Scientists started looking for safer, more flexible plasticizers back in the mid-twentieth century, long before BPA and phthalates drew public attention. Diisononyl adipate—DINA—joined the mix as a kind of answer to both flexibility requirements and new worries about health. Companies aimed to get away from older plasticizers like DOP (dioctyl phthalate), given growing evidence about long-term toxicity. Up through the 1970s and 80s, chemical makers focused on modifying the backbone of familiar compounds. By adding adipic acid and branching out with isononyl alcohol, they figured out DINA could answer the new safety and performance benchmarks. All that time in research labs now shows up in a global market that depends on safer, functional softeners, not just for vinyl flooring, but for everything from synthetic leathers to food packaging.
DINA falls in the family of adipate-based plasticizers. It is a clear, nearly colorless, oily liquid at room temperature. Producers use adipic acid—an old favorite from nylon production—and blend it with isononyl alcohol. This gives the molecule a flexible, high-boiling ester that dissolves well in most plastics. Companies reach for DINA to get soft, bendable PVC and other polymers used in everyday consumer products. DINA stands out because of its good balance—flexibility without much odor, decent compatibility, and less migration out of plastic items compared to cheaper options.
DINA flows easily, has a low freezing point, and offers a boiling point that clears 400°C. Its density sits just under water, around 0.92 g/cm³ at room temperature. That means it won’t evaporate or break down under normal room or high-heat processing conditions. Chemists prefer esters like DINA because they resist water, and they don’t interact much with acids or mild bases. Its solubility favors nonpolar solvents; water can’t pick this up, which helps it stay inside plastics. You’ll spot it by its faint odor and oily feel. DINA doesn’t corrode or discolor the base polymers, which stands as a big plus for consumer-facing goods.
Manufacturers stick to clear purity standards. Typical DINA grades run 98% plus pure, tested for residual alcohols, acidity, and color. The acid value lands below 0.1 mg KOH/g, with ester content staying high so it won’t break down in use. Big buyers—such as flooring producers and automotive trim makers—demand strict compliance with standards like ASTM D3298 and ISO 17025, which spell out test methods and minimum requirements. Labels call out batch numbers, purity, recommended storage, and shelf life—usually two years if kept sealed and away from sunlight. Even packaging standards matter; DINA gets bottled and shipped in high-density polyethylene drums, never in soft PVC, to avoid unwanted reactions.
Making DINA looks like basic esterification, but in bulk. Chemists react adipic acid directly with isononyl alcohol in the presence of acid catalysts—often sulfuric acid. The process creates water as a by-product, so the reactors have to keep pulling it out to drive the reaction to completion. Later, the crude ester gets neutralized, washed, and vacuum-distilled to remove leftovers and color impurities. Getting DINA right means watching temperature and purity levels. Any leftover acid damages stability and increases odor, two big red flags for buyers. The final step, filtration and quality control, keeps the purity steady from drum to drum.
DINA’s main reactivity comes from its ester groups. It resists light hydrolysis in normal use, but under strong acid or base, it can break back down into its two base chemicals—adipic acid and isononyl alcohol. That rarely happens outside specialty chemical plants. Scientists have experimented with cross-linking DINA-modified polymers to strengthen or slow plasticizer migration. No major commercial process tries to change the DINA molecule itself once produced, mostly for cost and consistency. Some niche R&D outfits have looked at adding heat-stabilizers or antioxidants to DINA before blending, especially when chasing better UV durability or long-lasting cable sheathing.
DINA goes by a string of official and trade names. You’ll see Diisononyl adipate as the chemical name, with synonyms like Nonyl adipate, Hexanedioic acid, diisononyl ester, or its CAS number 33703-08-1. Commercial producers use branding like Plastomoll DOA, Jayflex DOA, or Palatinol DOA depending on the supplier and the market. Product sheets often flag these synonyms for customs and regulatory tracking. Many global companies use local language adaptations, especially across Europe and Asia, adding another wrinkle for buyers trying to track quality and consistency.
Anyone handling DINA in bulk looks at both the chemical safety sheet and international standards. DINA scores relatively low on acute toxicity, and doesn’t show skin sensitivity in most tests. Personal experience in plant audits has shown that contact with skin causes only slight, short-lived irritation, and inhalation risks remain low at room temperature. Still, DINA falls under chemical-use regulations like REACH in the EU and TSCA in the US, mostly to guard against environmental contamination rather than user risk. Storage means tight, sealed drums away from open flames—DINA burns, so keeping it outside hot areas is important. Production lines require goggles and gloves, and sometimes respiratory protection if the temperature rises. Waste goes to regulated chemical incinerators, never down the drain or into normal landfills.
DINA starts in the chemical plant and ends in flexible products relied on every day: soft PVC used in food wraps, children’s toys, synthetic leathers, and transport tubing. Car manufacturers count on DINA for dashboard skins and trim, owing to its high durability under temperature cycles. Footwear makers pick it for faux leathers that bend but don’t go sticky or brittle, even with daily use. Medical suppliers use DINA-plasticized tubing and bags—one reason stems from DINA’s long migration half-life, a big deal for sterile or food-safe packaging. Even synthetic sports surfaces and tablecloths use it to get that supple, long-lasting bend. All these uses add up, making DINA a quiet staple in materials science.
Researchers keep digging into how DINA behaves in both products and in the environment. Universities have run migration tests in food contact plastics, using advanced chromatographic techniques to check for leakage and by-products. Polymer labs have spent years finding out just how well DINA holds up under UV, heat, and long-term flexing—key data for automotive and building applications. Makers of specialty plastics sometimes blend DINA with other adipates or citrates to fine-tune properties like low-temperature flexibility or fire resistance. Labs have reported some success stacking additives, but cost and production speed always dictate what reaches market scale. Beyond performance, research has examined biobased routes to DINA, seeking sustainability and lower upstream emissions.
Much of the public safety debate has centered on phthalates, but DINA also gets scrutiny. Animal studies generally report low oral and dermal toxicity. Studies published through the European Chemicals Agency and the US EPA describe a low tendency for bioaccumulation. Regular monitoring in industrial settings hasn’t shown major links to chronic health effects in exposed workers, though concern sometimes comes up about long-term, low-level exposure. Some environmental toxicologists watch for DINA in surface waters near chemical plants, but most reports find only trace levels far below what’s likely to cause harm. DINA remains off the lists of reproductive or carcinogenic risks, which keeps it in play for sensitive products. Consumer safety groups remain vigilant, pressing regulators and companies for ever-deeper studies about its breakdown products and possible interactions with other common chemicals.
Demand for flexible, safe plasticizers isn’t fading. As countries clamp down on compounds with higher health and environmental risks, DINA stands out as a go-to alternative. Markets trend toward even more demanding applications—medical devices, high-performance electronics, reusable packaging—where product consistency counts. Pressure for greener, more sustainable chemicals will likely shift attention to bio-based or recycled sources for the raw adipic acid and isononyl alcohol ingredients. Some startups are working on fermentation-derived adipates or closed-loop manufacturing to keep emissions and waste down. Meanwhile, advances in analytical chemistry make it easier for companies and regulators to monitor trace migration, helping buyers trust the safety of consumer goods. The next few years will show if DINA keeps its spot as a backbone plasticizer or steps aside for even newer technologies.
Diisononyl adipate, or DINA, comes up a lot these days whenever folks start paying closer attention to what’s inside plastics and rubber goods. Its main role is as a plasticizer. That means it helps make plastics soft and flexible instead of brittle. Walk through any hardware store and you’ll spot dozens of plastic goods—flooring, wires, garden hoses—that likely owe some of their give and flexibility to a plasticizer like DINA.
I’ve had more than my fair share of run-ins with stiff cords that crack in the cold or plastic wraps that tear at the first tug. The companies making those products don’t choose plasticizers on a whim. DINA lets manufacturers create a soft, waste-minimizing vinyl used in products where toughness and bend go hand in hand. Extension cords, automotive interiors, and synthetic leathers need to survive bending and twisting, or they become landfill fodder way too soon.
DINA steps in for a reason. Vinyl flooring tiles use it to keep from cracking under heavy foot traffic. Medical device tubing, those IV drips and oxygen masks, can’t do without a soft, reliable plasticizer either. Cable sheathing counts on DINA to prevent cracking and splitting, crucial for insulation and safety. There’s even a role for it in food packaging films. Soft gloves, shower curtains, toys—they all draw on the qualities DINA brings to the table: flexibility, low-temperature performance, and the ability to withstand repeated flexing.
When I had my first child, I got serious about checking what goes into every toy or food container. People with young kids or anyone eating food stored in plastic wants reassurance. DINA has been reviewed by European and US regulatory bodies. Limits on how much DINA can migrate from packaging into food exist for a reason. Studies suggest DINA stays put better in plastics than older alternatives, like DEHP, cutting down on the risk of leaching. Still, the push for thorough testing and transparency never really stops.
Consumers want safer, cleaner, and more sustainable choices. Regulations around the world keep nudging chemical companies to upgrade their safety protocols and environmental responsibility. Some companies are pushing for DINA alternatives made from renewable resources or with even lower migration potential. I’ve noticed more packaging showing off claims about “free from phthalates” or using bio-based plasticizers, which often means working harder at the chemistry bench but brings peace of mind for parents and the eco-conscious.
DINA became popular as a less risky substitute for certain chemical plasticizers linked to health concerns. It remains a key player in making plastic products safer to use and easier to live with, especially for applications like food contact or toys. Like every synthetic chemical, its story gets written by new studies and how we balance performance with safety. I see steady demand whenever flexibility and durability are non-negotiable—at least until a safer, just-as-effective replacement comes along.
Standing in the grocery store, folks rarely think about what lines their packages. Yet, plasticizers like Diisononyl adipate turn up in a surprising number of food wrappers, lids, and flexible films. While regulators watch what goes into food, the stuff wrapping it deserves just as careful a look. If a material leaches, people can end up eating more than they bargained for.
DINA belongs to the family of adipate plasticizers, substances that make plastic soft and bendy. The most thorough safety opinions on DINA come from both the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). These agencies rely on laboratory data: animal studies, migration tests, chemical analyses.
EFSA looked deep into DINA’s behavior when it touches food. They set a specific migration limit of 9 mg/kg of food, meaning that less than this amount can come out of packaging and still be safe. Scientists gave rats large amounts over time and watched for health problems. At the highest doses, some changes popped up, like mild impacts on organs or weight. Staying below the limit, though, didn’t trigger the same issues.
The FDA takes a similar stance, approving DINA for certain uses with rules about how much can be present. In both Europe and the U.S., makers must make sure actual migration into food stays well below allowed levels, and packaging firms run tests to check compliance.
Despite those checks, real kitchens and pantries never match sterile lab setups. Heat, fat, and specific foods can raise the amount of DINA that gets into what people eat. EFSA’s work mostly focused on what happens in a lab, and didn’t always look at what’s true in every household. That opens the door to questions, especially for kids or people eating lots of packaged, fatty snacks where migration could spike.
Some research suggests tiny traces build up in the human body, although much lower than with older, riskier plasticizers like DEHP. More studies would help nail down exactly what long-term, low-level exposure means for children and other sensitive groups. Testing also needs to cover the possible effects if someone eats packaging with DINA most days, not just now and then.
Shoppers looking to dodge unnecessary chemicals can pay attention to packaging codes or ask more questions about what holds their food. Food companies can help by using alternatives with even safer track records—like certain bio-based or non-migrating plasticizers—when flexibility matters. Some European countries have already pushed for lower DINA migration limits in products aimed at babies and young children.
Regulators could expand real-world tests to track migration under regular kitchen conditions. Public disclosure of test results would go a long way toward building trust. For now, experts’ advice sticks with the basics: choose fresh foods when possible, rotate packaged snacks, and don’t heat food in its wrapper—especially if that wrapper feels unusually soft or greasy.
DINA, also known as Diisononyl Adipate, plays a quiet but vital role in the world of plastics and flexible materials. Its clear, oily liquid form gives it an unassuming appearance, but dive into its details, and you find a lot behind that translucent exterior.
Pour DINA into your hand and you’ll notice its slick texture. It hardly gives off any smell, which makes it less intrusive in manufacturing environments and commercial products. People choose DINA because it pours easily, even at low temperatures, thanks to its low freezing point that drops below minus fifteen degrees Celsius. Its boiling point reaches beyond 400 degrees, showing resilience when exposed to heat during processing or end-use.
Density sits just under that of water, right around 0.92 grams per cubic centimeter. That means finished products stay lightweight, contributing to the growing demand for less bulky goods. The viscosity clocks in around 30 millipascal-seconds at room temperature, making it simple to mix with other raw materials like PVC resins. You don't run into many problems with separation, and the homogenous mix ensures lasting flexibility that children’s toys, cables, or vinyl flooring all need.
Chemically, DINA stands out for its stability. Adipate esters like DINA resist strong acids and bases, even as temperatures climb. This resilience means the substance clings to its molecular structure, even during demanding production cycles. Strong sunlight or exposure to oxygen won’t quickly degrade it, reducing unwanted breakdown and chemical byproducts over time.
You rarely see DINA react with water because of its low water solubility—less than 0.01 grams per liter. Water can’t wash it out of products or create unwanted side reactions. This quality makes it a favorite for cables, outdoor tarps, or flexible hoses used in humid climates.
Without a plasticizer like DINA, companies wrestle with brittle plastics that snap or crack during the daily grind. Its long, branched molecules push apart polymer chains, keeping the material soft and bendable year after year. At work, I’ve seen older products lose that flexibility and start to shed sticky residues if the wrong additive goes into the mix. With DINA, that ugly phase rarely arrives on schedule.
DINA also brings a low migration rate, so it rarely leaches out of plastics into surrounding materials. That translates to safer surfaces for households or in contact with sensitive contents. Workers along the supply chain depend on this reliability, knowing that critical parts won’t fail or leak problematic substances.
Manufacturers keep a close eye on its safety record. Studies from health authorities show that DINA does not accumulate in the body or environment as quickly as other plasticizers. Still, anyone handling large volumes of DINA wears gloves and goggles because repeated skin contact or inhalation of vapors may cause mild irritation.
Disposal needs respect for both local and global guidelines. As plastics release additives slowly, policymakers and businesses look toward greener options and closed-loop recycling, reducing waste without compromising durability. Responsible choices start well before a product ships, with material selection and end-of-life planning leading the charge.
Some companies experiment with biobased adipates to lower environmental impact. These plant-derived versions show promise, though supply scale and price still challenge their adoption. At the same time, ongoing research tracks DINA’s safety and looks for subtle ways it may affect health, especially as regulatory limits shift.
Overall, DINA’s blend of physical and chemical properties shapes everyday items for the better. Future solutions may come from blending technical knowledge with a sense of responsibility, as both users and producers work to balance performance, health, and sustainability.
Diisononyl adipate—often called DINA—shows up quietly in dozens of products. Plasticizers hide deep inside flooring, cables, and sometimes food packaging. Their purpose isn’t flashy, but their safety draws plenty of attention. DINA’s use isn’t just about chemistry, either—people wonder if it holds up under all the rules in place, especially in Europe with REACH, and in other tough markets.
REACH sets the bar high. If you plan to sell chemicals in Europe, you face strict registration. Substances can’t threaten health or the environment. Companies have to cough up plenty of data on use and safety—not as an option, but a requirement. I’ve watched companies scramble when a new piece of data forced them to review their whole process. There’s never “it’ll sort itself out” with REACH.
DINA hasn’t ended up on the list of substances of very high concern (SVHC) so far. That matters, because if it had, the entire supply chain would have to rethink things. People would want tracking, notification, and in some cases phase-out plans. Right now, with DINA not flagged, the path to compliance stays clear for most uses. Its toxicological record hasn’t thrown up the same kind of alarms as some phthalates. Studies so far suggest lower concerns about reproductive harm or bioaccumulation.
Europe isn’t the only place looking closely at plasticizers. For instance, contact with food comes under a different microscope. In the EU, DINA isn’t listed among the authorized plasticizers for plastic food contact materials, so manufacturers there usually pick other substances when dealing with food. Trusted sources, like the European Food Safety Authority, point to data gaps. In the United States, the FDA hasn’t explicitly cleared DINA for food contact either. That puts a stop to certain possibilities on both continents, but not all uses.
I remember a time not long ago when a supplier switched from one plasticizer to another, thinking nobody would care. The problem? Their customers called, worried about exposure and whether new chemicals might seep into products. These weren’t paranoid folks. They just read stories about plasticizer bans and didn’t want to be the next bad headline.
With DINA, most applications fly well below the risk radar, but only as long as manufacturers pay attention. There’s a real need for transparency about what’s going in and where it’s being used. The best teams I’ve worked with keep compliance data up to date and make sure everyone in the chain knows which regulations apply. That’s the only way to avoid nasty surprises during an audit, or worse, facing a public recall.
Relying on a chemical because it isn’t yet restricted can end up as a short-term fix. The science keeps moving, and regulators don’t give much warning before making big changes. Producers would serve themselves well by pushing for more research on DINA. They could fund independent safety reviews and offer clear summaries to downstream users. It would help everyone—customers, regulators, and other industries—make better decisions about risk.
Better cooperation between regulators and producers could make communication around plasticizers more honest. Instead of waiting for a bad report to surface, industries have a chance to tell their own story based on real data. I see this approach grow stronger each year. It’s about staying a step ahead, not just checking compliance boxes.
DINA remains off major restriction lists, but every actor in the supply chain benefits from caution, transparency, and regular review. That’s the real backbone of chemical safety.Anyone working around flexible plastics or cable insulation likely knows the name Diisononyl Adipate (DINA). Trusted for making PVC soft and manageable, DINA’s performance ties directly to how it’s cared for in storage. Even the best product struggles if left in the wrong place or kept too long. This isn’t just about corporate loss—it relates to workplace safety and reliable results in critical manufacturing.
You’ll often hear a two-year shelf life for DINA, counted from the manufacturing date. That’s not an arbitrary guarantee. Researchers and manufacturers have found that, under ordinary conditions, DINA keeps its clarity, its flexibility, and its basic chemical character for about 24 months. Past this time, it can thicken or yellow, which hurts both finished product appearance and performance.
Those stories you hear—about expired chemicals gumming up lines or fouling products—usually come back to neglected shelf dates or sketchy storage. Chemical breakdown isn’t always obvious until a whole batch of product goes out the door. So treating that shelf life seriously keeps blame out of the production log and costs out of the repair budget.
Long years in chemical warehouses teach a few simple lessons. DINA prefers a closed, tightly sealed drum or container, stored inside where temperatures hold steady between 15°C and 30°C (59°F to 86°F). Wild swings in heat or freezing temps push the liquid to break down or even make crystals form. Light is another problem—exposure over time can leave the liquid looking yellow instead of clear.
Companies pouring DINA into open pots or using half-empty drums sometimes see it spoil faster. Air and moisture creep in, and those two roll out the red carpet for oxidation or other chemical changes. Every time a drum sits open, the risk jumps up. As simple as it sounds, keeping the container sealed after every use does more for shelf life than any warning label.
The big worry about aging DINA isn’t just that it won’t work—it might throw off byproducts, or, in rare cases, cause unexpected chemical reactions with other materials in the mix. Technical bulletins always stress routine checks. If the liquid looks cloudy, smells different, or won’t mix smoothly, that’s a signal to check the batch for freshness, not just power through and hope for the best.
In my own work, I saw a plant waste thousands fixing a run of cable sheathing because no one checked a five-year-old drum of DINA in the back corner. They learned to rotate stock, label arrival dates, and keep stock off the floor on wooden pallets to stop cold air from seeping in from below. These measures cut down on surprises and saved more than a few weekends of overtime.
Success comes from habits, not heroics. Rotating inventory so new shipments go to the back prevents forgotten stock. Clear date labels and weekly checks mean any issues show up early. Training those handling DINA to reseal promptly and store it away from sunlight does more than following a long list of rules. It shows respect for the product and for anyone relying on its performance downstream.
Taking these steps to heart pays off every batch, every year. It keeps operations lean, workers safe, and customers coming back with confidence in what's built with DINA at its core.
| Names | |
| Preferred IUPAC name | bis(7-methyloctyl) hexanedioate |
| Other names |
Adipic acid diisononyl ester
Adipic acid, diisononyl ester Diisononyl adipate DINA Hexanedioic acid, diisononyl ester |
| Pronunciation | /ˌdaɪˌaɪsəˈnoʊnɪl ˈædɪpeɪt/ |
| Identifiers | |
| CAS Number | 33703-08-1 |
| Beilstein Reference | 6426692 |
| ChEBI | CHEBI:83458 |
| ChEMBL | CHEMBL2105979 |
| ChemSpider | 21101749 |
| DrugBank | DB16675 |
| ECHA InfoCard | 03b7e2e8-42c0-41a6-b80e-0bb897aa387c |
| EC Number | 204-211-0 |
| Gmelin Reference | 2041376 |
| KEGG | C19614 |
| MeSH | D017539 |
| PubChem CID | 60798 |
| RTECS number | AF4200000 |
| UNII | WD6Y14451U |
| UN number | UN3082 |
| CompTox Dashboard (EPA) | EPA CompTox Dashboard (DSSTox) ID: DTXSID8020452 |
| Properties | |
| Chemical formula | C26H48O4 |
| Molar mass | 426.68 g/mol |
| Appearance | Colorless oily liquid |
| Odor | Odorless |
| Density | 0.92 g/cm³ |
| Solubility in water | Insoluble |
| log P | 8.8 |
| Vapor pressure | 0.05 mmHg (20°C) |
| Refractive index (nD) | 1.447 (20°C) |
| Viscosity | 18.1 mPa·s (25°C) |
| Dipole moment | 0.78 D |
| Thermochemistry | |
| Std molar entropy (S⦵298) | 240.2 J·mol⁻¹·K⁻¹ |
| Std enthalpy of combustion (ΔcH⦵298) | -13200 kJ/mol |
| Hazards | |
| Main hazards | May cause slight irritation to eyes, skin, and respiratory tract. |
| GHS labelling | GHS07 |
| Pictograms | GHS07 |
| Signal word | Warning |
| Hazard statements | No hazard statement. |
| Precautionary statements | P202, P273, P280, P308+P313, P501 |
| NFPA 704 (fire diamond) | 0-1-0 |
| Flash point | 196°C |
| Autoignition temperature | 355 °C |
| Lethal dose or concentration | LD50 (oral, rat): >5000 mg/kg |
| LD50 (median dose) | LD50 (median dose): 9100 mg/kg (rat, oral) |
| NIOSH | NA |
| PEL (Permissible) | Not established |
| REL (Recommended) | 5 mg/m³ |
| Related compounds | |
| Related compounds |
Diisodecyl adipate (DIDA)
Dioctyl adipate (DOA) Bis(2-ethylhexyl) adipate (DEHA) Diisodecyl phthalate (DIDP) Diisononyl phthalate (DINP) |
