IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i2p405-d475912.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of Winter Footwear: Comparison of Test Methods to Determine Footwear Slip Resistance on Ice Surfaces

Author

Listed:
  • Atena Roshan Fekr

    (The Kite Research Institute, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute—University Health Network, Toronto, ON M5G 2A2, Canada
    Institute of Biomedical Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 3G9, Canada)

  • Yue Li

    (The Kite Research Institute, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute—University Health Network, Toronto, ON M5G 2A2, Canada)

  • Chantal Gauvin

    (Mechanical and Physical Risk Prevention Team, IRSST—Institut de Recherche Robert-Sauvé en Santé et en Sécurité du Travail, Montréal, QC H3A 3C2, Canada)

  • Gordon Wong

    (The Kite Research Institute, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute—University Health Network, Toronto, ON M5G 2A2, Canada)

  • Wayne Cheng

    (The Kite Research Institute, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute—University Health Network, Toronto, ON M5G 2A2, Canada)

  • Geoff Fernie

    (The Kite Research Institute, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute—University Health Network, Toronto, ON M5G 2A2, Canada
    Institute of Biomedical Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 3G9, Canada)

  • Tilak Dutta

    (The Kite Research Institute, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute—University Health Network, Toronto, ON M5G 2A2, Canada
    Institute of Biomedical Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 3G9, Canada)

Abstract

The use of slip-resistant winter footwear is crucial for the prevention of slips and falls on ice and snow. The main objective of this paper is to evaluate a mechanical testing method to determine footwear slip resistance on wet and dry ice surfaces and to compare it with the human-centred test method introduced by researchers at KITE (Knowledge, Innovation, Talent, Everywhere)-Toronto Rehabilitation Institute-University Health Network. Phase 1 of this study assessed the repeatability and reproducibility of the mechanical method by evaluating ten different occupational winter boots using two SATRA Slip resistance testers (STM 603, SATRA Technology Centre, Kettering, UK). One tester is located in Toronto and one in Montreal. These boots were chosen based on the needs of the IRSST (Institut de Recherche Robert-Sauvé en Santé et en Sécurité du Travail, Montréal, Quebec, Canada), who were primarily interested in providing safe winter footwear for police, firefighters and municipal workers. In Phase 2, the results of the human-centred test approach were compared with the mechanical results. In Phase 3, two of these boots with conflicting results from the previous phases were tested using a second human-centred method. In Phase 1, the mechanical testing results obtained in the two labs showed a high linear correlation (>0.94) and good agreement on both ice surfaces; however, they revealed a bias (~0.06) between the two labs on the dry ice condition. The mechanical and human-centred tests (phase 2) were found to be better correlated in the wet ice condition (R = 0.95) compared to the dry ice condition (R = 0.34). Finally, the rating of the footwear slip resistance based on the number of slips counted in phase 3 was consistent with the rating by the human-centred test method (phase 2), but not the mechanical method (phase 1). The findings of this study provide a better understanding of the limitations of the SATRA ice tray for measuring footwear slip resistance and demonstrate that the mechanical method must be further refined to make it more comparable to the human-centred methods to achieve better agreement with real-world performance.

Suggested Citation

  • Atena Roshan Fekr & Yue Li & Chantal Gauvin & Gordon Wong & Wayne Cheng & Geoff Fernie & Tilak Dutta, 2021. "Evaluation of Winter Footwear: Comparison of Test Methods to Determine Footwear Slip Resistance on Ice Surfaces," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(2), pages 1-22, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:2:p:405-:d:475912
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/2/405/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/2/405/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:2:p:405-:d:475912. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.