The effect of surface roughness and contaminant on the dynamic friction of porcelain tile.

Surface roughness affects friction, but it is not clear what surface roughness characteristics are better correlated with friction. The average of the maximum height above the mean line in each cut-off length (Rpm) and the arithmetical average of surface slope (deltaa) had the highest correlation with dynamic friction coefficient in a previous study. The previous study was expanded to two different footwear materials and four different contaminants on a porcelain tile in the current investigation. The results showed that dynamic friction decreased as the interface speed and glycerol content in the contaminant were increased due to the hydrodynamic lubrication effect. Deltaa had the highest correlation with friction for most of the test conditions with neolite. For Four S rubber, friction coefficient appeared to have the highest correlation with the parameters related to the surface void volume at 30% glycerol content, related to the surface slope at 70 and 85% glycerol contents, and related to the peak to valley distance at 99% glycerol content. A good indicator of surface slip resistance probably should consist of the surface parameters representing the surface slope, the surface void volume and the surface peak-to-valley distance with the coefficients determined by the system parameters.

[1]  D. P. Manning,et al.  The superior slip-resistance of footwear soling compound T66/103 , 1994 .

[2]  S. R. Shaw,et al.  Slip resistance of floors: Users' opinions, Tortus instrument readings and roughness measurement , 1988 .

[3]  David J. Whitehouse,et al.  Handbook of Surface Metrology , 2023 .

[4]  T. D. Proctor,et al.  Slipping, tripping and falling accidents in Great Britain -- Present and future , 1988 .

[5]  R. Brough,et al.  Measurement of the coefficient of friction of floors , 1979 .

[6]  T B Leamon,et al.  Occupational slips and falls: more than a trivial problem. , 1995, Ergonomics.

[7]  Lennart Strandberg,et al.  The dynamics of slipping accidents , 1981 .

[8]  David Tabor,et al.  Friction, Adhesion and Boundary Lubrication of Polymers , 1974 .

[9]  M Tisserand,et al.  Progress in the prevention of falls caused by slipping. , 1985, Ergonomics.

[10]  L Strandberg.  The effect of conditions underfoot on falling and overexertion accidents. , 1985, Ergonomics.

[11]  Raoul Grönqvist,et al.  Slip resistance versus surface roughness of deck and other underfoot surfaces in ships , 1990 .

[12]  Wen-Ruey Chang.  The effect of surface roughness on dynamic friction between neolite and quarry tile , 1998 .

[13]  D. G. Lloyd,et al.  An investigation of floor surface profile characteristics that will reduce the incidence of slips and falls , 1992 .

[14]  Wen-Ruey Chang.  The effect of surface roughness on the measurement of slip resistance , 1999 .

[15]  Craig Jones,et al.  Proof of shoe slip-resistance by a walking traction test , 1990 .

[16]  The Actual Contact Area and Friction Properties of Elastomers under Frictional Contact with Solid Surfaces , 1972 .

[17]  M. P. Wilson,et al.  Slip resistance testing of shoes — new developments , 1983 .