Rimkus Consulting Group, Inc. evaluates marble tile treated with Sure Step Nonslip.
Dear Mr. Williams:
Rimkus Consulting Group, Inc. was retained to evaluate and compare the treated and untreated surfaces of a marble tile. The surface was treated with Sure Step Nonslip Safety Floor and Tub Treatment. This report was reviewed by Dirk E. Smith, Ph.D., P.E., Senior Vice President.
In the course of our work, the treated and untreated marble surfaces were evaluated and images collected using a Keyence VK-X1000 3D Laser Scanning Confocal Microscope, a Keyence VHX-6000, and a Keyence VHX-5000 Digital Microscope.
- Visually, the treated surface could not be discerned from the untreated surface. To the naked eye, the coloration and gloss did not appear to be altered.
- At magnification, the texture of the treated surface became visible, with the treated surface exhibiting a rougher texture. Generally, a rough surface will provide better
traction than a smooth surface, so the roughened texture of the treated surface should improve slip resistance over an untreated surface.
- The roughness of the treated surface was on the order of 200 to 300 percent (%) greater than the untreated surface, depending on the measurement used.
- The texture was obtained by accentuating the height differential between the softer and harder components within the matrix. Although the texture and surface roughness have been improved, this surface modification is inconsequential relative to the overall thickness of the flooring material.
A marble tile, similar to that used in commercial flooring applications, was used to evaluate the Sure Step Anti-Slip Safety Floor and Tub Treatment. Half the tile was treated with the product, while the other half of the tile was left untreated (Photograph 1). To the naked eye, the treated side could not be identified, as the gloss and coloration did not appear to be affected.
The surfaces were examined at low and high magnification using a Keyence VHX-5000 and a Keyence VHX-6000. The transition from the treated to untreated surface could be seen at 35X magnification (Photograph 2) as a textural change. At 200X magnification, the surface texture of the treated surface was visibly different than the
untreated surface, as shown using oblique lighting (Photograph 3). However, under full light, the inclusions (rust-colored clusters) were slightly muted on the treated surface, but the brightness and reflectance did not appear to change. At higher magnification, the textural differences between the untreated and treated surfaces became markedly more pronounced with the treated surface showing much greater texture (Photograph 4).
The surfaces were evaluated using a 3D laser scanning confocal microscope to measure and quantify the differences in roughness (Photographs 5 and 6). There was a marked difference between the surface topography of the two surfaces. Various roughness parameters were evaluated to illustrate the differences between the treated and untreated surfaces (Photographs 7 and 8). The data revealed that the treated surface had more variation in surface topography, which should improve traction.
Photographs taken during our work were retained in our files and are available to you upon request.
This report was prepared for the exclusive use of Safestep Floors, Inc. and was not intended for any other purpose. Our report was based on the information available to us at this time. Should additional information become available, we reserve the right to determine the impact, if any, the new information may have on our opinions and conclusions and to revise our opinions and conclusions if necessary and warranted.
SEE ATTACHED DOCUMENTATIONRIMKUSTest