7-days of FREE Audio papers, translation & more with Prime
7-days of FREE Prime access
7-days of FREE Audio papers, translation & more with Prime
7-days of FREE Prime access
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2003.08.001
Copy DOIJournal: Safety Science | Publication Date: Sep 19, 2003 |
Citations: 2 |
The objective was to investigate how two distinct data collection procedures, raw coefficient of friction (COF) data versus averaged COF data, may affect the outcome and interpretation of statistical analysis of friction tests and thus the reliability of slip resistance assessments. A prototype portable slip meter (PSM) and a force platform (FP) were used for evaluating floor friction transients over contaminated surfaces. A one-way ANOVA was performed to estimate significant differences between the PSM and the FP using raw COF data (55 measurement points) and averaged COF data (five measurement points) respectively. For comparing the FP with the portable slip meter, the best approach is to use averaged friction data. When the portable slip meter is used independently for walkway friction measurement, either the averaged or the raw data can be used to present the test results. However, the larger sample size is always the preferred choice.
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.