IP57 vs IP14
Head-to-head comparison of two IEC 60529 ingress protection ratings.
IP57 and IP14 are both IEC 60529 ingress protection codes, but they differ in solid-object protection (level 5 vs 1) and liquid protection (level 7 vs 4). IP57 is rated for dust-protected and temporary immersion (up to 1 m), while IP14 provides > 50 mm — back of hand and splashing water (all directions).
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.
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.
Detailed comparison
The stronger rating on each row is highlighted in emerald.
Solid protection (first digit)
IP57
5 — Dust-Protected
IP14
1 — > 50 mm — Back of Hand
Liquid protection (second digit)
IP57
7 — Temporary Immersion (up to 1 m)
IP14
4 — Splashing Water (all directions)
Dust-tight
IP57
Limited
IP14
No
Water-jet resistant
IP57
Yes
IP14
No
Submersible
IP57
Yes
IP14
No
Outdoor suitable
IP57
Yes
IP14
Yes
The exact difference (IP57 vs IP14)
Solid protection
IP57
Level 5 — Dust-Protected
IP14
Level 1 — > 50 mm — Back of Hand
IP57 provides "Dust-Protected" (level 5), while IP14 provides "> 50 mm — Back of Hand" (level 1). IP57 is 4 levels higher.
Liquid protection
IP57
Level 7 — Temporary Immersion (up to 1 m)
IP14
Level 4 — Splashing Water (all directions)
IP57 handles Hydrostatic ~10 kPa at 1 m (Temporary Immersion (up to 1 m)), while IP14 handles 50–100 kPa (Splashing Water (all directions)). 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.