IP05 vs IP08
Head-to-head comparison of two IEC 60529 ingress protection ratings.
IP05 and IP08 are both IEC 60529 ingress protection codes, but they differ in liquid protection (level 5 vs 8). IP05 is rated for no protection and water jets (6.3 mm nozzle), while IP08 provides no protection and continuous immersion (manufacturer-specified).
Under IEC 60529, IP05 specifies no protection against solid objects and protection against water jets. Water projected by a 6.3 mm nozzle against the enclosure from any direction shall have no harmful effects.. It is an IEC 60529 ingress protection code combining first-digit (solid) level 0 with second-digit (liquid) level 5.
Built to withstand no protection against solid objects and protection against the effects of continuous immersion in water under conditions specified by the manufacturer.. Classified as IEC 60529 ingress protection code IP08, it pairs solid level 0 with liquid level 8.
Detailed comparison
The stronger rating on each row is highlighted in emerald.
Solid protection (first digit)
IP05
0 — No Protection
IP08
0 — No Protection
Liquid protection (second digit)
IP05
5 — Water Jets (6.3 mm nozzle)
IP08
8 — Continuous Immersion (manufacturer-specified)
Dust-tight
IP05
No
IP08
No
Water-jet resistant
IP05
Yes
IP08
Yes
Submersible
IP05
No
IP08
Yes
Outdoor suitable
IP05
Yes
IP08
Yes
The exact difference (IP05 vs IP08)
Solid protection
IP05
Level 0 — No Protection
IP08
Level 0 — No Protection
Both IP05 and IP08 share the same solid protection: No Protection.
Liquid protection
IP05
Level 5 — Water Jets (6.3 mm nozzle)
IP08
Level 8 — Continuous Immersion (manufacturer-specified)
IP05 handles 30 kPa (Water Jets (6.3 mm nozzle)), while IP08 handles Specified by manufacturer (Continuous Immersion (manufacturer-specified)). IP08 provides 3 levels more liquid protection.
NEMA equivalents
No direct NEMA equivalent.
No direct NEMA equivalent.
Recommendation
IP08 offers higher overall protection than IP05. Choose IP08 for harsher environments; IP05 may suffice for milder conditions and can be more cost-effective.