Friction has been widely used as a measure of slipperiness. However, controversies around friction measurements remain. The purposes of this paper are to summarize understanding about friction measurement related to slipperiness assessment of shoe and floor interface and to define test conditions based on biomechanical observations. In addition, friction mechanisms at shoe and floor interface on dry, liquid and solid contaminated, and on icy surfaces are discussed. It is concluded that static friction measurement, by the traditional use of a drag-type device, is only suitable for dry and clean surfaces, and dynamic and transition friction methods are needed to properly estimate the potential risk on contaminated surfaces. Furthermore, at least some of the conditions at the shoe/floor interface during actual slip accidents should be replicated as test conditions for friction measurements, such as sliding speed, contact pressure and normal force build-up rate.

This paper seeks to address questions related to friction measurement such as how friction is related to human-centred assessment and actual slipping, and how repeatable friction measurements are. Commonly used devices for slipperiness measurement are surveyed and their characteristics compared with suggested test conditions from biomechanical observations summarized in Part 1. The issues of device validity, repeatability, reproducibility and usability are examined from the published literature. Friction assessment using the mechanical measurement devices described appears generally valid and reliable. However, the validity of most devices could be improved by bringing them within the range of human slipping conditions observed in biomechanical studies. Future studies should clearly describe the performance limitations of any device and its results and should consider whether the device conditions reflect these actual human slipping conditions. There is also a need for validation studies of more devices by walking experiments.

The objective of the present study was to determine whether differences in the frictional properties of a floor surface may affect the kinematics and kinetics of pushing and pulling. Eight male participants were required to push and pull a four-wheeled trolley over two level surfaces, on which were mounted floor coverings with good (safety floor) and reduced (standard floor) frictional properties. A psychophysical approach was used to determine the initial maximum acceptable horizontal force required to move the trolley over a short distance (3 m). Three-dimensional (3D) hand and ground reaction forces and 3D postures were measured during initial force exertions. The results showed that psychophysically derived measures of initial horizontal force and horizontal components of hand forces did not differ significantly between floor surfaces. Despite the ability to exert similar forces, the measured maximum coefficient of friction varied according to floor surface. These changes reflected significant alterations in vertical and horizontal components of ground reaction and vertical hand forces, suggesting that participants had maximized the frictional properties available to them. Postures also changed as a consequence of floor surface, with significant changes occurring in knee flexion and trunk extension. This study has shown that handlers involved in the pushing and pulling of trolleys are capable of adjusting posture and the direction of hand and foot forces in order to compensate for reduced levels of floor friction. This has particular relevance when assessing the musculoskeletal loads imposed on the handler and the likely mechanisms of injury resulting from variations in floor conditions when workers undertake pushing and pulling tasks in the workplace.

No abstract

This is a repository copy of Understanding the friction measured by standardised test methodologies used to assess shoe-surface slip risk.