A Guide to Structural Waterproofing Compliance

BRENDAN: Well, welcome aboard, everybody, and thank you for joining us today for our online event, “A Guide to Structural Waterproofing Compliance”. We’re glad to have you with us. Just to run through a couple of housekeeping items before we jump into it.

Today, our speakers are Hayden Prestidge from MARKHAM, usually based in New Zealand, who is joining us today from the Sydney office. Then there’s Clive Tuffin, who’s joining us from the United Kingdom. He’s from Premcrete Limited. And David Previte, who’s joining us from Australia, of Waterproofing Integrity. The speakers will give us a couple of lines about themselves as they join the conversation, and we’ll share information about each of the companies at the end of the presentation.

Just to run very quickly through the main points of the agenda. We’ve got an opening overview. Clive Tuffin will give us Deeper Understanding on British Standard 8102:2022 – sub-grade waterproofing. David Previte will give us the connection between BS8102 and Australian NCC 2025. We’ll talk about the importance of early engagement and the pathway to compliance. We’ll have a little bit of background about each of the companies represented today, and a live question-and-answer forum in which you are very welcome to take part. You can submit your questions at any time using the Q&A button at the bottom of the window.

Without further ado, we’d like to lead into this. Hayden, if you could take us away, please.

HAYDEN: Brilliant. Thanks, Brendan. And welcome. Good morning. Good evening. We’ve got a bunch of, people joining from all over, actually. So it’s great to have you all on board. It’s definitely proof it’s a topic of interest. Waterproofing in general as we know has been a hard thing to get right. I should say that we can get it right, so that makes it a topic. But it’s a very expensive thing when it goes wrong, as we also know. So it’s awesome to have this interest on here and, even looking to be, you know, upskilled further and developed. So thanks for joining.

So yes, as Brendan said, I’m Hayden Prestidge, work with MARKHAM. I came out of the construction industry, I used to swing a hammer. I’ve been with MARKHAM for nine years and work with the Australia and New Zealand sales and marketing team. So that’s me in a nutshell.

And why we’ve pulled this together is, we’re really focusing in on sub-grade waterproofing. We know it’s a big topic. It’s a topic that needs to be discussed, and we need each other’s help to get it right. So hence this platform to try and bring that together. I guess, as we know, Australia and New Zealand do not have a standard or code as such for sub-grade waterproofing, which is always amusing, because it’s such an area of risk, as we know. But what that’s led to is the adoption of the British Standard BS8012, as a guide to get things right in sub-grade waterproofing. So during this presentation, we’re just focusing in on basements and sub-grade. Obviously there’s many other aspects of waterproofing as we go. And then, you know, there’s the British Standard, but then how does that… what’s the connection between the Australian and New Zealand codes; and the National Construction Code in Australia?

So, it’s more just bringing this together. So just moving forward – I’d like to introduce Clive. So MARKHAM has partnered with Premcrete in the UK. They’ve been doing basement waterproofing, manufacturing and installing of systems for a long period of time, predominantly based in the London market. So, Clive, I was hoping you can dive into the British Standard and help us understand more from your experience.

CLIVE: Very good. Thanks, Hayden. I trust everyone’s hearing me OK. Glad to be on this webinar with you. So just a brief piece of background. I guess Hayden’s right. He mentioned we’ve been in the the basement waterproofing markets for many years. Indeed, I guess, the UK, predominantly London, has had a significant growth in the basement market over the past 10 to 15 years. Which, like many of the other significant global manufacturers, we’ve played a really key part in a significant percentage of the schemes across London, but indeed throughout the UK. So, yes, glad to be on board today. It’s going to be a relatively, brief snapshot overview in terms of the key principles of BS8102 and hopefully give some sort of core background to the design principles. So if we could go onto the next slide.

So I thought we’d just kick off, the background to BS8102, the latest edition of 2022. There were some significant updates, since the previous 2009 edition. Now the significant… So the updates have been very much geared towards those of us in the market who are designers. Now, one of the key elements is it’s really clarified the scope, and the responsibilities of working designers.

But it’s also pointed up and highlighted the importance of early stage involvement, with specialist designers. So I’m well aware, having been to the the recent event in Sydney, which David hosted and arranged; but there’s a lot of discussion around the new NCC standards, and it was interesting to network with many others in the Australia market.

And I see there’s some great opportunity for development throughout the industry, learning together through earlier collaboration, with all different stakeholders. So this is very much what’s been pointed up in BS8102. So it specifically mentions about the appointment of a waterproofing specialist at what’s called an early RIBA stage. Now I know this isn’t entirely appropriate to the Australian stage of design, but essentially it’s preliminary stages of establishing a structural design, architectural design of a project.

Also on the 2022 edition, BS8102, significantly highlighting the need to design, with the consequences of defects in mind. And we’ll go into that in a bit more detail shortly. So there’s been a lot of focus around the considerations of what the internal construction will be. The final usage of the environments within inside the basement, and therefore what impact that might have on the possibilities or maybe the challenges of actual remediation, at a later date, should there be issues.

So it’s really important that we’re designing with the end in mind, and considering, should an issue arise, how will that be resolved? There’s also key considerations around follow-on trades, making sure that we are mitigating damages, being prepared for what might follow on, by, let’s say, the internal fit-out, how that might interact with key waterproofing devices.

There’s also been some clarity around podium decks, which is obviously the ultimate sealing up of a basement; the basement lid, if you like; so the slab at ground level over the top of your basement. We used to design, and have products that are certified for zero-fall applications. 2022 updates we’re going to have now highlights the importance of 1-to-80 falls, which I know is also being, discussed in relation to the NCC updates coming through as well.

Movement joints. I guess none of us in the waterproofing trade are great fans of movement joints, but they can unfortunately cause the challenges we don’t want to be seeing; mainly due to the fact it can be very challenging to detail right and well on site. So the guide BS8102 highlights the need to only use these in an instance where they’re absolutely unavoidable from a structural design perspective.

There’s also a key definition, which has been clarified in the 2022 updates in terms of dampness. And so we’ll go into the grades of environment in a moment. But dampness in accordance with BS8102 is no longer an area that is physically wet, but it’s more specifically an area that is slightly wet resulting from the internal environment.

In other words, this is not dampness passing through the structure. So as far as BS8102 is concerned, dampness is is a a state that can be created within a basement, but it’s only as a result of the internal environment, i.e. a lack of ventilation. So it’s been a really key term because historically we design many basements to allow what we call dampness, as penetrating from the outside to in. So if we go on to the next slide, please.

So in terms of key considerations for design, there’s many things we need to be considering, and I’ll talk through, in a moment; the kind of pathway that design takes. One of the key elements of BS8102 is considering the maintainability. Now, this might be, as point 2 mentions, land drains and other similar external drainage outside of the basement.

They can be maintained. But we also need to be considering for the lifetime of a structure. If there is a defect, how can that be addressed? How can we maintain the water tightness of the structure? In the instance that we’ve got a habitable basement – so dry environment we need to achieve, internal finishes are being installed –

it’s a really key consideration to make sure that we’re incorporating combined waterproofing protection: two forms of waterproofing. We’ll go through this in a moment, is the way in which we can design in accordance with BS8102. And I know primarily in the Australian market, this would be, generally speaking, in the form of a an external pre-applied bonded membrane in conjunction with a watertight concrete additive, for example. Buildability is a really key consideration highlighted throughout BS8102. And I guess that’s where collaborating, working with designers who have experience, hands-on experience, in terms of understanding how structures actually get built. The follow-on sequence of trades and the impact that may have on waterproofing. Really, really key that we’re understanding that early on.

Shotcrete, which I know is widely used in the Australian market, indeed, it was used for many years in a significant way in the UK. However, due to many issues, mainly based on concrete compaction, that very much is being discouraged; because we all know that the success of any waterproofing system is dependent significantly on good quality compacted concrete. Precast concrete design; so precast retaining walls and the like. This is a a great option if there is the opportunity for it within a basement.

But again, there’s some really key considerations that we must all bear in mind around the detailing of the construction joints and how we will maintain the integrity at these critical areas. Protection of the waterproofing systems that are being installed. So it may be an external membrane being installed, around a basement. We’re going to be backfilling against the walls.

It’s really important that suitable protection elements are incorporated. And again, a significant focus on that in the latest edition of BS8102. The last couple of pieces relate to the overall structure’s design life. Primarily there’s the crack width design, which depending on whether you’re looking at waterproofing concrete additive, whether you’re looking at a membrane system, it’s really key that an early stage, there’s collaboration with the waterproofing designer. It may be that there’s a, for example, a 0.2mm or 0.3mm crack width required. Knowledge of this in the context of waterproofing is so important. And the earlier that’s built into the considerations, the better to save any excessive over redesign of the structural detailing at a later date. And lastly, a structure’s design life. It’s really important that systems that are incorporated within basement design have a design life appropriate to that to which the structure is, which they’re going to be incorporated. So just a key consideration when looking in early stage around which systems. Next slide please.

So just to cover off quickly in terms of the grades of waterproofing environments, and I do know that this is becoming increasingly familiar terminology in the Australian market. But there’s Grade 1A. This is the lowest form of waterproofing, and indeed, water seepage is tolerable to this grade of environment. So what I know is regularly referred to as a wet wall basement.

Indeed I know that’s also being discouraged, and I’m sure David will go into that in a bit more detail in due course. We don’t really see basements being designed as new build as Grade 1A in Britain. We tend to start at Grade 1B. This is no seepage or water ingress, but there could be some marginal dampness that would be present through, let’s say, some capillary traction of moisture, from the outside to in. But this is what’s classed as a Grade 1B.

Grade 2: this is no seepage and no dampness is acceptable passing through the structure. There could, however, be some dampness within the internal environment due to a lack of ventilation and therefore causing condensation. So a typical example might be a plant room. It could be a lift pit, lift core, within a structure.

And lastly we have what’s the habitable environment. The Grade 3 structures. And it’s important to note a normal design consideration for us would be, if we have a Grade 2 or Grade 3 basement, then we’d be considering combined waterproofing protection in the form of two independent systems. Next slide please.

So at the outset of every scheme, it’s very important that firstly we understand the grade of environment that we must achieve. I often say to designers, specifiers, At the outset of a scheme start with the end in mind. What is the end game? What does the client expect from this structure? And we can then develop the design following that. And the design all starts with choosing the type of waterproofing. In accordance with BS8102, there’s three types; Type A, B and C.

Type A is what’s classified as barrier protection. Essentially this is a range of bonded membranes. It could be a pre-applied waterproof membrane, that will actually physically bond to the wet concrete. It could be a liquid applied membrane solution. It could be a self-adhesive post applied membrane. All of these types of systems are classified as a Type A waterproofing system.

Type B: this is integral protection. So it comes what we generally know in the form of waterproof concrete additives. which Hayden, I know, will probably touch on that a little bit later on. There’s a variety of technologies on the market, but essentially they’re all classified as Type B. Also important to note that BS8102 does accept secant pile wall structure as a type B for defence. And it does also consider welded sheet piles as being acceptable for this type of waterproofing also. So there is opportunity to incorporate elements outside of a specific waterproofing product per se, within the overall waterproofing strategy, so long as the warranty requirements meet what the client’s looking for.

And lastly, we have Type C. This is a water management system. So cavity drainage; so systems are either external or internal. Next slide please.

So just to quickly cover in terms of combined waterproofing, there was indeed a case that went through the courts in the late 1990s where a subcontractor was responsible to install a waterproofing system that had been designed by a main contractor. In brief, there was defects, there was failure in the system, and the subcontractor was owed money, from the main contractor due to the fact that the main contractor was unwilling to pay for essentially failed waterproofing.

In brief, the judge determined it was unreasonable and unrealistic to expect a bonded sheet membrane to be installed without a defect. Now, this here was the first court case which set a precedent indicating the need to be considering combined protection, essentially pointing to the fact that we can’t reckon on products that will be installed by humans to be installed without a defect. And if a completely dry environment is required, then combined protection should be considered. Next slide please.

So to cover off quickly in relation to where design essentially starts in relation to BS8102, there is a Table 1 within the standard which largely is what influences our consideration as a designer in terms of when combined protection is needed, and when a single form of waterproofing might be acceptable. So on the left, we start off with the risk. Now is the risk of the structure we’re building. A high risk structure would be, let’s say, a multi-level basement of a residential high end development. A low risk basement would be a single storey basement car park, for example. We then have the water table, which will vary from site to site. And then we have the Type A, Type B and Type C waterproofing systems incorporated for consideration.

Now, as you can see, as the level of the risk increases, and likewise if there is an increasing risk of water table, Table 1 highlights the importance to be considering combined protection; whether it be the form of a Type A membrane in conjunction with a piled wall or a liner concrete wall, designed in accordance with the appropriate standards to manage crack control.

All of these are really key considerations at an early stage. There is also many other guidance documents that we would follow, in particular the Property Care Association, who provides the CSSW qualifications. They outline specifically in a lot more detail some key considerations when looking at combined waterproofing. Next slide please.

So I just thought we’d cover off on a few key design milestones. Every project should follow as strict a design process as possible to ensure that the waterproofing design incorporation doesn’t make a major impact in terms of the overall design process. Now, every project kicks off with initial design concepts, followed through by the outline structural design considerations, understanding what the client’s looking for.

However, at this very early stage it is possible to establish a high level – albeit high level at this stage – design strategy. So the appointment of a waterproofing specialist, somebody who can take on the design liability and collaborate with a design team is really key for the overall success. It’s our responsibilities as a designer to then carry out on the initial desk studies; so understanding the characteristics of the site, characteristics in the ground in relation to water table risk, etc, and therefore building in a risk-assessed design, which is incorporating the appropriate types of waterproofing and ultimately producing detailed drawings, project-specific to each project. Next slide please.

So finally, just to cover off in terms of independent accreditation and warranties, what’s really important in terms of design of basements. And we know that we’re on a journey, the Australian market is on a journey, on a mission to raise the bar, raise the level, with a view to keeping water out of our basements. But what’s really key with engaging with design is ensuring there’s appropriate levels of professional indemnity insurance.

As a company, we do as working in collaboration with MARKHAM, we provide $10 million PI insurance. A CSSW design. So a certified surveyor of structural waterproofing is absolutely key in accordance with BS8102, that somebody suitably competent and qualified is responsible for design. 25 year system warranties for installed products, indeed, is very much a standard offering across schemes that we work on.

Agreement certification is really key; making sure there’s third party accreditation for all system products. So that’s gone through the scrutiny for their independent application. Compliance for European harmonized standards, etc, still has a place today and is important. And manufacturers should be able to demonstrate ISO accreditations: ISO9001 for quality control, ISO14001 for environmental practices. All what’s really key in today’s environment of design.

And lastly if there’s opportunity for carbon neutral accreditation; collaborating with manufacturers that have such accreditations will will only help clients with what they may be needing to achieve their carbon goals, emissions. So I think that might bring my piece to a close, does it Brendan?

HAYDEN: Brilliant, thanks Clive, appreciate that. A lot of in-depth knowledge; and quite a passionate topic for you, as we can see. But yes, obviously working alongside that standard for X number of years now, has proven to us… it raised a lot of thought process with me and talking points, but no doubt with the audience as well. So if you have got questions, on that, just a reminder to put it in the chat and we will have a Q&A at the back end of this just to make sure we cover off everyone’s thoughts and questions again. OK. So that’s the British Standard. And that’s what set across in the UK as you said at the start, you know, we’re adopting. But now what does that mean for us on this side of the ditch? So David, take us away!

DAVID: Good morning everyone. How are you doing? That was great, Clive, thanks for sharing that. I’m going to talk about something a little bit different, like Brendan said, it’s a little bit more about our regulations here that we can expect to be coming in the future, and what that means for us and how we interact with BS8102.

So I’ve got a few slides to get through. So, Brendan, I’m just going to say ‘Next’ when we go on to the next one and we can flow through. So got our title slide here: NCC which is our National Construction Code, waterproofing drafted changes. So public comment has just finished on this one. Next please, Brendan. Public comment has just finished. So now we’re going to see what comments get adopted; and there’ll be another iteration come out before it comes into effect – probably some time next year.

A little bit about me; I’ve been in construction waterproofing my entire professional career, from everything from installation to quality to project management to contracts, and more recently, for the last five years, I’m the founder of Waterproofing Integrity, and we do day in, day out waterproofing design and compliance of that design during construction. Next.

OK, so like I just said, we’re currently just finished, last week, the public comment draft period. So we’re waiting to see what comes out there. That slides a little bit outdated because it’s no longer live. It’s been closed. And yes, that’s it for now. Next.

1. So what does this mean for us? It means that we’re going to have some new rules coming in – next – about what we must now do for our basement waterproofing design. There is above-ground changes as well. But for the sake of this specific focus, we’re going to be looking at below-ground structure only. I’m sure we can cover the above-ground structure in the future.

And what I’m going to do is talk through the changes at the different levels. So we’re going to start at the top of this triangle, which is our NCC hierarchy here, the objectives. And then we’re going to have a look at functional statements. Then more importantly we’re going to hit performance requirements. And finally we’ll get down to the bottom.

So if we go to the next slide here we’ll start with our objectives. So you can see the way that this is marked up here to show the changes that have been made. So our first point here is that we’re adding in that we’re wanting to protect the building and also its internal surfaces from damage caused by entry of water.

So it’s actually been simplified quite a bit. Everything in red there has been struck off now, there’s no delineation between all these different types of H2O. It’s just any damage caused by the entry of water. And then point (b), and this is quite an interesting one, I’ll talk about this for a moment, is protect other property from damage caused by redirected – not surface water – just water. So previously this was relevant to… if you build a site and you redirect the flow of water from the rain, into another property, that would be considered a problem. But now it’s all sorts of water, which also implies our below-ground water. And I’ll talk about this just for… briefly so I don’t take up too much time today.

If we go to the next slide. To tie back in our UK origins of BS8102 – we currently already have minimum requirements for groundwater investigations and reporting, but that will take on a new form. Next, please.

When we start tying in below ground water… and I use the phenomenon of ‘iceberg homes’ that are very common now in the UK; where we have a small bit of the structure on the top and then a large bit of the structure down the bottom; which can disrupt our aquifers. So now we’re effectively needing to consider the way that the structures below ground might actually disrupt the flow of water and create increased hydrostatic pressure on adjacent properties, or something to that effect.

Whether there will actually be a big, issue to resolve around that is to be seen. From some of the reports that we’re seeing, or that I’ve read, from the UK, which – next slide please – which this is one, it’s sort of found that there has been monitoring of it to see what the impacts are. And it hasn’t found to be that significant. But it’s something to consider nonetheless. Next.

It’s just another one here about the investigating and reporting, how ground water factors impact basement designs. Next. OK, so that’s just a bit of a side note, something we can look forward to here as an ancillary consideration, but we’ll deal with that when it comes into effect. So now we go down a level in the NCC and we’re looking at our functional statements. And you can see again here, we’ve got some rewording that’s happening. We’ve cut out ‘redirected surface’. So it’s just water; adverse effects of water, including water that may enter the building and damage internal surfaces. So that’s point number 1. Functional point number 2 is resistance to… they’ve actually cut out ‘rain and surface water’ here. So that point number 2 is really focused on rising damp and ground water. So you can see there’s a lot more emphasis here where it’s above ground and then also below ground. Next.

So now we get into the real meat of it which is our performance requirements. Next. OK. And I’ll start just with a structural thing. You can see that on the left hand side here in the last NCC we had five different performance requirements. That’s actually been simplified down into just two now. Next. And those two are effectively F1P1.

So performance requirement number 1 is managing rainwater which is our above ground. And then P2 is the managing of ground water. Next. One more. OK that’s it. So the actual clause is ‘rising damp and ground water’. That’s the title of the performance requirement. Just showing a bit of a zoomed in slide here for emphasis. Next. OK.

Now what’s important is that -and this was a big thing in Australia – is that previously Class 7 and 8 buildings were exempt from complying with waterproofing performance requirements or… that’s a simplistic way of putting it. But at the end of the day, there was a clause in there that was used as a reason why car parks and and similar had no need for waterproofing, and they weren’t even required to justify how they performed in any way, which was always a bit of a problem, right? And we’ll show you why in a little bit with a video of some bad outcomes, that definitely wouldn’t be considered compliant. So this exemption has been removed. So now there is a degree of scrutiny that will be applied to car parks in these areas to make sure that it’s fit for purpose, and we’re not having any bad outcomes. Next. OK. So this is just a little bit of a video here that I happened to take yesterday. This is a switchboard of a building. And what you’re seeing in the background there is actually a shoring wall with a capping beam. That little awning with – the black on it is actually mould – that’s protecting this switchboard from being dripped on, barely! So yes, we effectively have a switchboard mounted to an internal wall here, which is obviously not a good thing. But these things, you know, were allowed to happen without having a NCC that actually backed up the necessity of having a good design, or at least a design that considers whether these things are OK. So that’s a good change.

And we’ll just go to next slide here as well, which is really some more not-so-great basement outcomes here. And this will just run through quickly. But this was a Class 7 basement for the majority, which was previously exempt. and there was a range of reasons why this sort of happened. The design was flawed. The installation was rushed. But effectively it resulted in this, which just isn’t suitable even for a car park, right? No one would, I think, try to argue that amenity of a space is maintained when you have to walk through water to get to your car, or to access plant or a storage location or anything. And most, but not all of these photos are all from one particular project. The ones at the end here, just from a couple of others that I thought were interesting as well. Next, please.

OK, so now we’ve established our performance requirements, being the outcome we need to achieve, which effectively is, not to allow water to enter the basement in a way that would impact the amenity negatively, damage interior finishes or to damage the structure. And how are we going to prove that we’ve satisfied those performance requirements? Well, there’s actually two pathways under the NCC. To put it simply, there’s ‘deemed to satisfy’ and there’s ‘performance solution’.

Well, unfortunately, at the moment we do not have a ‘deemed to satisfy’ provision that is adopted by the NCC. there is no below-ground structure that the NCC… sorry, no below-ground standard for the waterproofing of below-ground structures, that the NCC has adopted. So that means currently our only option is a ‘performance solution’. And I know this might sound a little bit contrary to what Clive was saying around BS8102. The way BS8102 is actually used is as a system or a process or a code of practice, as the title states, have a way of going about getting a performance-based design outcome. So the basics of doing performance-based design is establishing the outcome that you need to get, to satisfy the performance requirement. No damage of finishes, no loss of amenity, no damage to the structure. And then you look at your risks. What’s our groundwater like? And then we put mitigation in place. And that’s pretty much how you go about this in order to create a performance solution. So I hope that’s making sense; that while BS8102 is from British Standards, and it is actually noted as a British Standard document, it’s not considered that in Australia, but it is very good support for your performance solution. Next please.

OK! So what does this mean for us in the future? It means that we’re just going to have to do things a little bit differently. We’re going to have to prove that we’ve done a good job rather than just not thinking about it like a lot of projects do. Next.

And like I just sort of explained here we do have these multiple pathways. On the left hand side is a ‘deemed to satisfy’ provision. I’m sure there will be one developed; likely a variant of BS8102 will be adopted as a DTS provision in the future. It’s just not being done right now. So that means we’ve got the other pathway, which is a performance solution, like we said. And I’ve just got one more slide here which shows a little bit more about that process. Next.

1. And this is it here. This is just another diagram that I thought was really cool, showing the two different pathways: ‘deemed to satisfy’ on the right, ‘performance solution’ on the left and the combination of things that you can use to develop and justify that solution in order to demonstrate compliance. So that’s effectively what we’re looking at for the next iteration of the NCC for any below-ground structures, including car parks or similar areas which have been exempt or been able to be overlooked in the past. Next.

Oh, and this is just a little demonstration here of that sort of design we’ve effectively got, if you look at this in columns, three different structural possibilities here. It’s a little bit hard to see, but I’ll explain it. The one on the left is a fully tanked system. The one on the in the middle there is a drained cavity system. So it is contained. And then the one on the right is a drain system. But it’s exposed. So you might see a bit of wetness on the wall and whatnot. Now these are all very different. But that doesn’t mean they’re not able to achieve an appropriate level of performance depending on what you’re intending to use the space for. So just a little bit of performance based insight there. Next.

And that’s me. Thanks for having me on today, guys! I’ll pass it back to you.

HAYDEN: Brilliant. Thanks, David. Appreciate that. Brilliant intel. As we can see, a wealth of knowledge that I would bet… if anyone’s got questions, reach out to David, as I have a number of times. And again, just use that questions box, is just in the bottom right of your screen there, you see a question mark, pop anything in there. But I think that’s really good, what you said, David, about, you know, you’re going to get to that result of what the project needs; and different projects, unique and specific to its conditions and what the structure is. So using the British Standard as a guide to get to that point, where you can write the performance solution, you know, ties it all together. So that’s really good. So I just wanted to have a look now, just on the next slide. I just wanted to touch base because both speakers have mentioned this so far. But really pulling that together; and the early engagement, it’s a big key to… big milestone, so to speak, key to success – in compliance and project success. So if we just have a quick look: let’s run through a brief diagram, process, that we put together. But then I’d also like any thoughts from yourself, David and Clive. So early engagement: it starts right at the top. Think about the job, think about what… as Clive said, begin with the end in mind. You know, What’s this building doing? What’s its life? What’s the intended purpose? Who’s going in to the basement? Those sort of things. What’s it holding? And then start the design consideration. accordingly. So it may pay to bring in some parties to flesh that out, you know, to build a checklist of what, you know, make sure we’re thinking about the right things at the start.

Then think about the planned approach with stakeholders so that design considerations. How is it best to reach that result? And then site evaluation. Extremely important. What’s the site conditions? Is it a brownfield site? Has it got contamination? What’s the water levels? All these things. What is the stability of the, the Earth below, sub-grade? All those sort of things come into it.

And then, review the structure. So what type of structure, what type of design will support the waterproofing that we need and the structure that we need, you know, to start thinking about that. Is it pile? Is it secant pile? Is it D-wall? – these sort of things. And then obviously we need to engage with a waterproofing consultant, such as someone like David’s team, to run those risk profiles and grade, you know, do up a performance, of what’s required in there.

And then also with that, engage a waterproofing installation company at that point, so you can start thinking. They’ve got different methodologies, different ways of adding value or reducing costs – better methodologies. Engage early, is a key step there. Again, have the waterproofing teams, consultants to review design proposals, you know, make sure it’s suitable for that job, and then get the design sorted. Obviously it goes to the head contractor to make sure they’re fully involved all the way through.

But then I just wanted to make this point: Don’t leave it to the last minute to get your contractor on board to carry out the waterproofing. There’s lead times on products; there’s training to do; there’s, you know, there’s a lot of discussion and meetings, methodology meetings prior. So we want to make sure… that’s a big part of key success. And then full project team. Get everyone on board; the concrete companies, you know, the head contractors, the waterproofing teams, the consultants, get everyone around the table: this is what we’re doing, this is how we’re going to control it. That’s a good key step. And then on-site training is very important. Who’s going to be installing it? Are they certified? Have they had some training? Is that ticked off? Have we got certificates, etc? All key steps. And then construction monitoring as we go through the job. Who’s controlling that? Who’s QA-ing it? Who’s coming to site? Is there project management and construction monitoring of the waterproofing install? And then obviously completion; sign-off, compliance. So we’ll send out this bit of a checklist, you know, just so you can think about it as well. But any comments on that David or Clive? Interested in any other points or consideration.

DAVID: Yes, I would just add something. I think this is a really good workflow and it covers a lot of good things that need to be done and considered. The one thing which I think is important is to not think of it as far as engaging your design stakeholders that, OK… like, see how it says review of structure there, that doesn’t sort of necessarily mean you do the structural design first, and then you bring your waterproofing designer in a couple of steps after the fact. We’ve faced this on at least half of our projects, where we get engaged a little bit too late and the structure’s already locked in, and it’s less than ideal, and it’s cut out about 60% of their possible waterproofing solutions and therefore they’re not getting optimal value for money and whatnot.

So we always say to our clients, there is no such thing as too soon for us to get involved. We will, you know, give little bits of advice based on the appropriate stage of the project, and it is a collaborative effort. So, yes, that’s the one thing I would say is, get your waterproofing specialist involved early. Oh, and just one more thing as well is there needs to be, what would you say? – like a chaperon or someone that’s actually guiding the BS8102 process out of the team. And honestly, the waterproofing consultant is the one that is going to know this inside and out. This standard, which is effectively a collaboration code of practice in my understanding. And so having someone that sort of says, okay guys, here’s how we’re going to do it. We’ve got to do this desktop study here, and here’s how we’re going to work together. That’s how we sort of normally approach it. And it really helps hold everyone together and make sure the appropriate considerations are being had at the right times of the design staging.

HAYDEN: Yes, 100%, I’d back that, that review structure, 100%. That’s… so often we get involved with the job. You know, we’ve got this, we’re starting in two months. What can we do to waterproof it? And OK, we see what’s happening there. But yes a bit more early engagement to get it right to the detail. And 100%, a little… almost like a cheerleader, to hold it all together, push the passion, push the motivation right through to completion. So that’s good. Anything else Clive that you think of?

CLIVE: No. I would echo what David says. From our perspective in the UK there is a sort of further shift in terms of legislative requirements around design processes now, which is forcing designers to be formally engaged much earlier to just meet building control requirements. We’re seeing the benefits now, where the industry is taking a shift to not leaving it to the last minute to start discussing with waterproofing, manufacturers bringing that in. In one sense, with designers, it’s important to be aware that there’s not necessarily, at an early stage, always the opportunity to formally engage, necessarily. If there is, all well and good. But high level advice, willingness to collaborate at an early stage just to help get the, you might say, the show on the road in terms of a waterproofing strategy.

And then as maybe the contractual pieces develop more formally, that’s when maybe the the more formal appointment of waterproofing designers, manufacturers might come into play. But we often find that there can be reticence from clients to actually come and approach a waterproofing designer or manufacturer early, because they’re not in a position to be in a contract with anyone.

But it’s important, especially as the market’s taking a shift, like we’re saying, and in Australia – that there’s a willingnss to collaborate early is, I guess, where I’m coming from. Yes, I think that’s good. Just catching on to that, what you said about, it’s not necessarily a formal award. And I think we need to think about that more as a team. It’s a team effort; to think about the right aspects, think about it from different angles. Everyone comes to a project from a different angle, from a contractor to a consultant, to an engineer, to a waterproofing specialist; who’s thinking about different components; and get their heads together at that point, and just think about the project success.

HAYDEN: That’s good. Appreciate the input. Right, if we jump to the next slide. Thanks, everybody, for joining us again. I just wanted to briefly touch base on these companies. Obviously, we’ve got Premcrete fro the UK, and Waterproofing Integrity, but just want maybe just a couple of words on who you are, what’s your strengths, you know, where you come from, that sort of thing. So give us the Intel on your company. The audience can reach out if they’ve got questions or further follow up. So Clive, do you want to kick us off there?

CLIVE: Yes, sure, thanks Hayden. Just a bit more breadth and depth, I guess, on Premcrete as a company. So we’ve been established since the late 1980s. The company has evolved a lot over the last, 15 years, through initially having a significant focus on construction chemicals. So structural grouts, concrete repair products, joint sealing systems, as well as waterproofing, gas proofing, contamination resistant membranes, etc. But as a company, we’ve purely focused on the waterproofing sector and contaminated site protection and the like, over the last 10 to 15 years.

We’ve been on a real journey as a manufacturer. Initially we did a lot of outsource manufacturing, to our own specifications. We’ve now brought that in-house. So we are truly a British manufacturer. Nothing is being produced in the likes of Eastern Europe or Asia. Everything is produced within our key manufacturing facility in south of England. And we very much developed our business, in the UK – bearing in mind there’s lots of major global manufacturers, that you would be well familiar with in the waterproofing sector.

We’ve developed significantly because of our ability to take on design liability, taking on the requirement for project specific detailing where required. And ultimately, as I see that piece playing out in the Australian market, there’s the likes of Waterproofing Integrity, where there’s a necessity for projects to have that overseeing, oversight in terms of the overall strategy. But I do see a real gap in the market currently where somebody could be coming in as a manufacturer and providing a lot more detail around the specifics of design, which is where, I guess, our core strength has come from. So, yes, I don’t know if that gives enough background.

Myself, I’ve been at the forefront of many of our major projects over the last 7 to 8 years. I’ve progressed through the business, came straight from college into the business in 2012. And today, I’m heading up our business development and technical team. I’m one of the CSSW qualified designers. And from an Australian standpoint, Australian market, I’m going to be the one working closely alongside of MARKHAM, on this exciting venture.

HAYDEN: Good, thanks Clive, good overview. Yes, we partnered up, probably it’s really only within the last twelve months. So we’ve got the first shipment of product coming across the water, but there’s been a lot of back and forth around design and where we’re off to. So appreciate your input there. David! Waterproofing integrity. Tell us about it.

DAVID: OK, there we go. I guess I’ll give you a little bit of history about us, because it really conveys the changes in the market and the way our services have evolved. So about five years ago, I was conducting waterproofing, installation and whatnot, and I really felt like there were a lot of things going wrong in the industry. And I thought, surely there’s enough developers and builders out there that are worried about the long term performance of their building, that they’d be willing to engage an independent third party; that’s not necessarily trying to do the installation like I was at the time, because there’s a conflict of interest there; and that we would be that independent third party that would give advice on, OK, that installations good or that design’s good, or this should be changed, and whatnot.

And we started out doing exactly that: inspection, testing, compliance during construction. We then evolved to meet growing industry demand, based on that service being really well received, as well as changes in regulations around the way that designs were formed on certain classes of building here, which anyone in New South Wales would be familiar with. So from that we, expanded our skillset, which we already had, but applied it into the new construction design market.

So then we’re providing waterproofing designs and everything, and now we have grown to a team of probably just over 45, primarily in Sydney, but also in, Newcastle and Brisbane. We do work in Melbourne and a little bit in other regions as well. So across Australia. And that’s really what we do all day, every day is just looking at waterproofing design because there’s always new considerations to be made; whether they’re changes in standards; change in code of practice, best practice; whether it’s change in NCC regulations like we talked about today; or even new materials entering the market, providing different strategies on what we can do. So that’s what we do. Everywhere from below ground – we have a specialist basement team who’s on the webinar with us today – to above ground material specialists.

And of course then into remedial, for anything that hasn’t worked out so well, and they need our help to rectify it. So that’s effectively what we do. And we’re happy to help with any of your waterproofing needs.

HAYDEN: Yes, that’s really good. And I know we’ve worked together on a number of projects now. So well done. And thank you for your services. Thank for the education you put out in the market. I think it’s appreciated, and just want to make the point that it is. But it is an overwhelming topic sometimes, waterproofing. And there’s specialists out there like Waterproofing Integrity that can lead you through a discussion. And when you break it down, it’s probably more simple than you think. So, yes, good. Thanks for that.

And then just briefly on MARKHAM, we’re in Australia, New Zealand, project-based business. And it’s actually head office in Napier, New Zealand. Coming up 30 years’ birthday soon. Predominantly focused in chemical admixtures and spray-on floor treatments for concrete. A big part of that is waterproofing admixtures and then, having our own teams do installation and project management on site to achieve a very different range of things. The whole whole purpose of what we do is Adding Life To Concrete, and what that is, is extending service life of concrete structures.

So hence why we’ve partnered with Premcrete to bring in a waterproofing membrane system that helps for the sub-grade. If you want to just jump slide briefly, I’ll just quickly look at this. So yes, just, run everything from a design point of view; taking, lifting that risk, liability off yourselves, you know, design and managing that risk, right through to on-site training, installation, construction monitoring, working alongside your teams to get the right result; and then obviously run the final warranty. So taking a design through to the warranty, on a project. So that’s us in a nutshell, a team of about 70 across New Zealand and Australia; working on various projects, retail, health, sports, aged care; all commercial construction. So that’s us.

There’s a couple of questions. So thank you for asking the questions. I’ll just read them out and then I’ll get them answered. So – ”Thanks, guys. Just wondering if negative waterproofing can achieve the same outcome as positive waterproofing?” Do you want to give us a couple of words on that, David?

DAVID: Yes. I’m not on mute. OK, great. Can negative achieve the same outcome? Yes I think on paper it can. I am a bit more worried about negative side systems being more susceptible to faults such as cracking or structural movement. If you can just imagine for a moment – a lot of negative side membranes are sort of quite rigid in nature, whereas a positive side membrane might be a pre-applied sheet system, which is going to accommodate movement a bit; but also that could be a lot longer a discussion. But, yes, the simple answer is on paper it does, but it has a lower fault tolerance. So in reality I don’t think it actually would have as much confidence.

HAYDEN: Yes, I think that’s fair. Clive, any points on that?

CLIVE: I would just add, when considering negative, waterproofing applications inside your basement, it’s really key that products are suitably third party certified and tested to withstand the negative water pressure that they’re going to be up against. Too often we see products that get used in the market, not being fully scrutinized. And they can only actually achieve a very low level of negative pressure. They might be applied into, you might say, a two storey deep basement, but it could be, at times, quite a significant head of water up against it. So that’s really key. I would also agree with what David said, that these types of products tend to be cementitious coatings and the like. And it’s always very key, when you’ve got a thin coating going onto a concrete surface. We always say to people, even if they’re a flexible coating, if there’s no crack there, when the product is put on and a crack then appears, even if your coating has got 300% elongation, 300% time zero is still zero.  So if there’s no crack formed in the first place, then that product actually has very little flexibility. However, if there was a small minor crack a coating was applied over to, then you realize the real flexibility, or the nature of flexibility, you might get in the coating. So that’s a really key thing, just to bear in mind with structures that move, as they will do.

HAYDEN: Yes, I think that’s good. And it’s almost… sometimes we’re forced to do it from that way around. But the other thing to remember would be that you’re not exactly protecting the structural… structure within that concrete wall by putting the coating on the inside. So you’ve got to think about, you know, you’re still allowing moisture ingress into that wall. Over time, that can take contaminants, chlorides, or whatever’s in the ground, and potentially have an effect on that structural integrity.

So that’s a good question, though. So anything else, Brendan, have I missed anything on the chat?

BRENDAN: I believe that’s it at this stage, Hayden. If there’s any other peripheral topics that you wanted to cover off before we wrap up…?

HAYDEN: So that’s good. I’m conscious of time, and everyone’s got a day job to fill out, but appreciate everyone jumping on to continue learning. Any other comments, team? Brilliant. Thanks very much for joining us, David and Clive, thanks very much for presenting very good overviews. And we will have a recording of this. We’ll send out an email for some feedback; and please fire us some feedback. We love that, that’s how we grow. And yes, we’ll send you some slides and information as well. But feel free to reach out to us and we can point you in the right direction for contacts for David and Clive as well. So thank you very much. Have a great day. Great evening.

CLIVE: Very good. Thank you.

DAVID: Thank you.

BRENDAN: Thank you all.