Transportable Structure Appliance Inlet

[PeteRig]

Does an appliance inlet require a cover, so that when the connector is not install the pins of the inlet are protected from the elements.
The reason for asking is some of the 32A inlets dont have covers not like the 16A versions that all seem to have them.
AS/NZS 3001 clause 3.2.2 (c ) ii -requires min protection of IP24 with or without the socket inserted. This particular inlet is rated IP67, so is the rating applying to the terminal connections only and not the pins or when the connector is inserted?
My reason for asking is I had an inspection on a construction site an AS/NZS 3001 appendix C7.5 the tests failed due to the inlet pins corroded so I had to clean them to get the required test results.
So this made me think if a transportable structure is sitting around for sometime unused and then put into service, no doubt the earth continuity will be poor and most probably not picked up either as the shed could be livened by a non electrician.
I dont believe I can fail the EWoF for the inlet not having a cover, but only if it fails the earth testing (which I can remedy)
Thoughts please?
Peter

[AlecK]

IP24 is a requirement for new inlets as per 3.2.2
If you check the what IP24 means (see App of "3000");
you'll find that IPx4 means protected against water splashed from all directions.
That protection can only be attained if there's a cover (applies to both plugs and sockets).
Product data sheets will confirm that there was originally a cover of some sort; else it could never have had the rating

IP ratings are no longer valid in the event of damage / missing parts
(or even holes drilled other than i.a.w MIs)
Therefore absence of flap / cover is a "fail" as per C6.5.

I suspect the IP67 fitting you refer to us "56 series" (or similar) complying to "3123".
56 series AIs come with a cover than dangles on a wire when not in use.
However most people are too lazy to use the covers - and they are prone to going missing.
Can be remedied by replacing either the cover, or the entire inlet.

[PeteRig]

Thanks Alec, the inlets are Gewiss model GW 60 437, looking on the web site I believe that they dont make covers for these inlets and as mentioned there seems to be a lot of inlets in the 32A range that dont have covers.
https://www.gewiss.com/ww/en/products/e ... ds/GW60437
Now have to explain to the building contractor that the inlets dont comply and probably never did.

[AlecK]

Interesting
maybe they have seals around each pin, and other measures to prevent ingress; in order to achieve the rating.

In which case my rule-of-thumb isn't entirely valid
And - as you've found - that leaves the possibility of corrosion

[PeteRig]

So would that be a fail under 3001 C7.5 if you didn't clean the contacts you wouldn't achieve the required earth readings as mentioned above, so that is why covers are required to achieve compliance to C6.5.
Not sure why some brands sell inlets without covers though.

[AlecK]

yes you could fail for excessive earth resistance readings.

Not happy losing my rule-of-thumb; it certainly works for all '3112' sockets that i've found,
and wondering how they can claim the IP rating without a cover.
maybe the "60309-2" Standard allows for a mated-only rating.
And unfortunately App C doesn't specify rating for both mated & un-mated states.

[PeteRig]

Cheers Alec, clears it up I think, only can fail on excessive earth resistance but then I will try to clean the contacts to get a "pass" result anyway.

[AlecK]

Discussion with NZ working group for "3001" suggests that while IP X2 is protection against water ingress from any direction, it's about ingress to the inside of the fitting.
In this case the pins will have seals, probably O-rings
Water on exposed pins not a safety issue because exposed pins can't be live.
To liven the pins, connector must be in place.
And when connector in place, water can't get to the pins.

The flap / cover rule remains valid for sockets, but not for inlets

[PeteRig]

Thanks for all the valuable info Alec