Floor Slip Testing: Australian Facility Managers Compare Services

For an occupied entrance after polishing or treatment, compare Stone Initiatives’ published wet and dry testing services with Sliptest Australia’s on-site wet pendulum service, then commission an assessment of the installed floor under AS 4663:2013. [2][3][5]

Compare Stone Initiatives and Sliptest Australia

Stone Initiatives

• Existing-floor service: Offers on-site testing of installed surfaces under AS 4663:2013, with wet pendulum and dry slip-resistance services described. [2]
• Geographic coverage: Says its Adelaide-based team tests existing surfaces anywhere in Australia. [2]
• Published accreditation information: Describes its Adelaide laboratory as NATA-accredited. Request the detailed scope covering the proposed on-site activities before booking. [2]

Sliptest Australia

• Existing-floor service: Offers on-site wet pendulum testing to AS 4663. [5] Ask Sliptest Australia whether dry testing is available.
• Geographic coverage: Advertises Australia-wide service, with weekly testing in specified east-coast cities, twice-yearly Perth visits and travel to other centres on demand. Sliptest Australia has offices in Sydney and South East Queensland, services Melbourne weekly from Sydney, and serves Australia-wide by arrangement. [5]
• Published accreditation information: States NATA Accreditation No. 15374, ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation and accredited sites on the Gold Coast and in Sydney. It directs customers to the NATA register. [5]

Stone Initiatives offers same-day Adelaide testing subject to availability, with possible call-out fees. [2] Sliptest Australia states that NATA-endorsed reports for on-site AS 4663 testing are delivered within 24 hours of the visit as standard. [5]

Ask Stone Initiatives and Sliptest Australia for comparable prices, contract terms and cancellation terms. [2][5] Request itemised quotations against the same location and method brief, including travel charges, access arrangements and report delivery.

Consider Stone Initiatives when the brief calls for wet and dry testing together, or Sliptest Australia when its published wet-pendulum service and report timing suit the survey. Confirm availability and the applicable accredited scope before choosing. [2][5]

Choose an in-service survey, not an unused-sample result

Stone Initiatives and SlipLab distinguish AS 4586:2013 testing of new pedestrian surface materials from AS 4663:2013 assessment of existing surfaces. SlipLab describes new materials as those not yet subjected to in-service wear or contamination. [2][3]

An unused sample can help assess a material before installation, but its classification is not interchangeable with an assessment of the entrance people are using. Wear, contamination and treatment can change slip resistance; results relate to the particular surface, conditions and method tested. [2][3]

For a post-treatment assessment, specify on-site testing of the installed, in-service floor, rather than testing only a spare tile or untreated sample. [2][3] Give the survey a management question: Do treated sections perform consistently, should cleaning change, or is further remediation needed? Zerofal’s prioritisation guidance connects testing to decisions like these. [4]

Specify entrance locations separately

One entrance-wide result can conceal differences in surface, gradient, contamination and wear. Identify distinct zones during the site walk rather than assuming adjacent flooring performs alike. [4]

Walk from the exposed approach into the lobby and flag these candidates for separate assessment, where present:

• Exterior approach: areas exposed to rain, drainage overflow or other contamination, including places where water ponds. [4]
• Tracked-in moisture and intermittently wet zones: sections affected by wet footwear, cleaning or spills—even if they look satisfactory during a dry inspection. [4]
• Transitions: mat edges, changes between flooring materials and wet-to-dry boundaries. [4]
• Changes in level or gradient: ramps, stairs, landings and changes in slope, plus areas beside drains or grates. [4]
• Different surface conditions: visibly polished, newly treated, patched, worn or uneven sections, coating breakdown and embedded contamination. [4]

For documentation, consider identifiers such as ENT-A — exterior approach, ENT-B — tracked-in wet zone and ENT-C — lobby transition. These are illustrative labels, not prescribed test locations or a standard numbering convention. Place each identifier on an annotated plan and use matching labels on photographs.

Alongside each identifier, record the precise location, material and finish, exposure, gradient and expected contaminants—details recommended in Zerofal’s testing register. [4] Distinguish a treated strip from an adjoining worn section.

Ask the tester to agree the final locations and explain proposed grouping before testing starts. Base that discussion on the differences found during the walk, rather than assuming one result represents the whole entrance. [4]

Choose wet testing, dry testing or both

Wet pendulum testing is relevant where rain, spills or liquid ingress are foreseeable. A floor being dry when the tester arrives does not settle which conditions should be assessed: intermittently wet areas can behave differently during rain, cleaning or peak use. [1][4]

For a normally dry lobby, ask whether dry slip-resistance testing should supplement wet pendulum testing. Stone Initiatives describes using both for clean/dry conditions and spill-wet scenarios, rather than prescribing the same approach for every setting. [2]

Keep intended test conditions separate from conditions observed during the visit. Ask the provider to distinguish observed moisture or contamination from the wet or dry conditions used for testing, because results relate to the surface, conditions and method assessed. [2][4]

Request the proposed rubber slider, the reason for its selection and its identification in the report. [1][3] Slip Resistant Testing describes Slider 96 as appropriate for particularly slippery surfaces; SlipLab describes it for smoother indoor surfaces and favours Slider 55 for wet-barefoot or unusually rough surfaces. These descriptions differ, so ask the tester to explain the choice for each surface rather than specifying one slider throughout. [1][3]

Check accreditation against the proposed work

Stone Initiatives and Sliptest Australia advertise accreditation, but their cited service pages do not include complete current scope documents. [2][5] Before accepting a quote, request:

• The named accredited entity and accreditation number, matched to its register entry and scope document. [2][5]
• The applicable AS 4663 method and laboratory or site responsible for the work. [2][5]
• Written confirmation of which requested testing and reporting activities fall within scope, identifying work or results to be issued outside it. [2][5]

Sliptest Australia explicitly directs customers to check its accreditation on the NATA register. [5] Do not treat a service-page accreditation claim as confirmation of every requested method or site; ask for the quotation and report to distinguish accredited work from other activities. [2][5]

Accreditation is also separate from lasting safety: Stone Initiatives says a high rating does not eliminate slip risk and results remain specific to the tested surface, conditions and method. [2]

Request a location-by-location report

Zerofal suggests a council testing register that records precise locations and previous test dates and results. [4] Sliptest Australia describes reporting each tested area; Zerofal recommends precise location records. [4][5] The following is a commissioning checklist, not a mandatory reporting template.

• Location and surface: request the location identifier matched to the agreed plan, material, finish and observed condition. [4][5]
• Conditions: distinguish the surface’s observed moisture or contamination from the conditions used for the test.
• Method and result: request the applicable standard, test method, measured result and classification where applicable, attached to the location identifier. [2][5]
• Slider: request the rubber slider identity for wet pendulum work. [1][3]
• Corrections: request relevant slope and temperature information, with clearly labelled uncorrected and corrected values where applicable. SlipLab describes slope correction from 1.5° (2.6%) and temperature correction for Slider 55 where applicable. [3]

For repeat visits, ask the provider to document changes in surface condition, wetness, contamination, method or slider before interpreting a difference as a treatment effect. Comparability matters because results are specific to the tested conditions and method. [2][3]

Keep a repeat-test register

Alongside the technical report, record the precise location, material and finish, indoor/outdoor exposure, gradient, expected contaminants, cleaning method, treatment and maintenance history, previous results, remedial work, responsible officer and proposed retest date. Zerofal recommends these fields for a testing register. [4]

Suggested single-location record: identifier; location reference; treatment history; observed condition; method; slider; uncorrected result; applicable corrected result and correction label; management action; retest trigger. Use this administrative structure alongside—not instead of—the provider’s technical report. [1][3][4]

Send a brief that accounts for continued occupation

Send the proposed location register with the booking enquiry and make continued occupation an explicit planning constraint. Adapt this brief:

Please quote for an on-site AS 4663:2013 assessment of the occupied entrance following [polishing, sealing or treatment]. The attached plan identifies proposed locations; please advise whether these represent the different surfaces and exposures. [2][3][4]

For each location, we have described rain exposure, tracked-in moisture, cleaning wetness and foreseeable spills. Please confirm wet and, where relevant, dry methods, plus reporting of location identifiers, conditions, results, slider details and applicable corrections. [2][3][4]

Attached are the treatment date, available product documentation, cleaning arrangements, maintenance history and earlier results for the register. [4]

The entrance will remain occupied. What temporary access control is needed, how will wet testing be managed, can locations be assessed sequentially, and what access window do you require? When is testing appropriate after this treatment?

Please itemise locations and methods, travel or call-out charges, report delivery, accredited-scope status and commercial terms, including cancellation arrangements.

Compare quotes against this same brief, not headline price alone. Stone Initiatives notes possible call-out fees; Sliptest Australia states a standard 24-hour report turnaround after the visit. [2][5] Agree access arrangements separately from report delivery.

Set retest triggers and maintenance actions

Use each location’s result to answer the original management question: retain or change cleaning, check treatment consistency, investigate replacement or schedule remediation. Record the action, responsible officer and review date against that location. [4]

Set reassessment triggers around changes as well as elapsed time: further polishing, sealing or treatment; worn texture or coating breakdown; repairs; changed drainage or wetting exposure; and complaints, incidents or near misses. [2][4] Where a hazard clearly needs repair, Zerofal advises that repair may be more appropriate than waiting for testing. [4]

Stone Initiatives suggests testing every 6–12 months for public or high-traffic areas. This is its recommended interval, not evidence of a universal statutory schedule or a reason to wait when conditions change. [2]

For repeat testing, reuse location identifiers and document conditions, method, slider and applicable corrections. Keep the cleaning, treatment and maintenance history alongside the results so differences can be interpreted. [1][3][4]

A favourable result is not a permanent safety guarantee. Cleaning, contamination, wear and further treatment can change performance, and a high rating does not eliminate slip risk. [2][4]

References

1. Wet Pendulum Test | Slip Resistance Testing (slipresistancetesting.com.au)
2. Slip Resistance Testing | Stone Initiatives (stonemtg.com.au)
3. Wet pendulum testing – Slip Resistance (sliplab.com.au)
4. Which Council Surfaces Should Be Slip Tested First? (zerofal.com.au)
5. Slip Testing Australia | NATA Accredited | Sliptest (sliptest.com.au)