Together we could bring about a revolution in floor safety
Thank you for agreeing to help us. Your help could bring about a revolution in floor safety in the UK and across Europe. All we ask is that you conduct a few very simple floor safety tests, record the reults and send them to us. Your measurements will provide the CEN TC339 committee with evidence that may persuade them to make a momentus decision that will revolutionise floor safety in the UK and Europe. Without such data, the future of floor safety is likely to take a giant step backwards.
Contact us for more information
CEN TC339 are about to make an important decision for floor safety that will have a profound effect on floor safety and on you
The CEN TC339 committee has been striving for years to establish a common measure of floor slip risk. The committee has been divided in three camps, partly because of geographic boundaries and partly because there has been no single method of measuring slip risk that everyone agrees upon that mirrors the complex physics of slipping and delivers consistent and accurate results.
Most slip test methods do not work or cannot be proven and as a consequence your floor is probably not as safe as it should be
CEN now wish to review all slip test machines including many slip test methods that don't work. Trundle devices such as the Tortus, GMG or FSC2000 measure co-efficient of friction but because of their slow speed of movement they do not appear to correctly measure wet slip risk (the biggest cause of slips). The Germans and many Europeans favour the Ramp Test - which cannot be verified once a floor is laid. Many of these tests have support from their country of origin. We need your help to support a slip test measure that works, is easy to use and that will improve floor safety and prevent slip accidents.
We can prove SlipAlert benefits - but we need your help
We can prove that SlipAlert is easy, detects slip risk and that it can save time, money and trouble. Used to test new floors and to monitor changes to floors, it will reduce slip accidents.
You can download a copy of our submission to CEN TC339 which includes details of the strengths of SlipAlert, customer case studies and some simple tests that will prove or disprove our claims regarding SlipAlert merits.
Download a printable version of the TC339 case for SlipAlert
When you have read the document, please contact us with comments or volunteer to help undertake testing to prove the value of SlipAlert.
If you own any of the other test methods mentioned in the document you may wish to try the tests with those and compare with SlipAlert.
CEN TC339 standards for measuring floor slip risk
The CEN TC339 committee has been striving for years to establish a common measure of floor slip risk. The committee has been divided in three camps, partly because of geographic boundaries and partly because there has been no single method of measuring slip risk that everyone agrees upon that mirrors the complex physics of slipping and delivers consistent and accurate results. With no “absolute” measure to assess slip test machines how can test machines be assessed?
Download the case for SlipAlert
We'd welcome your comments
The search for a new or better measure
The TC339 committee has called for all countries to put forward slip test methods in common use. The committee has long been unable to agree that any one test is “the best”. Fans of the German Ramp Test like its repeatability, fans of the UK Pendulum believe that PTV results correlate with actual slip experience. However, both methods have obvious weaknesses: the Ramp Test uses oil and studded boots (how can that simulate wet pedestrian slip risk) and anyway it cannot be used to test floors in-situ. The Pendulum results can vary significantly because it has an analogue reading, can easily be out of calibration and requires an experienced user.
Download the case for SlipAlert
Most other test methods do not work or cannot be proven
Many other test measures exist. Rz microroughness is the most common end-user slip test method in the UK . Detractors say it is a poor measure of slip risk and cannot detect contamination or change to slip risk. Trundle devices such as the Tortus, GMG or FSC2000 measure co-efficient of friction but because of their slow speed of movement they do not appear to correctly measure wet slip risk (the biggest cause of slips).
SlipAlert has been ignored until now
The UK representatives on TC339 have until now been keen to limit discussions to the set of test machines that have already been considered by the group: the German Ramp Test and the TRL Pendulum. As a result, despite the fact that SlipAlert was invented by Dr Malcolm Bailey then Chair of the UK TC339 committee, it has not been promoted to the wider TC339 Group until now.
Download the TC339 case for SlipAlert
It is time for a step change in floor safety
TC339 has called for a new review of slip test machines and that review must now include SlipAlert. SlipAlert has been hiding in the shadow of the Pendulum for too long. SlipAlert does offer similar results to the Pendulum but it also offers many benefits: ease of use, digital display, greater precision, more consistency, better repeatability and reproducibility. SlipAlert more closely mirrors the physics of a slip and it is designed to be easy to use for measuring new floors and for monitoring changes to slip risk caused by contamination, wear or poor cleaning. SlipAlert allows non-experts to reliably measure slip risk.
Download the TC339 case for SlipAlert
You can take the first step
Please consider the case for SlipAlert. As a common European measure of slip risk SlipAlert has the potential to dramatically reduce slip accidents across Europe . For any business, SlipAlert saves time, saves money and reduces slip risk. Please read on or try SlipAlert floor testing and see for yourself the benefits it could bring.
Download the case for SlipAlert
View the remaining document in html
|
