Talk:Disulfur decafluoride

Chemicals Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.ChemicalsWikipedia:WikiProject ChemicalsTemplate:WikiProject Chemicalschemicals
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Technology / World War II Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	World War II task force

No mention of sulfur pentafluoride

... but sulfur pentaflouride redirects to this article. What is the relationship between the two? Ross Fraser (talk) 05:33, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The S-S bond in disulfur decafluoride is very weak so the molecule can easily break into two SF₅ radicals - this also explains most of its reactivity. But I've found something else...

It's a common name (commonly used in certain contexts) that reflects the minimum empirical formula for the compound rather than the composition of the molecule itself. I've added it under "other names" in the data box. --Itub (talk) 18:13, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Flammable?

Why is disulfur decafluoride considered as very flammable by the hazard diamond? Surely it may react with oxygen to form (SF₅)₂O or (SF₅)₂O₂, but this reaction is neither highly exothermic nor it contains chain reactions like combustion reactions of organic molecules, so it shouldn't be a violent reaction. So there is not really a reason for classifying S₂F₁₀ as being flammable... --79.243.252.242 (talk) 15:14, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it to 2/0/0 per Sittig's Handbook of Toxic and Hazardous Chemicals and Carcinogens, which is much more plausible. --Itub (talk) 18:10, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PEL wrong?

This formula (currently appears in the hazardous-levels section) Looks like it's missing a zero to me:

0.025 ppm (0.25 mg/m3)

However, it is consistant with the following line:

0.01 ppm (0.1 mg/m3)

Is there some kind of "weight of a cubic meter of air" thing going on that I'm not taking into account?

Riventree (talk) 22:01, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]