Skip to Main Content
Skip Nav Destination
ASTM Selected Technical Papers
Metrology of Pedestrian Locomotion and Slip ResistanceAvailable to Purchase
By
MI Marpet
MI Marpet
1
St. John's University
,
New York, New York
;
symposium co-chair and STP editor
Search for other works by this author on:
MA Sapienza
MA Sapienza
editor
Search for other works by this author on:
ISBN-10:
0-8031-3454-1
ISBN:
978-0-8031-3454-6
No. of Pages:
148
Publisher:
ASTM International
Publication date:
2003

This paper studies the extent to which different tribometers consistently rank the slip resistance of a series of different ceramic tiles, as measured by a number of techniques. An accelerated abrasion treatment was used to determine how the slip resistance might change with wear in service. It forms part of a wider study of the slip resistance of stone, concrete, vinyl, rubber and other pedestrian surfaces. Although most techniques ranked the tiles in a similar order, there were some notable exceptions. Underestimation or overestimation of available slip resistance may cause significant problems, whether in the evaluation of a new product or an existing walkway surface. It is important to determine when specific tribometers may give “incorrect” results on particular types of surfaces, in order that a more reliable assessment can be made. This may require the use of a different technique, a dissimilar test foot, or modified test procedures or parameters. When a hard rubber test foot was used, the slip resistance tended to reflect the altered surface roughness of the abraded tiles, but when a resilient rubber was used, there was a general increase in the slip resistance. These results confirm the complex interplay between surface topography and choice of test foot. The results also indicate that current commonly used test methods can yield results that poorly predict the traction available to a pedestrian, either when the product is new or after the surface wears. This study found that the manually-pulled 50-pound drag sled (as used in ASTM C-1028) was incapable of satisfactorily distinguishing between the wet slip resistance of ceramic tiles. The pendulum tribometer (used according to AS/NZS 4586, with TRRL rubber, similar to ASTM E-303) provided more reliable results than the English XL Variable Incidence Tribometer (used according to ASTM F-1679).

1.
Marpet
,
M.I.
, “
Comparison of Walkway-Safety Tribometers
,”
Journal of Testing and Evaluation, JTEVA
 0090-3973, Vol.
24
, No.
4
,
07
1996
, pp. 245–254.
2.
Marpet
,
M.
, and
Fleisher
,
D.
, “
Comparison of Walkway-Safety Tribometers: Part Two
,”
Journal of Testing and Evaluation, JTEVA
 0090-3973, Vol.
25
, No.
1
,
01
1997
, pp. 115–126.
3.
Harper
,
F.C.
,
Warlow
,
W.J.
, and
Clarke
,
B.L.
, “
The Forces Applied to the Floor by the Foot in Walking
,”
National Building Studies Research Paper 32
,
DSIR Building Research Station
,
1961
.
4.
Perkins
,
P. J.
, “
Measurement of Slip Between Shoe and Ground During Walking
,”
Walkway Surfaces: Measurement of Slip Resistance, ASTM STP 649
,
Anderson
C.
and
Senne
J.
, Eds.,
American Society for Testing and Materials
,
West Conshohocken, PA
,
1978
, pp. 71–87.
5.
Buczek
,
F.L.
,
Cavanagh
,
P.R.
,
Kulakowski
,
B.T.
, and
Pradhan
,
P.
, “
Slip Resistance Needs of the Mobility Disabled During Level and Grade Walking
,”
Slips, Stumbles and Falls: Pedestrian Footwear and Surfaces, ASTM STP 1103
,
Gray
B.E.
, Ed.,
American Society for Testing and Materials
,
West Conshohocken, PA
,
1990
, pp. 39–54.
6.
English
,
W.
, “
Should the Threshold of Safety Be .50?
,” URL:http://www.englishxl.com/point5.html, revised
25
05
2002
.
7.
Pye
,
P.W.
, “
A Brief Review of the Historical Contribution Made by BRE to Slip Research
,”
Slipping — Towards Safer Flooring
, Paper 7, Seminar held at
Rapra Technology Ltd
,
Shawbury, Shrewsbury, England
,
29
09
1994
.
8.
Jung
,
K.
, and
Fischer
,
A.
, “
Methods for Checking the Validity of Technical Test Procedures for the Assessment of Slip Resistance of Footwear
,”
Safety Science
, Vol.
16
,
1993
, pp. 189–206.
9.
Jung
,
K.
, and
Schenk
,
H.
, “
Objectification and Accuracy of the Walking Method for Determining the Anti-Slip Properties of Floor Surfaces
,”
Zentralblatt
, Vol.
39
, No.
8
,
1988
, pp. 221–228.
10.
English
,
W.
,
Pedestrian Slip Resistance. How to Measure It and How to Improve It
,
William English, Inc.
,
Alva, FL
,
1996
, pp. 64–65.
11.
James
,
D.I.
, “
The Theory Behind the DIN Ramp Tests
,”
Polymer Testing
, Vol.
18
,
1999
, pp. 3–10.
12.
Bowman
,
R.
, “
An Introductory Guide to the Slip Resistance of Pedestrian Surface Materials
,” Standards Australia Handbook 197, Standards Australia,
1999
, p. 8.
13.
Marpet
,
M.I.
, “
Problems and Progress in the Development of Standards for Quantifying Friction at the Walkway Interface
,”
Tribology Int.
, Vol.
34
,
2001
, pp. 635–645.
14.
Andrew
,
K.R.
, “
Energetics of Transient Contacts Between Polymers and Inorganic Substrates
,” PhD Thesis, Department of Physics and Applied Physics,
University of Strathclyde
, Glasgow, Scotland,
02
1997
.
15.
James
,
D.I.
, “
Assessing the Slip Resistance of Flooring Materials
,”
Slips, Stumbles and Falls: Pedestrian Footwear and Surfaces, ASTM STP 1103
,
Gray
B.E.
, Ed.,
American Society for Testing and Materials
,
West Conshohocken, PA
,
1990
, pp. 133–144.
16.
Flynn
,
J.E.
,
Powers
,
C.M.
,
Burnfield
,
J.M.
, and
Brault
,
J.R.
, “
An Evaluation of the Reproducibility of Data Obtained from Two Types of Tribometers When Measuring the Slip Resistance of Walkway Surfaces
,”
Proceedings of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences Annual Meeting
,
Seattle, WA
, February 19–24, 2001, p. 94.
17.
Flynn
,
J.E.
, and
Underwood
,
D.C.
, “
Precision and Bias Testing of the English XL Variable Incidence Tribometer and the Brungraber Mark II Portable Inclinable Articulated Strut Slip Tester
,” National Occupational Injury Research Symposium Abstracts,
Pittsburgh, PA
, October 17–19, 2000, p. 28.
18.
Powers
,
C.M.
,
Burnfield
,
J.M.
,
Brault
,
J.R.
and
Flynn
,
J.E.
, “
Comparison of Coefficient of Friction Requirements During Gait to Tribometry Measurements: Evaluation of Shod and Barefoot Conditions at Various Walking Speeds
,” National Occupational Injury Research Symposium Abstracts,
Pittsburgh, PA
, October 17–19, 2000, p. 38.
19.
Perkins
,
P.J.
, and
Wilson
,
M.P.
, “
Slip Resistance Testing of Shoes — New Developments
,”
Ergonomics
 0014-0139, Vol.
26
,
1987
, pp. 73–82.
20.
Giles
,
C.G.
,
Sabey
,
B.E.
, and
Cardew
,
K.H.F.
, “
Development and Performance of the Portable Skid-Resistance Tester
,”
Symposium on Skid Resistance, ASTM STP 326
,
American Society for Testing and Materials
,
West Conshohocken, PA
,
1962
, pp. 50–74.
21.
Giles
,
C.G.
,
Sabey
,
B.E.
, and
Cardew
,
K.H.F.
, “
Development and Performance of the Portable Skid-Resistance Tester
,”
Road Research Technical Paper No.
 66,
DSIR Road Research Laboratory
,
1964
.
22.
Manning
,
D.P.
,
Jones
,
C.
, and
Bruce
,
M.
, “
Improved Slip-Resistance on Oil from Surface Roughness of Footwear
,”
Rubber Chemistry Technology
 0035-9475, Vol.
56
,
1983
, pp. 701–717.
23.
Di Pilla
,
S.
, “
Slip Resistant Treatment Study 2000
,” URL: http://www.esis.com/ESISSRT2000-0600.pdf, ESIS Risk Control Services,
06
2000
.
24.
Fendley
,
A.
,
Marpet
,
M.I.
,
Medoff
,
H.
, and
Schutter
,
D.
, “
Repeatability and Reproduceability in Walkway-Safety Tribometry: Abrasive Grit Size in Test-Foot Preparation
,”
Journal of Testing and Evaluation, JTEVA
 0090-3973, Vol.
27
, No.
1
,
1999
, pp. 76–82.
25.
UK Slip Resistance Group
, “
The Measurement of Floor Slip Resistance. Guidelines Recommended by the UK Slip Resistance Group
,” Issue
2
06
2000
, circulated by Rapra Technology Limited, Shawbury, Shrewsbury, Shropshire, UK.
26.
Dravitski
,
V.K.
, and
Potter
,
S.M.
, “
The Use of the Tortus and the Pendulum with the 4S Rubber for the Assessment of Slip Resistance in the Laboratory and in the Field
,”
Journal of Testing and Evaluation, JTEVA
 0090-3973, Vol.
25
, No.
1
,
1997
, pp. 127–134.
27.
Chang
,
W.R.
,
Kim
,
I.J.
,
Manning
,
D.P.
, and
Bunterngchit
,
Y.
, “
The Role of Surface Roughness in the Measurement of Slipperiness
,”
Ergonomics
 0014-0139, Vol.
44
, No.
13
,
2001
, pp. 1200–1216.
28.
Marpet
,
M.I.
, “
On Threshold Values that Separate Pedestrian Walkways that Are Slip Resistant from Those that Are Not
,”
J. Forensic Sci.
, Vol.
41
, No.
5
,
1996
, pp. 747–755.
29.
Marpet
,
M.I.
.
, and
Brungraber
,
R.
, “
The Effect of Contact Pressure and Test-Foot Sliding on Slip Resistance: Experimental Results
,”
J. Forensic Sci.
, Vol.
41
, No.
5
,
1996
, pp. 770–775.
30.
Marpet
,
M.I.
, “
Improved Characterization of Tribometric Test Results
,”
Safety Science
, Vol.
40
,
2002
, pp. 705–714.
31.
Powers
,
C.M.
,
Kulig
,
K.
,
Flynn
,
J.
, and
Brault
,
J.R.
, “
Repeatability and Bias of Two Walkway Safety Tribometers
,”
Journal of Testing and Evaluation, JTEVA
 0090-3973, Vol.
27
, No.
6
,
1999
, pp. 368–374.
32.
Chang
,
W.R.
, and
Matz
,
S.
, “
The Slip Resistance of Common Footwear Materials Measured with Two Slipmeters
,”
Applied Ergonomics
 0003-6870, Vol.
32
,
2001
, pp. 549–558.
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this chapter.

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal