Has your tanking failed!

When making the choice to waterproof a new build or refurbishment property, many options are available to the designer and the end client. When proposing the appropriate solution the designer must assess a variety of factors to gain the degree of water tightness required.

What is the space being used for? End use could be a car park, plant room, living space or archive storage - all these require different degrees of waterproofing!

Although many differing systems are available, one firm fact remains: unless the waterproofing is designed and installed by a professional, you run the risk of failure of the waterproofing and water may enter the fabric of the building with disastrous consequences.

Reasons for waterproofing failure include:

• Cheap inappropriate options used at the last minute to get inside an unrealistic budget.
• The product choice is incompatible with the fabric of the structure.
• Poor quality workmanship.
• A blasé attitude to waterproofing by the designer.

Landmark judgement 'Outwing Vs Thomas Wetherald' has established that it is not reasonable to expect 100% defect free workmanship of the installation of the waterproofing membrane, and so by specifying a system that relies on it to be 100% to be effective, the designer is open to criticism and potential litigation if the system were to fail.

During construction, waterproofing is one of the only things that cannot be tested to see if it will work. This is because it is virtually impossible to replicate the ¾ head of water that the system must be able to cope with, as a test after the installation. Many systems will be untested for years with designers satisfied that this system has worked when in truth it has just not been tested. In our experience, a pressure resistant membrane tested fully to the requirements of BS8102 will fail in the majority of cases. The 'Outwing' case finds that if you are to use this method of waterproofing, the external ground water must be managed so that the membrane is not in contact with ground water. The removal of water basically downgrades the system to a simple DPM.

Newton System 500 has been used to waterproof failed 'tanking' systems on thousands of projects over the years. Therefore it seems obvious that the system be used as the primary waterproofing during the build, rather than it be added retrospectively after the original attempt had failed. Only recently has this point been accepted by designers, and increasingly Newton System 500 is used on more and more new-build projects. Our RIBA approved CPD seminar is designed to show designers how our systems can be the most viable option for the new build project. If you require a CPD seminar, please click here for more information.

We are very confident in our systems and their ability to be the primary waterproofing system for your project. However, our superior systems are only part of the equation. If installed poorly by those of little or no experience, even the best products will under perform, and so we at John Newton strongly recommend that our waterproofing system be installed by one of our Newton Specialist Basement Contractors (NSBC).

‘The waterproofing should be installed once only – coming back is not an option’

We partner with our contractors to ensure they are of the highest possible quality, and we restrict membership to those that meet our strict criteria. The waterproofing should be installed once only – coming back is not an option, and so it is vitally important that an expert ultimately designs and installs our waterproofing systems. Further information on our NSBC scheme can be found here.

It could be argued that the waterproofing is the most important aspect of the project. You get this wrong and the whole project is blighted, and repairs and remedial action can be very expensive and disruptive to the client. Visit our case studies to see details.