Determining the Best Flooring Maintenance Program for your Facility

Background

Flooring maintenance is a significant economic factor in the life of a flooring product and is given more consideration in life cycle cost assessments. The requirements and costs for maintaining commercial resilient floor coverings can be confusing and misunderstood. On seemingly identical products, one manufacturer recommends using polish to maintain the floor while another states that polish is not required and makes claims of “low maintenance” and reduced life cycle costs.

Most often the feature that imparts these “low maintenance”, “no polish” characteristics to the floor covering is a factory-applied polyurethane (PU) finish. In recent years, there has been an increase in the number of urethane-coated commercial flooring products promoting “no polish” features. Armstrong and other manufacturers have introduced PU coated products in response to the growing demand for floor coverings that are easier and less costly to maintain. Installing a urethane-coated product, however, will not automatically translate to maintenance cost savings. Additionally, a “low maintenance” floor covering does not mean “no maintenance”. Many factors, in addition to the floor covering features, influence the maintenance system, frequency and costs. These factors include grit control, environmental conditions, traffic levels, type and amount of soil, the flooring pattern and color, resource availability and the end users expectations and desired level of appearance.

In order to effectively lower maintenance costs, Armstrong recommends an assessment of these factors within the different spaces of a building environment and to determine for each space the most suitable maintenance methods. To help develop the best maintenance program for a facility and to clarify some of the maintenance misperceptions in the industry, this technical bulletin outlines the following:

I. What are the differences between a “no polish” and “polish” recommendation?
II. How do urethane-coated products influence maintenance recommendations?
III. Why are there differences across maintenance recommendations for similar products?
IV. What are the influencing factors that determine the best, cost-effective maintenance program?

I. What are the differences between a “no polish” and “polish” maintenance methods?

The four stages of the maintenance life cycle for resilient flooring include: initial, daily/regular, periodic and restorative. The following chart compares general maintenance guidelines for a flooring product with and without polish. The chart indicates that maintaining with no polish does not mean “no maintenance”. A large percentage of maintenance costs are derived from the Daily/Regular and the Periodic procedures where the requirements are very similar between maintaining with and without polish. The benefits of using polish include added protection, appearance retention, extended service life and can save replacement costs (see attached photographs, Appendix A). (Open attached file at bottom of document for photos).

Maintenance Life Cycle Stage	Maintaining with Polish	Maintaining without Polish
Initial	Sweep, vacuum or dust mop Scrub Rinse Apply floor finish	Sweep, vacuum or dust mop Scrub Rinse
Daily/Regular	Sweep, vacuum or dust mop Wet mopping (Spot, damp or wet)	Sweep vacuum or dust mop Wet mopping (Spot, damp or wet)
Periodic*	Scrub/rinse Re-coat, spray buffing and/or burnishing	Scrub/rinse Spray buffing or burnishing
Restorative**	Strip Refinish (Polish)	Not needed

II. How do urethane-coated products influence maintenance recommendations?

Urethane-coated products do provide maintenance benefits including higher resistance to gloss loss, scuffing and soil pick-up than uncoated products or other types of factory-applied finishes. 

III. Why are there differences across maintenance recommendations for similar products?

The difference or confusion relates to how floor covering manufactures choose to promote or how they position their “no polish” recommendation within their published maintenance instructions or other literature. A more predominant “no polish” recommendation may mislead a building owner to think that the product has better maintenance characteristics compared to other similar products with a less predominant recommendation. It is important to thoroughly read these instructions and the manufacturer’s warranty, particularly when a product is touted as not requiring polish. Qualifiers will often be found within the instructions such as polish should be used if a higher gloss is desired, if staining potential is high or if heavy and/or abrasive traffic is expected. Additionally, commercial warranties can be predicated on meeting certain maintenance requirements. Maintenance instructions are to be used as guidelines because other factors specific to each building environment will ultimately determine the best and most cost-effective maintenance program.

IV. What are the influencing factors that determine the best, cost-effective maintenance program?

In addition to selecting floor covering products with enhanced maintenance characteristics, other variables play a significant part in maintenance. Understanding these variables is important as they can affect the maintenance methods used, their frequency and therefore the cost of maintenance. An effective way to lower maintenance costs is to assess the different spaces/locations within the building with respect to these variables and determine for each space, the maintenance methods and required frequencies. This will provide a clear picture as to where the most effort should be applied. Regular reassessments should be conducted to ensure the maintenance program is producing the desired result. If needed respond accordingly by increasing efforts in areas that require more attention and backing off in areas that may be over-maintained.

Factor	Explanation	Examples of Recommended Methods
Grit Control	An effective, well planned and properly maintained entrance matting system is critical. The vast majority of dirt and grit brought into a building comes in through the main entrance on people’s shoes. Preventing dirt and grit from entering the building can reduce maintenance costs and is a proven, cost-effective and key element in a successful flooring maintenance program. It can also be one of the easiest ways to reduce maintenance costs.	Lobbies and entranceways are best maintained with polish. If an effective grit control system is in place, polish may not be required.
Outdoor environment	Geographic location and climate can play a role in the development of a maintenance program. The presence of sandy soils in coastal regions or the long winter seasons in the northern latitudes can have a significant affect on maintenance procedures and frequencies and therefore, maintenance costs.	The entranceways, first floor corridors and main office of a school in a seaside community should be maintained with polish to protect it from the extremely abrasive nature of the sand that will be traced onto the surface.
Location/traffic level	Where within the building is the floor covering located? Entryways, lobbies and reception areas will require more protection and more intensive, frequent cleaning than lower traffic areas or upper levels. Traffic types and density (foot traffic count) can vary greatly from location to location within a building. The same can be said for the type of footwear most common for a specific end-use application.	High traffic areas such as lobbies, main corridors, and multi-purpose rooms should be maintained with polish. Pivot points such as checkout lines, stair landings, elevators, queue lines and waiting areas should be maintained with polish. Retail stores located on levels above the street entrance are areas where polish may not be required.
Type of soiling	The type and amount of soil, grit, contamination, staining agents and chemicals likely to be found at the location.	Laboratories where harsh chemicals spills may occur and hospital lab and examination rooms where staining agents may be used should be maintained with polish. Unpolished flooring will be more susceptible to permanent staining.
End-users visual expectations	The expectations of end-users with respect to acceptable levels of appearance can vary greatly and play an important part in determining a maintenance regime.	If an owner prefers a high gloss (shine), using polish may be the only option.
Pattern/Color/Texture	These features in the flooring can play a role in the apparent visual. Generally, mid-range colorations and busier, higher contrast patterns possess more hiding power than light or dark patterns and solid colors.	Solid color and the more saturated, monolithic patterns benefit from the use of polish. Higher contrasts patterns may allow for a no polish system.
Available resources: Staff – Number & Skill Level Equipment/Chemicals Budget	Manpower, maintenance budgets and available equipment are key considerations in determining how flooring will be maintained.	A no polish method may be used if the facility has a well-staffed maintenance crew with a focus on daily and regular maintenance of the floor.

Appendix A

The attached photographs show one of the differences between maintaining with and without floor polish.  The photographs were taken from an 8-week maintenance evaluation of a homogeneous sheet vinyl installed in a high traffic environment.  The polished and unpolished test samples were installed in the same area and were exposed to approximately 12,000-15,000 traffic counts between cleanings.  The sample panels were cleaned and evaluated weekly for the 8-week duration. The photographs on the right were taken at the conclusion of the study before the final cleaning.

Unpolished Samples

Polished Samples