Follow an approved accessible-route layout and identify each tactile pattern clearly. These guides cover directional and warning surfaces, samples, attachment, documentation and maintenance without claiming that a catalogue category proves universal compliance.
Browse 2 productsDirectional and warning tactile surfaces have different wayfinding roles. Similar materials or dimensions do not make their patterns interchangeable.
Read guide: Directional and warning tactile surfaces: different rolesA tactile route needs continuity and a clear relationship to destinations and decision points. Choosing a tactile product is only one step in that layout.
Read guide: Planning tactile routes across doors and decision pointsChoose tactile surface materials for the supporting floor and expected exposure. A material label alone does not prove that the installed product meets the project's accessibility requirements.
Read guide: Tactile surface materials: exposure and fixing checksReview tactile surface contrast against the actual adjoining finish and lighting. A product colour viewed on a screen cannot establish the contrast of an installed route.
Read guide: Tactile surface contrast: assess it against the actual floorTactile retrofit work begins with the existing substrate and the approved route layout. Attachment must suit the floor without creating unresolved edges or damage to concealed layers.
Read guide: Retrofitting tactile surfaces onto existing floorsWhen slip performance is specified, request the test method and conditions for the actual tactile surface. A generic anti-slip description is not a numerical result.
Read guide: Tactile surfaces and slip data: ask for the test conditionsInspect tactile installation against the approved plan, not just the product delivery label. The right component can still be installed in the wrong orientation or location.
Read guide: Tactile installation inspection: pattern, orientation and attachmentTactile surface maintenance should preserve the approved route and pattern. A replacement that looks similar may change the intended guidance if its shape or location differs.
Read guide: Maintaining tactile surfaces without losing route continuityKeep product documentation separate from the approval of the complete accessible route. A catalogue entry cannot establish compliance with every national or project requirement.
Read guide: Tactile compliance documents: product data versus route approvalA tactile surface enquiry should identify pattern, location, substrate and attachment. One total quantity without the approved layout leaves the wayfinding arrangement unclear.
Read guide: Tactile surface RFQ: a route-based product scheduleA tactile-route review at a doorway should consider the moving leaf, threshold and the approved accessible route together. The pattern and appearance of a tactile product do not determine where it should be placed at every door.
Read guide: Coordinating Tactile Routes with Door MovementA tactile proposal at a stair landing needs a location-specific design review. Product geometry should be kept separate from the decision about where a warning or directional surface belongs.
Read guide: Reviewing Tactile Proposals at Stair LandingsTactile-route coordination in a lift lobby should connect the intended route with the actual lift controls and circulation. A symmetric lobby photograph is not enough to decide which pattern should lead to which destination.
Read guide: Coordinating Tactile Routes in Lift LobbiesA glare review should assess a tactile sample beside the actual floor under relevant lighting. It is an appearance and usability coordination exercise, not a substitute for any required contrast measurement or accessibility assessment.
Read guide: Reviewing Tactile Samples Under Glare and ReflectionTactile finish control should link the approved sample to delivered batches and installed zones. Consistent appearance should not come at the expense of substituting a different pattern or component geometry.
Read guide: Keeping Tactile Finishes Consistent Across Site PhasesTemporary construction and operational obstructions should be reviewed against the approved accessible-route plan. A tactile surface left visible on the floor does not prove that the route remains usable while works are in progress.
Read guide: Checking Temporary Obstructions Along Tactile RoutesAn adhesive test panel should demonstrate the proposed tactile component and floor combination. It should not be treated as permission to bond every tactile product to every existing surface.
Read guide: Approving Tactile Adhesive Test PanelsA tactile-route handover map should identify the installed functions and locations in a form the operator can maintain. An unmarked product brochure does not show where route continuity needs to be preserved.
Read guide: Creating a Tactile Route Handover MapTactile replacement records should preserve both component identity and route purpose. Replacing a worn piece with a similar-looking raised element can change the intended information if the function or layout is not checked.
Read guide: Recording Tactile Component ReplacementsA supervised tactile mockup review should have a clear scope and qualified oversight. It can gather useful project observations, but it should not be presented as evidence of user testing that never took place or as a substitute for required design assessment.
Read guide: Planning a Supervised Review of Tactile Mockups
