IP67 - What is the real requirement?

If I drop a terminal in a puddle of water, will less than IP6 handle that? at least with IP67, I don't have to worry about how deep that puddle is. Or if I drop the terminals in a toilet, Will less than IP67 handle that? These are real world cases why IP67 makes sense?

IP67 is important for two reasons.

First, IP6x means that the device is actually totally protected against dust ingress. Anything less means that "limited ingress" is still okay. So if you really, really do not want dust to get inside your system, an IP6x rating suggests that this won't happen.

IPx7 means that a device can handle actual immersion into water. Anything less means that the device can handle various degrees of water sprays or jets, but that, up to IPx5, limited ingress is acceptable. An IPx7 device, on the other hand, can fall into a puddle or shallow stream and survive. There are some limits, though, and manufacturers usually state the degree of IPx7 protection, like "30 minutes at a depth up to 3 feet."

So basically, IP67 means no dust and water ingress at all, and in a sensitive piece of electronic equipment that's used outdoors, that may definitely be a requirement.

We've actually tested a number of handhelds underwater, using scuba. For the most part, the devices passed the test, but there are also some lessons when designed a waterproof device: The fewer potential points of failure, the better. Double seals are always better than single seals. Fail-safe seals are better than fail-fail seals.

All that said, not everyone needs an IP67 device. IP67 can add cost, bulk and weight, which is not what you want when it's not actually needed for a job.

It should be interesting to quantify the additional cost between IP54 and 65, and IP 65 and 67, so that sales have a clear understanding of the extra cost for such high level requirement.

Pierre

Hello,

My 2 cents

IP 67 is a real requiement in some market spaces and in some cases if you do not have an IP67 device you cannot even respond to the RFP or compete in the opportunity.

The question is not whether IP67 is a requirement, the question is the cost of developing an IP67 device VS the revenue potential of having one.  I would equate this to the on-going debate of develping an I-Safe device.

Oddly enough the IP67 specification does allow for dust or water ingression into the device BUT the device cannot degrade in preformance.  Since we are making electronic devices we say that no water or dust is allowed to enter the device since this could case shorting internally.

It would be interesting to know the different ways the product gets exposed to water and dust.  If we know this it might make sense to have dedicated devices for each of the enviornments or we may design our seals differently to meet these different enviornments.

Some of our customer perceive IP67 to mean that water will not allow any water ingress under almost all conditions.  We have a customer that is using our terminals in an outdoor environment in all weather conditions.  They need a terminal that can withstand a 10+ hours shift in a heavy downpour (1" or more of rain per hour).  Based on our experience we know that IP65 allows for too much water ingress, so the customer believes that IP67 is their best option.  Although the IP testing doesn't require this prolonged exposure to constant rain, maybe this is something we should be testing to.

Solid point Eddie. IP65 can be more severe than IP67 in certain circumstances, and matching the IP rating with your circumstances can potentially save you weight, ergonomics, and due to the lower cost, you can get more powerful configurations.

As IP67 is lower pressure, but longer term vs IP65's high pressure, short duration. When you have the possibilities of soaking the unit underwater, IP67 is what you might want. But if you're just out in the rain, or even thunderstorms IP65 can be what you'd need.

Perception is reality. Most feel IP67 is a better rating. In some applications it appears IP 65 is not sufficient. In some of those same applications IP67 devices seem to perform better as it relates to water ingress. Maybe the question is would customers be willing to pay an upcharge for an IP67 device? Could the same device be built to two different IP specs? The IP65 at one price, while the IP 67 at a higher price. Not to complicate your world, but does anyone build devices to IP68? That sounds like pressure and submersion are possible. It is probably EXTREMELY difficult to achieve.

I think an understanding of real applications is required to decide what is needed. And also an understanding of real weather conditions is required. The same device could be used during a torrential down pour, be dropped in a puddle of water and then be used in sub zero temperatures. That is the environment many of our customers subject their devices to. I think a freezer rated IP67 device would perfrom best in an enviroment like this.

Hi,

With the advent of Motorola's latest offering, the MC9500K, Motorola has clearly seen that that there is a market opportunity for IP67 devices. Remember, customers definitely look at specifications, and the better the spec the more inclined the customer is to buying the perceived "better" device over others with lesser specifications. PsionTeklogix can not afford to be complacent. We have lost considerable business over the last couple of years to the Trimble Nomad, which has an IP67 rating. The customers went with this device first and foremost because of the IP67 rating, followed by the excellent ergonomics. We would welcome with open arms an IP67 device from PsionTeklogix to help us compete!

Mark Roberts - Marketing Director, Pocket Solutions New Zealand

I have another question that I believe fits into this discussion.  IP67 calls for the prevention of liquid water from penetrating into the unit.  So in a pouring rain environment the rain water will not enter the device.  What IP67 does not do is talk about water vapour getting into the product and then condensing within the product.

Do we know if customers are really concerned about liquid water (rain) or are they concerned about the condensation that occurs?  It may be both.

What is the difference in perception from a customer perspective between water condensation and liquid water penetration within the device?

Steve as a good point; water ingression can ingresses in a vapour form and will condense as temperature changes. Freezer temp terminal are plagued by this problem hence the desiccant packs used to capture moisture in vapour form.

This is the most challenging mechanical problem as moisture will permeate through almost anything over time.... and in freezer application (varied temperature) the unit internal air will expand and contract creating pressure on seals allowing moisture penetration. Making product sealed will always be a mechanical challenge and a serious design expense to meet the various customer requirements (freezer or not, indoor or outdoor, in tropical environment or in desert). Only past history tells us what works for an application and learning through our experience we can improve the designs to be more effective.

In response to Steve's question about customer's perception;  I would say that if an IP67 device was not able to scan a barcode because there is condensation or fog on the inside of the scanner window, then the perception is the device is not meeting it's rating.  Although the device may really be meeting IP67,  if the device is not working as expected the cusomer is not satisfied.

When looking at wate ingress and vapour ingress (which could become water), they could both potentially stop the device working properly, due to wet electronics or fogging of the scanner window.  So adding the initial question, what environment factors could stop the device from working properly in it's environment.

If a single device that meets all requirements is too expensive, can we leverage the Omnii modularity and rate the modules by enviroment useage in addition to IP rating?  If you want a device that will work int he driving rain for 10 hours, maybe as suggested a double seal is required on all modules (which will bump up the price for that specific configuation).  Would you be able to mix and match these envirnomentally rated modules.

What sort of features do these extreme devices need?  To help save cost can some of the bells and whisles be removed?  Can the LEDS or side buttons or speaker (receiver) or MIC be removed?  What sort of keypad is expected (hard cap or elastomer)?

In addition to the IP67 question with regards to harsh environments, does the drop rating also need to increase?  Should we assume that since this environment is harsh so are the operators?

My answer to this question would be "Because we are the industry leader in rugged terminals" and this rugged design has been the most recognizable characteristic of Psion (Teklogix) for a very long time. If we lose our edge in rugged design in Markets like Freezers, Ports and other harsh environments then we become more like our competition. Freezer, Condensing and Environmentally challenging customers put Psion at least in North America on the Map in my opinion and we need to do everything we can to maintain that moniker or risk taking one step closer to a Commodity. Obviously this does not have to be the case in every device (NEO, EP-10) however the OMNII and Equivalent VMT's should maintain this standard as well as the ability to work in Freezing and condensing areas. This would help us keep our qualitative advantage over our competitors like Moto and LXE.