IP31 vs IP32
Head-to-head comparison of two IEC 60529 ingress protection ratings.
IP31 and IP32 are both IEC 60529 ingress protection codes, but they differ in liquid protection (level 1 vs 2). IP31 is rated for > 2.5 mm — tool / wire and vertically dripping water, while IP32 provides > 2.5 mm — tool / wire and dripping water at 15° tilt.
The IP31 rating offers protection against solid objects larger than 2.5 mm and protection against vertically falling drops of water. Dripping water shall have no harmful effects.. It is an IEC 60529 ingress protection code combining first-digit (solid) level 3 with second-digit (liquid) level 1.
Under IEC 60529, IP32 specifies protection against solid objects larger than 2.5 mm and protection against vertically falling drops of water when the enclosure is tilted up to 15° from its normal position.. It is an IEC 60529 ingress protection code combining first-digit (solid) level 3 with second-digit (liquid) level 2.
Detailed comparison
The stronger rating on each row is highlighted in emerald.
Solid protection (first digit)
IP31
3 — > 2.5 mm — Tool / Wire
IP32
3 — > 2.5 mm — Tool / Wire
Liquid protection (second digit)
IP31
1 — Vertically Dripping Water
IP32
2 — Dripping Water at 15° Tilt
Dust-tight
IP31
No
IP32
No
Water-jet resistant
IP31
No
IP32
No
Submersible
IP31
No
IP32
No
Outdoor suitable
IP31
No
IP32
No
The exact difference (IP31 vs IP32)
Solid protection
IP31
Level 3 — > 2.5 mm — Tool / Wire
IP32
Level 3 — > 2.5 mm — Tool / Wire
Both IP31 and IP32 share the same solid protection: > 2.5 mm — Tool / Wire.
Liquid protection
IP31
Level 1 — Vertically Dripping Water
IP32
Level 2 — Dripping Water at 15° Tilt
IP31 handles 0.1 mm/min drip rate (Vertically Dripping Water), while IP32 handles 0.3 mm/min drip rate (Dripping Water at 15° Tilt). IP32 provides 1 level more liquid protection.
NEMA equivalents
No direct NEMA equivalent.
No direct NEMA equivalent.
Recommendation
IP32 offers higher overall protection than IP31. Choose IP32 for harsher environments; IP31 may suffice for milder conditions and can be more cost-effective.