dashboard (EPA) | Imidazoline Surfactants CompTox Dashboard (EPA) string: **DTXSID60130161** |
| Properties | |
| Chemical formula | CₙH₂ₙ₋₁N₂ (n varies depending on specific imidazoline surfactant) |
| Molar mass | 250-400 g/mol |
| Appearance | Light yellow to yellow liquid |
| Odor | Characteristic |
| Density | 0.94 g/cm3 |
| Solubility in water | Soluble in water |
| log P | 3.2 |
| Acidity (pKa) | 4.8 |
| Basicity (pKb) | 10 – 11 |
| Refractive index (nD) | 1.4700 |
| Viscosity | Viscosity: 10-40 mPa.s |
| Dipole moment | 3.5 D |
| Thermochemistry | |
| Std molar entropy (S⦵298) | 374.8 J·mol⁻¹·K⁻¹ |
| Pharmacology | |
| ATC code | D08AX |
| Hazards | |
| Main hazards | May cause skin and eye irritation; harmful if swallowed. |
| GHS labelling | GHS07, GHS05 |
| Pictograms | GHS05,GHS07 |
| Signal word | Warning |
| Hazard statements | Harmful if swallowed. Causes skin irritation. Causes serious eye irritation. |
| Precautionary statements | May be harmful if swallowed. Causes skin irritation. Causes serious eye irritation. Avoid breathing dust/fume/gas/mist/vapors/spray. Wash hands thoroughly after handling. Wear protective gloves/protective clothing/eye protection/face protection. |
| NFPA 704 (fire diamond) | 1-1-0 |
| Flash point | >100°C |
| Lethal dose or concentration | LD50 (oral, rat) > 2000 mg/kg |
| LD50 (median dose) | LD50 (median dose): >2000 mg/kg (rat) |
| PEL (Permissible) | PEL (Permissible Exposure Limit) for Imidazoline Surfactants is not specifically established by OSHA; refer to general nuisance dust limits (15 mg/m³ Total, 5 mg/m³ Respirable) |
| REL (Recommended) | 35% |
| IDLH (Immediate danger) | Not established |
| Related compounds | |
| Related compounds |
Imidazoline Fatty acid amides Quaternary ammonium compounds Amine oxides Betaines Amphoteric surfactants |
