IP14 vs IP57
Head-to-head comparison of two IEC 60529 ingress protection ratings.
IP14 and IP57 are both IEC 60529 ingress protection codes, but they differ in solid-object protection (level 1 vs 5) and liquid protection (level 4 vs 7). IP14 is rated for > 50 mm — back of hand and splashing water (all directions), while IP57 provides dust-protected and temporary immersion (up to 1 m).
Under IEC 60529, IP14 specifies protection against solid objects larger than 50 mm and protection against splashing water. Water splashed against the enclosure from any direction shall have no harmful effects.. It is an IEC 60529 ingress protection code combining first-digit (solid) level 1 with second-digit (liquid) level 4.
IP57 is dust-protected and tolerates temporary immersion up to 1 m for 30 minutes. Useful for portable devices that may be dropped in shallow water.
Detailed comparison
The stronger rating on each row is highlighted in emerald.
Solid protection (first digit)
IP14
1 — > 50 mm — Back of Hand
IP57
5 — Dust-Protected
Liquid protection (second digit)
IP14
4 — Splashing Water (all directions)
IP57
7 — Temporary Immersion (up to 1 m)
Dust-tight
IP14
No
IP57
Limited
Water-jet resistant
IP14
No
IP57
Yes
Submersible
IP14
No
IP57
Yes
Outdoor suitable
IP14
Yes
IP57
Yes
The exact difference (IP14 vs IP57)
Solid protection
IP14
Level 1 — > 50 mm — Back of Hand
IP57
Level 5 — Dust-Protected
IP14 provides "> 50 mm — Back of Hand" (level 1), while IP57 provides "Dust-Protected" (level 5). IP57 is 4 levels higher.
Liquid protection
IP14
Level 4 — Splashing Water (all directions)
IP57
Level 7 — Temporary Immersion (up to 1 m)
IP14 handles 50–100 kPa (Splashing Water (all directions)), while IP57 handles Hydrostatic ~10 kPa at 1 m (Temporary Immersion (up to 1 m)). IP57 provides 3 levels more liquid protection.
NEMA equivalents
No direct NEMA equivalent.
No direct NEMA equivalent.
Recommendation
IP57 offers higher overall protection than IP14. Choose IP57 for harsher environments; IP14 may suffice for milder conditions and can be more cost-effective.