2026-10-14T03:26:09Z https://api.figshare.com/v2/oai

oai:figshare.com:article/33954577 2026-09-21T13:50:02Z category_26482 item_type_3 month_year_09_2026

IP code (IEC 60529) ingress-protection ratings as three CSV tables ahmed taysir (25083688) Electrical engineering not elsewhere classified IEC 60529 ISO 20653 IP rating ingress protection water resistance consumer electronics <p dir="ltr">The IP code is read as a scale and it is not one. IPX7 does not imply IPX5: a device certified for thirty minutes under a metre of still water can fail a garden hose, because the two digits describe unrelated tests and only the second one was run. The letter X is not a zero either — it records that the digit was never tested, so IPX7 says nothing at all about dust.</p><p dir="ltr">This dataset is the <a href="https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/2452" target="_blank">IEC 60529</a> ingress-protection code split into three CSV tables so the distinction can be checked programmatically rather than read off a marketing page.</p><ul><li><b>ip_code_first_digit.csv</b> — 7 rows, solids protection 0–6, with the diameter of the standard test probe for each.</li><li><b>ip_code_second_digit.csv</b> — 10 rows, water protection 0–8 plus the 9K test from <a href="https://www.iso.org/standard/45555.html" target="_blank">ISO 20653</a>, with nozzle, flow and duration per digit.</li><li><b>ip_code_common_marks.csv</b> — 11 rows, the marks that actually appear on products (IPX4, IP67, IP69K…), each with a <code>what_it_does_not_tell_you</code> column. That column is the point of the dataset.</li></ul><p dir="ltr">Two design choices are worth stating. Digit 8 carries no fixed depth or duration because the standard leaves both to the manufacturer, which is why two IP68 devices are not comparable to each other. And <code>survives_jets</code> is recorded as <i>unknown</i>, never as <i>no</i>, for marks ending in 7 or 8 — the jet test was not run, and absence of evidence is stored as absence of evidence.</p><p dir="ltr">Transcribed from the publicly documented test conditions; <a href="https://www.iec.ch/ip-ratings" target="_blank">IEC's own summary of the rating system</a> and the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_code" target="_blank">Wikipedia IP code article</a> are the easiest cross-checks against the paywalled standard. This is a convenience table, not a normative source.</p><p dir="ltr">Two things sit outside the standard and therefore outside the data. Water chemistry: every test uses fresh water, so chlorinated pool water and salt water fall outside the rating entirely — the practical consequences of that gap are worked through in a write-up on <a href="https://cairovolt.com/en/blog/bluetooth-speaker-beach-pool-ipx67-rating" target="_blank">what an IPX7 rating actually covers at the pool and the beach</a>. And ageing: seals and adhesives are tested once, on a new unit.</p> 2026-09-21T13:50:02Z Dataset Dataset 10.6084/m9.figshare.33954577.v1 https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/IP_code_IEC_60529_ingress-protection_ratings_as_three_CSV_tables/33954577 CC BY 4.0