<br>冬季鞋类的评估：测定鞋类冰面防滑性能的测试方法比较,International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

当前位置： X-MOL 学术 › Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health › 论文详情

Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)

冬季鞋类的评估：测定鞋类冰面防滑性能的测试方法比较
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health Pub Date : 2021-01-06 , DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18020405
Atena Roshan Fekr _{1,

2} , Yue Li ₁ , Chantal Gauvin ₃ , Gordon Wong ₁ , Wayne Cheng ₁ , Geoff Fernie _{1,

2} , Tilak Dutta _{1,

2}

Affiliation

使用防滑的冬季鞋对于防止在冰雪上滑倒和跌倒至关重要。本文的主要目的是评估一种机械测试方法，以确定鞋类在湿冰和干冰表面的防滑性，并将其与 KITE（知识、创新、人才、无处不在）研究人员引入的以人为本的测试方法进行比较 -多伦多康复研究所-大学健康网络。本研究的第一阶段通过使用两台 SATRA 防滑测试仪（STM 603，SATRA 技术中心，凯特林，英国）评估十种不同的职业冬季靴子，评估了机械方法的可重复性和再现性。一名测试人员位于多伦多，另一名测试人员位于蒙特利尔。这些靴子是根据 IRSST（加拿大魁北克省蒙特利尔市 Robert-Sauvé en Santé et en Sécurité du Travail 研究所）的需求而选择的，该机构主要致力于为警察、消防员和市政工作人员提供安全的冬季鞋类。在第二阶段，将以人为本的测试方法的结果与机械结果进行了比较。在第三阶段中，使用第二种以人为中心的方法对其中两款与前一阶段的结果相互矛盾的靴子进行了测试。在第一阶段，两个实验室获得的力学测试结果显示出较高的线性相关性（>0.94），并且在两个冰面上都具有良好的一致性；然而，他们发现两个实验室在干冰条件上存在偏差（~0.06）。研究发现，与干冰条件 (R = 0.34) 相比，湿冰条件 (R = 0.95) 中的机械和以人为中心的测试（第 2 阶段）相关性更好。最后，根据第 3 阶段计数的滑倒次数对鞋类防滑性的评级与以人为中心的测试方法（第 2 阶段）的评级一致，但与机械方法（第 1 阶段）的评级不一致。这项研究的结果使人们更好地了解 SATRA 冰盘测量鞋类防滑性能的局限性，并表明必须进一步完善机械方法，使其与以人为中心的方法更具可比性，从而与实际情况更好地吻合。世界表现。

"点击查看英文标题和摘要"

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

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.

更新日期：2021-01-06

点击分享查看原文

点击收藏

公开下载

阅读更多本刊新发论文本刊介绍/投稿指南