Get more information at: https://safetydirectamerica.com/anti-slip-floor-coatings From the slip resistance testing experts at https://safetydirectamerica.com/

Most anti-slip floor treatments are temporary solutions, and you’ll be told to buy “special soap” to clean your floors. Well, that’s the floor treatment watered down that your cleaning crew applies nightly. SparkleTuff will last a decade or more, never yellow or crack, and will look beautiful for many years to come. Chemical resistance, UV resistance, can be submerged in water, stain resistance and you can drive a forklift over it. This is a revolutionary new type of anti-slip floor coating that has been impressing some of the biggest companies on earth for ten years now. From tub manufacturers to cruise ship companies to food processing plants – we’ve got clients that know this is the best solution out there for slippery floors of any kind.

Personal injury attorney billboards litter our country like ants because people believe nonsense slip tests created by the American tile industry themselves that say slippery floors aren’t slippery. They were fooling flooring consumers for many years with SCOF scams like the now-withdrawn ASTM C1028. Now it’s ANSI A326.3 they’re fooling people with. It’s a scam, too, written by the same authors of ASTM C1028. The BOT-3000E is not capable of being a safety assessment tool. The test method actually says that in black and white printing.

SparkleTuff Anti-Slip Floor Coating is extremely durable and long-lasting (almost permanent), and can make absolutely ANY kind of floor slip resistant with a beautiful. glossy look. No special prep is ever needed, even on epoxy floors. Just clean and dry the floor, apply this revolutionary anti-slip floor coating, and you’ll have a beautiful, safe floor for a decade or more. It shimmers in the light, and has been tested with the pendulum DCOF tester to assure that it has excellent slip resistance as per the ASTM E303 pendulum DCOF test.

The post SparkleTuff™ Anti-Slip Floor Coating. Looks Great – No Slips!! Anywhere!! appeared first on Safety Direct America.

This test uses the pendulum tester to assess the slip potential (or slip resistance) of a flooring sample, and then the sample goes through a simulated wear procedure which mimics 1-2 years of heavy foot traffic. Then another pendulum DCOF test is done to see if the slip resistance has changed. This test is the world’s most reliable and important slip resistance test when it comes to lab testing for architects and specifiers because it gives the client the most accurate real-world slip potential of a floor (before it is installed) for two conditions:

1. when the flooring is first installed and brand new, and

2. after the floor has gone through a year or two of heavy foot traffic.

The pendulum floor slip resistance tester has a peer-reviewed published test method in over 50 nations on five continents. It was originally created for the U.S. National Bureau of Standards with the first study using results from pendulum research published in 1943. The pendulum tester is sometimes referred to as the “British pendulum tester”, after it became officially validated in many experts’ eyes as the world’s most reliable slip resistance testing tool after British researchers tested 3,500 slip and fall incident sites and published their findings over 50 years ago.

This and other research studies conducted in various nations led to the United Kingdom’s Health and Safety Executive (HSE) publishing safety guidelines for pendulum test results. Australia later published a much more detailed list of recommendations using pendulum test values (PTV) for various areas of buildings, such as outdoor sidewalks, stairs, kitchens, lobbies, bathrooms and ramps.

With this SSR slip resistance test data, an architect or specifier can have peace of mind when installing a certain type of flooring that the floor will be slip resistant when new, and will retain its slip resistance over time and won’t need to be replaced after a year or two.

In 2018, Mr. Strautins conducted the first pendulum proficiency test that Sotter Engineering’s slip testing lab took part in (Proficiency Testing Report No. 26833, Safe Environments Pty Ltd), along with 39 other pendulum floor slip resistance testing labs in eight countries throughout North America, Europe, Asia, Australia and New Zealand. Identical tiles were sent to all 39 labs, and results were kept confidential (to not embarrass labs that did not do well in the study). Each lab was assigned a letter so that they could see how close they came to the correct answers for the tiles sent out to each lab for this study. Results showed that Sotter Engineering’s test lab was one of the top three most accurate in the world.

Again in 2022, Mr. Strautins organized another “pendulum proficiency test” for labs throughout the world, in which 20 laboratories participated. That study was the study mentioned earlier that showed that Sotter Engineering was the world’s most accurate and precise pendulum testing lab when it comes to Sustainable Slip Resistance pendulum testing.

Also in 2022, John C Sotter of Sotter Engineering Corporation made numerous changes to (American Society for Testing and Materials) ASTM E303-22, which is the USA’s version of the pendulum slip test that was published and has been in continuous use since 1993. Mr. Sotter’s changes and additions to ASTM E303-22 were intended to make it more closely mimic the recently-updated pendulum test methods used across Europe, the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Australia. Numerous research studies and proficiency tests were helping pendulum test method creators make their test methods come up with more precise results, and produce more repeatable results. John C Sotter brought ASTM E303 light-years ahead in 2022 by making several changes to make the test more repeatable and precise.

Verification surfaces and their correct test values were also published in the ASTM’s 2022 version of ASTM E303-22 so that pendulum users could validate that they were getting the correct answers on three easily-obtainable surfaces that covers the spectrum of readings on the pendulum – a very slippery surface, a moderately slip resistant surface, and a very slip resistant surface. This way pendulum users could check that their pendulum was working correctly in between annual calibrations, but they could also check that they were correctly following the directions when using the instrument and getting the correct values for known surfaces.

The proficiency tests organized by Mr. Strautins showed that some labs were not getting results close enough to the correct results on some surfaces, meaning either their pendulum was out of calibration, or the user needed to go over the test method again to make sure they were conducting the test properly. Even some professional floor slip resistance test labs were not doing well in these proficiency tests. And some not doing so well were ISO-accredited labs.

Believe it or not, it does normally take a little bit of experience to get accurate results on the pendulum tester, and extremely experienced users like John C Sotter will get extremely accurate results (as shown in three international proficiency tests), and first-time users will often get erroneous or inaccurate results because they are not yet familiar enough with the test method or the instrument. You don’t just push a button on the pendulum and it gives you the answer. There’s a bit more to it.

Inexperienced users will perhaps forget to tighten to locking knob on the back of the instrument before testing, for instance, or they’re using a rubber slider that wasn’t prepared properly according to the test method’s instructions. There’s a myriad of mistakes that can be made by an inexperienced pendulum user. It takes just a bit of instruction, training, and experience before a pendulum user is proficient. And some ISO-accredited labs apparently are not totally proficient, likely because they’re “specializing” in a hundred different types of tests, so they’re a master of none.

This is why renting a pendulum is very bad idea, both for that pendulum and for obtaining accurate results. Sending a delicate engineering device to an untrained  “first-time user” and then to another “first-time user” all year long will certainly cause damage to the instrument (and rubber sliders), and results would likely not be very accurate at all when someone has had no training or experience with the device. Mr. Strautin’s proficiency tests showed that even professional labs sometimes make mistakes and get bad results. We only know of one company in the entire world that rents pendulums. It’s a super dumb idea. Spend a few extra dollars and get a trained professional to test your floors. One small slip and fall lawsuit will cost you a whole lot more than getting a trained expert to come in and do your floor slip resistance testing for you.

In 2025, Mr. Strautins created another proficiency test for slip resistance testing labs around the world (Proficiency Testing Report No. 33048, Safe Environments Pty Ltd), and twenty-seven labs from five countries on three separate continents participated. Again, Sotter Engineering was found to be one of the top three most accurate labs on the planet. But furthermore, nineteen of the twenty-seven labs that participated in this study were ISO-accredited labs. That means that Sotter Engineering got more accurate results in this study than at least seventeen ISO-accredited labs! So what does that say about ISO accreditation?

ISO-accredited labs usually spend a whole lot of money and time and energy creating lots of paperwork to become ISO-accredited. That means they need to make lots of money (after they’ve given the ISO all that time and money) testing potato chips to verify if they’re “vegan”, testing concrete to make sure it has enough tensile strength, they need to test crackers to make sure they’re truly “gluten-free”, and they need to test floors for slip resistance from time to time as well. ISO labs are usually a “jack of all trades, but masters of none.”

ISO-accredited labs often have pretty lab coats embroidered with their company logo on them, and binders of safety protocols around every corner, but almost all ISO-accredited labs proved themselves in this latest pendulum proficiency test to be less accurate than Sotter Engineering in floor slip resistance testing. We specialize in just this one type of testing, and we know it well after more than two decades! So if you want an expert, hire an expert. If you want an ISO stamp on the report, take the results with a grain of salt, perhaps…

Hire an expert in floor slip resistance testing like Sotter Engineering, and you can be sure you’re getting accurate results and knowledgeable insight into possible remedial solutions to help stop slips on your property. Hire an ISO-accredited lab, and you’ll get some pendulum test results that might be a bit off, but you can get your crackers tested for gluten at the same time!

The post ISO-Certified Slip Resistance Testing labs vs. the floor slip resistance testing Experts at Sotter Engineering Corporation – the results are in!! appeared first on Safety Direct America.

These traffic paints used for speed bumps, red curbs, handicapped parking spaces, and other parking lot markings are regularly re-painted, but that doesn’t need to be the case, and these speed bumps and red curbs don’t need to be a dangerous slip hazard.

SparkleTuff Anti-Slip Floor Coating is a clear, glossy, really long-lasting, and very anti-slip floor coating that sticks to absolutely any floor or road surface. It has UV protection, so red curb paint and speed bumps only need to be re-painted every decade or so. The amazing slip resistance of SparkleTuff means that speed bumps are no longer a slip hazard, and red curbs no longer need to be stripped and re-painted nearly as often.

You can see the reflection of the sun in the photo above, meaning this paint is glossy, and therefore almost certainly slippery when wet. That doesn’t need to be the case if this paint was coated with SparkleTuff Anti-Slip Floor Coating. This revolutionary anti-slip floor (and road) coating makes traffic paint anti-slip, and protects the paint so it’ll last a whole lot longer.

SparkleTuff can also help remediate slippery pedestrian tactile surfaces like the one photographed above. These usually have some sort of anti-slip “bumps” or “nubs” on top of the surface, as seen below these large domes, but these “bumps” or “nubs” often wear down quickly, leaving a glossy slip hazard. Pedestrian tactile domes like these need to be replaced right away because they are a clear slip hazard when wet, but another option is the coat the tops of these domes with SparkleTuff Anti-Slip Floor Coating. It lasts for ten years or more in many situations, you can drive forklifts over it, and it has UV protection to keep colors from fading.

A new generation in anti-slip floor coatings, SparkleTuff anti-slip roadway treatment is a polysiloxane. It never yellows or peels or cracks. It has stain and scratch resistance and can help save pedestrians from the slip and fall hazards that pedestrian tactile domes, red curbs, and traffic paints create in the USA.

There’s no need to paint your parking lot annually. These slippery, glossy paints can be preserved and made slip resistant by simply adding a thin coat of SparkleTuff Anti-Slip Floor Coating on these slippery-when-wet paints. End the slip epidemic in the USA. SparkleTuff Anti-Slip Floor and Roadway Coating – looks great – no slips!

The post Traffic paint, pavement striping paint and red curb paint is a glossy, slippery mess waiting to happen. The answer is SparkleTuff™ Anti-Slip Floor Coating! appeared first on Safety Direct America.

If you’d prefer to listen to a podcast talking about this blog post while you drive, click here.

The first camp is made up of “non-profits” that pretend that they are interested in helping stop slip and fall injuries from occurring, but they pander to and are supported by the flooring industry itself, and these “non-profits” help the people they represent come up with slip resistance test methods (that keep getting withdrawn, or exposed as bad tests that don’t accurately assess safety) that serve to tell us that slippery flooring isn’t slippery, and another “non-profit” sells “high traction” stickers for flooring and floor products. Both of these “non-profits” help manufacturers of flooring and floor products make more sales and profits. The test methods they publish are part of the problem because they do not accurately identify slippery floors. They used to use ASTM C1028 to fool flooring consumers, until the test was exposed as a fraudulent safety test and withdrawn by the ASTM.

Here’s a video showing Camp #1’s latest test, ANSI A326.3 with the BOT-3000E, doing a really bad job of identifying a slippery floor as slippery:

The rest of the world doesn’t fall for this American nonsense. They use independent, reliable science that’s been researched for well over 50 years to help avoid slips and falls from happening, partly because many other counties (especially in Europe) have a system of universal health care, which means even the government, as well as building owners and architects, have an interest in stopping preventable slip and fall injuries. It costs the governments of these countries money fixing broken arms and hips with tax dollars that is much better spent elsewhere, such as housing the homeless, or buying second mansions for themselves.

The second camp consists of full-time expert “liars for hire” that work only for personal injury attorneys and insurance companies. Their interest is not in science or stopping slips from occurring. Their interest is figuring out a way to get the result the lawyer paying them wants them to get. If they do a good job of saying exactly what that lawyer wants them to say, then that lawyer is much more likely to hire them the following week when another slip and fall lawsuit comes across their desk. By pandering to big-time lawyers that do a lot of slip and fall defense work (and pandering to the big-time personal injury attorneys at times, as well), some of these people claim to have testified in hundreds or even more than a thousand slip and fall lawsuits. These are full-time professional liars that make the situation worse with fake tests and bogus data.

The more people that get injured in slip and fall incidents, the more jobs available to these “liars for hire” in camp #2, so why would they be interested in stopping them from happening? They aren’t. They don’t work for architects and building owners using proven, reliable and precise scientific devices that will help these people stop slip incidents from happening, but rather they come in with fake data after the injuries have occurred to help win, win, win these high-dollar lawsuits.

The two most common instruments used by this camp of “experts” are the English XL and the Brungraber Mark IIIB, and it’s baffling how these “instruments” that have been proven to lack precision in published studies are still let into American courtrooms as “science” since they were rejected by OSHA, the ASTM, and the international community of experts in this crucial field of study long ago. They are anything but real science.

These fake, unreliable “slip test instruments” are not intended to help stop the slip and fall injury epidemic in America, and they are rarely, if ever, used to help stop slips and falls from happening. They are only used in American courtrooms to win lawsuits. Below are photos of the Brungraber Mark II and Mark IIIB used by full-time courtroom “liars for hire”. One has a withdrawn ASTM standard (withdrawn over 20 years ago), and the other one has no peer-reviewed, published test standard in ANY nation because it lacks precision. In essence, it’s been proven that every operator of this device gets a different answer on the exact same spot of flooring. This allows users of this device to learn to manipulate the Brungraber Mark IIIB to get the answer the lawyer wants.

In fact, one peer-reviewed, published research study from Australia stated quite clearly that, “When compared to the other test methods, the VIT tends to underestimate the wet slip resistance of smooth polished, glazed or surface-protected tiles, while overestimating the slip resistance of tiles with a textured or profiled surface.” This means that these devices are fantastic at saying moderately slip resistant floors are very slippery, and can also help the “liar for hire” provide data indicating that floors that aren’t slippery are more slippery than they are. They don’t work to properly assess the slip resistance of floors, in other words. A perfect courtroom device for professional liars that need to provide bogus data that defies reality.

ASTM F2508 was created by some of these “experts” to “validate” their instruments (since valid scientific instruments will all have international acceptance and published test methods). The instruments they use have recent peer-reviewed, published studies showing that they lack precision, and therefore they have no chance of publishing a test method anywhere on earth. The “science” and common sense behind this “verification procedure” ASTM F2508 for instruments that have proven to lack reliability and precision is absolutely laughable. More on the laughable joke that is ASTM F2508 is discussed in the link provided. It’s pure nonsense, and it’ll make you think the gatekeepers of our justice system (the judges allowing this nonsense into their courtrooms) may be lacking some serious intelligence.

According to ASTM F2508, our eyes may be considered valid scientific thermometers in an American court of law if they can discern that a cup of ice water is colder than a cup of visibly-steaming-hot water in front of us. ASTM F2508 really is that ridiculous and fraudulent. The fact that users of the Brungraber Mark IIIB were able to publish such nonsense through the ASTM and use it to fool American judges will make you fear for your life and for our broken justice system…I assure you.

ASTM F2508 will convince you that Camp #2 of slip resistance test “experts” are in the slip and fall game for one reason – to help win multi-million-dollar slip and fall lawsuits with fake data. They couldn’t care less about preventing slips and falls. They’ve spent three decades now doing all they can to stop good science from helping to stop slip and fall incidents in America. Shame on them, and shame on the leaders of the ASTM for allowing these games to rule the ASTM F13 committee.

The third camp consists of independent, third-party testing labs that can help architects, flooring manufacturers, and building owners avoid slip and fall injuries from occurring. This is the only camp interested in helping stop slip and fall injuries with reliable, proven, international science created after many decades of slip and fall research around the world using the pendulum tester (shown below with me helping a meat processing plant to stop slips amongst their workers and visitors).

The first camp of “non-profits” writes and publishes slip resistance test methods designed to provide a false sense of security to architects, specifiers and building owners. They published the now-withdrawn ASTM C1028 (withdrawn in 2014), the now-expired ANSI B101.1-2009 (expired in 2014) and now-expired ANSI B101.3-2014 (expired in 2019). These were all written largely by a “non-profit” that represents the flooring industry and puts their logo on the front of their test methods now. All these test methods had to go away because too many people had been shown just how bad these tests were at identifying slippery floors. These tests were telling us that the slipperiest of floors were not slippery at all. So the largest flooring “non-profit” had to publish another bogus test to help sell more slippery flooring in the USA…

Their latest is ANSI A326.3, which was also published to help flooring manufacturers fool consumers today into believing that flooring has “passed” a “slip resistance safety test,” when in fact the test method itself says on the first page of the published test method that it is not intended to be a safety test at all. So what is it for? “Comparing surfaces”, according to the first page of the test. At least they’re not lying, but they’re counting on architects and specifiers not comprehending the fact that this test definitely comes across as a “slip resistance safety test”, but the disclaimers all point to the fact that it is in NO way that. To use ANSI A326.3 as a “slip resistance safety test” is to ignore the dozens of disclaimers posted throughout the test method. It’s ignoring reality and just being dumb.

Did you think ANSI A326.3 was a “safety test”? Then you haven’t read (or you chose to ignore) page one of the test method. Or you were perhaps mislead by someone at a “lunch and learn” or some other form of propaganda designed around getting architects to think ANSI A326.3 is a valid “slip resistance safety test” when it clearly isn’t.

The ANSI A326.3 test states clearly that it, “can provide a useful comparison of surfaces, but does not predict the likelihood a person will or will not slip on a hard surface flooring material.” It also states throughout the test method that, “the measured DCOF value shall not be the only factor in determining the appropriateness of a hard surface flooring material for a particular application.” It states that several other factors must be considered (other than the DCOF value obtained), but does not offer any guidance on how to consider those “other factors”.

They leave architects and specifiers to assume that the numbers given in this test as “passing” mean that it has passed a “safety test”, when that’s not what the test says at all…and for good reason. The tile industry doesn’t want to get dragged into the thousands of slip and fall lawsuits across the country that pop up weekly. They didn’t mislead you into believing the floor you bought passed a “safety test”, but rather YOU chose to ignore what the test says it is. It is not at all claiming to be a safety test. You just chose to ignore that.

ANSI A326.3 (and it’s predecessor ANSI A137.1) is for “comparing surfaces”, not “assessing safety”. Many manufacturers, architects and municipal officials choose to ignore that fact. Elsewhere in the ANSI A326.3 official test method, it states, “Normative measured DCOF limit values are not provided in this standard for exterior applications, interior ramps and inclines, pool decks, shower floors, or flooring that is contaminated with material other than water or where minimal or no footwear is used.” So according to that disclaimer, they’re not saying that this test is relevant to a floor with spilled coffee, tea, sunscreen, dirt or cola on it…it’s just for floors with spilled water. Don’t blame the publishers of this test if there was dried floor soap, dust, or a million other contaminants on your floor. This test doesn’t take those realities into consideration. You’re on your own in the slip and fall lawsuit. They warned you. ANSI A326.3 is in no way arguing that it’s a “floor slip resistance safety test”.

Test results from this test say far too many slippery floors aren’t slippery, and that’s one reason why they tell you on page one that the test was NOT designed to be an assessment of safety. Want to use it as one anyway? Then YOU are also part of the slip and fall epidemic in the USA. For reliable slip resistance test safety assessments, the rest of the world has been using the pendulum dynamic coefficient of friction (DCOF) tester for decades, because it DOES assess the slip resistance safety of a floor. Below I’m testing the slip resistance safety of a “splash pad” with the pendulum tester at an amusement park.

The video below appeared on Bloomberg Businessweek several years ago, and features interviews with two of the “slip and fall game’s” biggest players in Camp #1. One of these two “experts” also makes a living in Camp #2 using test methods he publishes with his Camp #1 “non-profit”. His ability to publish test methods was taken away for a while, but now he’s back publishing bad test methods that are part of the problem.

The amount of disinformation in this video is scary and at times just strangely bizarre, so be warned. These are mostly not facts being presented in this video…just mostly bizarre interpretations of an alternate reality, perhaps…

No-one in this video began the slip and fall prevention business, and the BOT-3000E stopped being admissible in European standards in 2008, and there doesn’t seem to be any evidence that it was ever included as part of a published European test standard (just a couple of the “bizarre” things stated in the video by these Camp #1 “experts”). The BOT-3000E certainly isn’t included in Europe’s current slip resistance test standard, EN 16165, published in 2021 for dozens of countries including the United Kingdom, who has been studying how to prevent slips and falls since around the time these two “experts” were born. Again, many of the things said in this video are far from true. The people in Camp #1 live in a different reality where stopping slips is not as important as helping to sell slippery flooring.

For historical context, Percy A. Sigler at the U.S. National Bureau of Standards developed the pendulum dynamic coefficient of friction (DCOF) test method specifically for the assessment of pedestrian traction potential, and he started publishing his results in 1943 (before either of these “experts” were born, presumably). Today that research has resulted in America’s latest reliable and proven slip resistance test method, ASTM E303-22. It’s used by Camp #3 to help stop slip and fall incidents using reliable science used on five continents.

Static coefficient of friction (SCOF) testing has been widely debunked by the international community. See letters published on that blog post from leading experts on three continents stating that SCOF testing was abandoned long ago by the international floor slip testing community, and why. That blog post also contains links to peer-reviewed, published studies stating why SCOF testing was abandoned around the world (except in the USA) as a valid safety assessment decades ago in Europe, the UK, Australia and elsewhere.

Here is a detailed look into why SCOF testing is no longer internationally accepted as science. Even the Tile Council of North America (TCNA), who published ANSI A326.3 (which is not a “safety test”, remember?!) abandoned the SCOF test ASTM C1028 in 2014 because it was calling some of the most slippery floors on earth “not slippery” due to a problem with SCOF testing called “stiction”. SCOF testing does not work to assess safety. The world agrees on that. There’s only a few fools left in the world today still peddling that nonsense, and they’re clearly in Camp #1, and part of the problem.

SCOF tests measure how slippery a floor is to someone standing still (static) on the floor. People don’t slip while standing. The nonsense Camp #1 fools use to convince you that it is relevant has been proven in published studies to be nonsense. This peer-reviewed, published study said, “This study found that the manually-pulled 50-pound drag sled (as used in ASTM C-I028) was incapable of satisfactorily distinguishing between the wet slip resistance of ceramic tiles.” This was easily the most widely-used and popular SCOF test ever until it was abandoned by the ASTM and the Tile Council of America (TCNA) in 2014, except perhaps for the disgusting scam that is ASTM D2047.

ASTM’s D2047 is perhaps the biggest scam safety test ever created, as it is measuring how slippery a clean and dry floor is to someone standing still on it. Bizarre? No. Just a scam. UL 410 is the exact same test, using the James Machine.

Below is an SCOF test being performed after an internationally-accepted pendulum dynamic coefficient of friction (DCOF) test is performed on the same slippery flooring sample.

During the 1950’s and 1960’s the Greater London Council (GLC) in the United Kingdom (UK) used the pendulum DCOF slip resistance tester to evaluate 3,500 slip and fall incident sites, and the findings of that study were published in 1971. Further research in the UK led to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE, which is the English version of OSHA) publishing guidelines for what constitutes safe, moderately safe, and a slippery floor for pendulum test results.

ASTM C1028, ASTM F1677, ASTM F1678, ASTM F1679, ASTM F489, ANSI B101.1-2009, and several other worthless SCOF test methods over the years have either been withdrawn by the ASTM, or allowed to expire because they all were found to have no correlation between the real-world slip resistance of floors and the test results given by these tests. Some also lacked precision and could not identify slippery floors as slippery.

As it turns out, in the USA, perhaps the biggest money in the “slip and fall game” turns out to be creating fake data saying that polished, glazed, slippery-when-wet floors aren’t slippery at all. Unscrupulous people in the USA’s Camp #1 and Camp #2 have been trying to publish bad SCOF test methods for decades to make this easy money. Their test methods have all been withdrawn or allowed to expire except ASTM D2047 and ANSI B101.1-22. (That’s the same ANSI B101.1-2009 that was allowed to expire by the TCNA, ANSI and the manufacturer of the machine used in the test because it wasn’t identifying slippery floors as slippery.

Using all the bad SCOF test methods created by these first two camps of “expert liars for hire” and “non-profit organizations”, slippery floors are installed, defended, and never remediated, allowing more and more innocent pedestrians to suffer life-changing injuries upon them. They are the cause of the USA’s slip and fall epidemic, and why there are millions of personal injury attorney billboards that cover our land like flies on fresh bull dung.

ASTM E303-22 was updated in 2022 in the USA based on over 50 years of international slip and fall science. It can identify slippery floors in published research study after published research study after published research study so that they are either not installed in dangerous areas, or they can lead building owners to utilize absorbent anti-slip mats at entryways when it rains, have a gritty anti-slip floor coating applied to the floor, or have the floor acid-etched, for instance. Here’s a video showing the world’s most reliable slip resistance test, using the pendulum DCOF tester, which has a peer-reviewed, published test in over 50 nations.

This American “slip and fall game” is a deadly one, and it’s making lawyers and shady “experts” rich while innocent pedestrians in America suffer in hospital beds, and under the knife of well-paid surgeons who put rods in the victim’s backs and wrists, and replace their hips.

Asking flooring manufacturers to create their own slip and fall safety standards, after decades of them publishing nonsensical bogus SCOF tests is like asking your smiley neighborhood fox to build you a hen house. Would you wonder if that hen house might include a hidden trap door or two? You’d be a fool not to. The fox will be eating your chickens by the end of the week because you’re too foolish to know the difference between who is a trustworthy keeper of safety and who is not. Just like the fox building the hen house, the “non-profits” in USA’s Camp #1 want you to not read all the disclaimers in ANSI A326.3 and pretend it’s a reliable safety test. It’s not, and it tells you so.

The “experts” in Camp #2 want you to pretend science doesn’t need to be peer-reviewed, published, and accepted internationally. They are court jesters, and a major problem for our society in many ways. They make a mockery of our justice system, and they cause countless avoidable slip and fall injuries across the USA with their bad, unreliable science.

For reliable floor slip resistance testing safety based on over 50 years of independent research in over 50 nations, use ASTM E303-22 or any other of the pendulum DCOF test methods available around the world. Slip and fall incidents (they aren’t accidents because they are preventable using real science) are preventable. Using the European Union’s EN 16165: Annex B, Australia and New Zealand’s AS 4586, the United Kingdom’s BS 16165: Annex B, and other pendulum test methods from around the world, people can accurately assess the slip potential of a floor and respond accordingly.

Not every floor needs to be slip resistant, but every floor owner should know the truth about the slip resistance safety of their floors. Camp #1 and Camp #2 don’t want you to know the truth. Needlessly destroying people’s lives because you refuse to use real science to assess the floor slip resistance safety of your floors makes you a part of America’s slip and fall epidemic as well. Please use real science to assess slip safety, and reject the SCOF nonsense pushed by con artists and sociopaths in the USA in our Camp #1 and Camp #2 “floor slip resistance testing experts.” They are just really evil people, whether they choose to ignore it or not.

Sotter Engineering and Safety Direct America is clearly in Camp #3. We want to help stop the epidemic with reliable science. We can also offer solutions to slippery floors like anti-slip floor coatings and anti-slip floor tapes.

The post Exposing the Main Con Artists in the American Slip and Fall Game appeared first on Safety Direct America.

There are a lot of bad ways to fix a slippery floor. Home Depot, Amazon, Slip Doctors and others have anti-slip floor treatments that will be a temporary solution, and you’ll end up addicted to buying their products again and again to etch tiny pores in your flooring to maintain the slip resistance. That’s why these products recommend you get quarterly slip resistance testing done – this is the way they get their foot in your door to tell you to buy more of their “floor cleaner”, which is actually some some and more of the chemical etch they originally treated your slippery floor with.

SparkleTuff Anti-Slip Floor Coating applies a clear, glossy, gritty, very durable anti-slip coating to your floor. It looks beautiful, will definitely stop slips from happening, and will last for years and years without having to buy the product again and again. One coat and you’ll be good for many, many years – even in high foot traffic areas and areas with forklifts and other heavy machinery.

Don’t settle for water-based anti-slip coatings – they don’t last. SparkleTuff is a polysiloxane, which means it’s incredibly durable, has UV, scratch and stain resistance, and excellent slip resistance, too!

Looks great! Stops Slips! Try SparkleTuff Anti-Slip Floor Coating today to fix your slippery epoxy floor, slippery tub, slippery polished concrete, slippery tile, and any slippery surface you can imagine. It sticks to absolutely anything! Get more information and order some today at https://safetydirectamerica.com/diyabrasivefloorcoatings/

The post SparkleTuff Anti-Slip Floor Coating vs. temporary anti-slip floor treatments and water-based coatings appeared first on Safety Direct America.

SparkleTuff Anti-Slip Floor Coating was created to end the slip and fall injury epidemic we are seeing around the world. This anti-slip floor treatment will stick to anything with no special preparation needed (and that includes epoxy floors of all kinds) and is very slip resistant. It’s incredibly durable, easy to clean, and easy to apply. Now you can make your slippery tub, slippery epoxy garage, slippery bathroom tile or ANY slippery flooring slip resistant for many years to come.

Con artists and sociopaths created bad tests like ASTM D2047 to test the safety of floors (and these tests say all floors on earth are not slippery), but we use the floor dynamic coefficient of friction (DCOF) science that the world outside of the USA has been using for 50 years to help stop slips – the pendulum DCOF tester and ASTM E303. Using real science, I was able to create the longest lasting and most slip resistant product in the world today to make ANY floor slip resistant for years and years.

The post The Innovation Behind SparkleTuff Anti-Slip Floor Coating appeared first on Safety Direct America.

If you’re concerned you have a slippery floor, contact us for a test in our floor coefficient of friction lab or anywhere across America and beyond.

The post Slippery Lies, Gritty Truths: The Fight for Real Floor Safety appeared first on Safety Direct America.

Check out the fun video they made showing how it can turn any slippery floor or tub into a slip resistant floor. More information on our Anti-Slip Floor Coatings page.

The post SparkleTuff™ Anti-Slip Floor Coating put to the test by a third-party slip test lab appeared first on Safety Direct America.

In this very informative blog post, we discuss why the ASTM test method for the English XL, ASTM F1679, was withdrawn by the ASTM and rejected by OSHA in 2006. The ASTM gave the users of this fake test device ten years to provide a “reasonable precision statement”, and ten years wasn’t enough. The “provisional ASTM test method ASTM F1679″ was therefore withdrawn in 2006 after ten years of politely asking the champions of this American “liars for hire device” to provide some sort of documentation that it had precision from user to user. They failed. This instrument should therefore not be allowed in courtrooms as science. Why not bring in a clairvoyant who saw the accident in a dream? That would hold the same weight as data from an English XL VIT.

In his book Pedestrian Fall Safety Assessments: Improved Understanding on Slip Resistance Measurements and Investigations, In-Ju Kim  notes that the ASTM website stated in 2006 that F1677 and F1679 were withdrawn (see page 47 of his book) “for failure to include an approved precision statement.” He goes on to state that, “Using these two instruments, different labs showed very different answers on identical tiles amongst interlaboratory studies. These findings suggested that both test methods [for the Brungraber Mark II and English XL] were unreliable and unable to provide ‘reasonable precision statements’ for slip resistance evaluations.”

OSHA was using the fake science of the English XL and Brungraber Mark II to help stop steel workers from falling off steel beams on skyscrapers under construction to their death for several years, and they found it wasn’t working. The English XL was failing at finding suitable solutions for slippery wet steel dozens of stories in the air. The English XL was not stopping the deaths and injuries from occurring. OSHA then decided in 2005 to reject the English XL and Brungraber Mark II (which is the Brungraber Mark IIIB with a new paint job, essentially) as useful science.

“OSHA noted that the two ASTM standard test methods listed in Appendix B (ASTM F1677–96 and ASTM F1679–96) had not yet been validated through statements of precision and bias. (A precision and bias statement is documentation that the test method, in laboratory tests, has been shown to have an acceptable degree of repeatability and reproducibility).” This was after nine years of the “liars for hire” using these unproven and bogus devices trying to put together an “approved precision statement” for either one.

In another study published in 2003, the English XL, which measures the floor essentially in the exact same way as the Brungraber Mark IIIB, was inadequate. “When compared to the other test methods, the VIT tends to underestimate the wet slip resistance of smooth polished, glazed or surface protected tiles, while overestimating the slip resistance of tiles with a textured or profiled surface.” It also stated in the abstract of the publication that, “The pendulum tribometer (used according to AS/NZS 4586,with TRRL rubber, similar to ASTM E-303) provided more reliable results than the English XL Variable Incidence Tribometer (used according to ASTM F-1679).”

In another study discussed in the paper mentioned above, “Powers et al. [18] found that, when the [English XL] VIT was used to test a dry smooth vinyl composition tile, it overestimated the peak coefficient of friction by 30%, when compared to healthy adults walking across the same surface on the same force plate at comparable impact angles.” “They believed that the differences in the measured utilised coefficients of friction were most likely related to the fact that the [English XL] VIT test feet do not have the same vertical and horizontal accelerations of the pedestrian’s lower leg at heel strike.” The Brungraber Mark IIIB, again, is essentially the same instrument as the English XL, and it measures the slip potential of a floor in almost an identical way. From the same paper, “These results confirm earlier findings [24] that the [English XL] VIT results can depend on how the test foot is prepared.”

It has also been noted by this author in person when talking with certified English XL tribometer users that test results can also be influenced by how hard the instrument is pushed onto the floor. This can increase readings, giving favorable readings to a slippery floor for the insurance company trying to weasel out of paying a legitimate injury claim.

The English XL, according to its user instructions, uses static coefficient of friction (SCOF) testing. SCOF testing has been rejected over and over and over again both in the USA and in the international community of experts in this crucial field of study. ASTM C1028-07, ASTM F1677-96 (for the Brungraber Mark II), ASTM F1679-96 (for the English XL), ASTM F489 (for the James Machine), NFSI/ANSI B101.1-2009 (for the BOT-3000E) are all examples of SCOF tests that have either been withdrawn or allowed to expire because they were found to not be reliable in identifying slippery floors. This makes these bogus test devices great for “liars for hire” working for American insurance companies because they almost always find a floor not slippery, but these tests are no good when a building owner or architect wants to know the truth about the slip potential of a floor to help save lives and stop life-altering injuries from happening on their properties. Ask OSHA and the steel industry about that!

ASTM D2047 (and the same test called UL 410) seems to be the last remaining dinosaur in the world today that pretends that using SCOF testing on a clean and dry floor, which is essentially measuring whether a floor is slippery when someone is static (or standing still) on a clean and dry floor is a “safety assessment”. The people supporting ASTM D2047 as a “safety assessment” should be jailed for the deaths they have caused and the amount of people’s lives they have destroyed through this useless “safety” scam nonsense. No-one in the history of the world has ever slipped while standing still on a clean and dry floor. This is clearly a scam created and supported by very bad people. Anyone using data from ASTM D2047 is either incredibly dumb, or a con artist. There is no other explanation for a person calling this a “safety test”.

In a more recent study by Siegmund et al. called “Quantifying the uncertainty in tribometer measurements on walkway surfaces,” the authors state that data from the English XL and Brungraber Slip-Test Mark IIIB are “less accurate than they appear.” This is in part because the user is “a key component to the system,” influencing the numerical outcome of a test. “Every operator gets a different result.” Hired by the defense in a slip and fall lawsuit? These guys magically get the answer needed to say the floor is not slippery. When they’re hired by the plaintiff, they often ask to be left alone to do their testing because they may not be able to manipulate their device in real time to get a “slippery” result, but you can bet they will get that result for your law firm, as long as you’ve paid the large “retainer fee” they always charge American lawyers in slip and fall cases. Users of the English XL and Brungraber Mark IIIB are experts at getting you the answer you need to win your lawsuit, but these people don’t advertise testing services for tile manufacturers and building owners – they focus on where the BIG money is – slip and fall lawsuits!

The video below shows the British Pendulum tester in action using ASTM E303-22:

Want to use real science to determine the slip potential of a floor using 50 years of research in over 50 nations? That’s easy – use the pendulum DCOF tester. In the USA, the test method is ASTM E303-22. In the European Union, it’s EN 16165:2021 and in the United Kingdom it is BS 16165:2021. In Australia and New Zealand, it’s called AS/NZS 4586. Here’s a list of other countries using this science to truly determine a floor’s slip potential, or slip resistance.

The post Published study after study shows the English XL (VIT) is not an adequate scientific floor slip resistance testing device, and the Brungraber Mark IIIB measures the floor in the same inadequate way appeared first on Safety Direct America.

First, we tried installing it in 300 bathtubs at a resort/hotel in Florida. Although the housekeeping staff were told that this gritty anti-slip floor coating was being applied and to not scrub it off the bottom of the tub, it only took a few weeks before each tub had been scrubbed clean of the anti-slip tub coating with abrasive pads and other cleaning techniques. It was just habit for the maids at this beach resort to scrub sand off the bottom of the tubs, and this gritty coating felt just like sand, so their instinct kicked in and they easily were able to scrub the water-based anti-slip floor coating down the drain. After all, it’s just water, some plastic beads to provide some minimal grip, and a couple other ingredients to hold the water-based floor coating to the tub. Not durable at all.

Before we realized what a bad idea water-based anti-slip floor coatings were, we installed it in a very upscale spa in a resort in Laguna Beach, California. They had heavy wooden chairs and chaise lounge chairs on the pool decks of this fancy spa (that had pools, a cold-plunge pool, and hot tubs), and every time a client dragged one of these chairs across the pool deck to get in and out of the sun, or join a friend, the coating scraped right up and off the floor, leaving an ugly mess to be cleaned up by staff right away. This started the coating peeling up EVERYWHERE. We had to grind that water-based anti-slip coating off with a polishing pad only days after spending all night applying it.

We also applied it to our bathtub at home and noticed it didn’t provide much grip. It was better than the super slippery tub, but even after applying several coats, the tub was still pretty slippery. You get what you pay for!

These water-based tub and floor coatings are usually tested with bogus tile-industry-created tests like ANSI A326.3 to say slippery floors aren’t slippery, or ASTM D2047, both of which are not international science-backed safety assessments. For that, you need the pendulum tester, shown below, which has a published test method in over 50 nations and a pendulum test value (PTV) over 36. In the USA, the pendulum DCOF test method is called ASTM E303-22. If someone is trying to sell an anti-slip floor coating without a PTV rating, and saying it’s “above a DCOF 0f 0.42” or “above an SCOF of 0.50” or some other nonsense, their scamming you.

If you’re looking for a slippery and short-lasting anti-slip floor floor or tub coating, then buy some water and some plastic beads in a bottle with a couple other chemicals. But be forewarned, you may need to prep the floor with another chemical for this water-based nonsense to stick to your floor. The project may take SEVERAL trips to the hardware store before you’re done!

But if you’re looking for real anti-slip floor protection that will endure for a decade or two, then there are low VOC and very safe solutions available these days. The technology has come a long way lately and big international companies and government agencies are buying up SparkleTuff Anti-Slip Floor Coating by the gallons and gallons for their ramps, pool decks, tubs, manufacturing facilities, bathrooms, and high-risk flooring areas.

The most popular no-skid floor coating is SparkleTuff Anti-Slip Floor Coating, available exclusively through Safety Direct America. It’s safe to apply, very slip resistant, and very durable. It’s not some water and some plastic beads. Don’t get conned by slick adds and fake awards for water-based anti-slip floor products – you’ll just end up applying them again and again week after week until your bottle is gone, then you’ll eventually learn what we learned: you get what you pay for! Don’t pay for water and plastic beads when your safety is on the line!

If you’re looking to save yourself from a life-changing slip and fall injury, don’t pay for a cheap water-based non-skid floor coating. It could cost you a serious injury, or in the case of slippery tubs and pool decks, it may cost you your life!

The post Water-Based Anti-Slip Floor Coatings – a bad idea appeared first on Safety Direct America.