IP65 PROTECTION CLASS FOR NON ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT 1

[srini1785]

Hi,

Does the IP65 protection class apply to Non - electrical equipment too?

I have a Pure pneumatic valve (3/2 single plunger operated) which has no electrical component. Our customer wants it IP65 rated. There is very little room for modification to make it water or dust tight (actually we tried and failed). Any technical documentation that says that IP65 applies only to Electrical equipment only or to enclosures which house electrical parts?

Thanks

 

[RedSnake]

Does the IP65 protection class apply to Non - electrical equipment too?

Not as far as I know.

IEC 60529:1989+A1:1999+A2:2013
Applies to the classification of degrees of protection provided by enclosures for electrical equipment with a rated voltage not exceeding 72,5 kV

 

[3DDave]

It is an enclosure rating, not an equipment rating.

Can you demonstrate that submerging the valve into abrasive, cohesive dust, such as in a concrete plant or under continuous water spray, will not affect the operation of the valve or to some lesser standard that applies to this particular situation?

 

[IRstuff]

https://clarionuk.com/resources/ip-...reliable,many indoor and outdoor applications.

Since this is an industry standard, there is an industry standard test for proving compliance
https://keystonecompliance.com/ip-65-testing/
https://keystonecompliance.com/ip5x-ip6x-dust/
https://keystonecompliance.com/ipx5-ipx6-water-jets/

 

[RedSnake]

If the costumer is requiring IP65 for none electrical things he doesn't have the competence that is needed to write a RFQ or such because he is asking for something that can not be delivered since no manufacturer will test there none electrical components according to that standard.
And asking the supplier to make this test himself for every third party none electric component they buy is not costumery and no one will put in the effort for this.

If the costumer had written that all component needs to be fully protected from dust and low pressure jets of water it would be different.

Even if I don't know what kind of pneumatic valve or brand this is, I would say I have never encountered any that does not comply with this, unless its something that is made out soft iron and not painted.

Simply because the product is mostly pressurised from within and if there are a possibility that dust and water would be able to enter from the outside there would also be air leakages directly from installation.
Of course it could corrode the outside if it cant stand water, but this would not effect the function.
The largest risk is that water and dust enters inside from badly filtered compressed air.
Any high quality pneumatic valve would fulfill the IP65 standard in my book even if its not possible to declared it as such.
A valve that didn't would probably have a mean time to fauiler less then a month or two.
But if the costumor don't understand this, I am not sure what can be done.

There might be standards for pneumatic valves that shows the requirements are fulfilled.
Like these for instance.




B

 

[waross]

Consider relocating the valve in a more friendly are.
That is a method used at times when electrical equipment is proposed for hazardous or wet, dusty or corrosive areas.

 

[TugboatEng]

The challenge with applying an IP rating rating to an enclosure with pneumatic components inside is, what happens when there is a leak?

 

[srini1785]

Thank you for the replies. Some clarifications.

1. The valve is used in Railway pantograph and cannot be relocated anywhere else. Its is exposed to the elements 24x7.
2. This valve controls the maximum height that the panto can reach.

I've tried to educate the customer but then again it seems a dead end.

 

[TugboatEng]

I would usually take a NEMA 4 or 12 enclosure and drill a hole in it to prevent pressure buildup in the event the valve leaks. A length of tubing works excellently at preventing moisture from entering the vent hole. NEMA 3S may be more suited for your application.

 

[IRstuff]

Is this just much ado about something? Does the component actually fail IP65 testing? Are the seals failing?

 

[srini1785]

Is this just much ado about something? Does the component actually fail IP65 testing? Are the seals failing?

Yes. It has failed testing.

 

[3DDave]

I think the question is - did it fail to function?

 

[srini1785]

I think the question is - did it fail to function?

Worked perfectly before and after the test. However it was not accepted as it not as per "Specs".

 

[3DDave]

Then there is nothing anyone here can help you with. You have a problem with your customer that needs to be addressed to the customer.

I'd just dump them. They sound like a customer who will never accept the product. Cut the losses and tell them to find another supplier.

 

[Taicho567]

IP rating is implemented to protect the equipment from water or dust from seeping in which would affect the operability of the equipment. This is not applicable to valve that don't have electronic or electrical component.

If you are worried of the water or dust seeping into the valve's parts or components, then don't as it's more worrying that a process fluid 'seeps out' of the valve due to a leak. On the other hand, leakage is an entirely different story as it requires different tests and industry standards that are to be complied.

Also, the valve actuator is pressurized from the inside so we focus on the leakage instead of water or dust going into. Moreover, no water or dust at atm pressure can seep into a pressurized valve.

Your customer is interesting indeed

 

[MintJulep]

The assessment for IP ratings is "protected against the harmful effects of....".

So if the valve "Worked perfectly before and after the test" then it passed, didn't it.

 

[Amp Dylan]

If the valve is working fine before and after the test, technically it hasn’t failed in functionality. But from a standards perspective, it didn’t meet IP65 and water ingress was detected, which disqualifies it per the spec, even if the ingress didn’t affect operation.

The customer seems to be strictly going by documentation and standard compliance, which is fair in some industries (especially rail).

If redesign isn't an option, you might just need to look at external sealing or housing options like NEMA enclosures. Otherwise, you’ll probably be stuck in this loop where the part performs fine but still gets rejected.

Did they give any room to discuss alternative compliance routes, or are they hard set on the literal IP65 rating?

 

[TugboatEng]

There is an elephant in this room. It's not wise to put pneumatic controls in sealed encloses. The IP rating probably shouldn't be applied here.