Home    |   Articles & Publications   |   Below-Grade Waterproofing Failures – Case Study

Below-Grade Waterproofing Failures – Case Study

In order to highlight fundamental design and construction errors, this paper briefly reviews our firm’s litigation-related evaluation of below-grade waterproofing failures at a university building (Figure 1) located in Northern California.

Consider the front portion with the low-sloped roof: this 70-foot-long area encloses a partially below-grade boiler room (Figure 2) with perimeter cast-in-place (CIP) concrete walls – commencing below-grade underneath the reddish precast masonry panels – that extend down to the concrete footings. Since construction, groundwater leakage had regularly occurred at the floor-to-wall transitions (Figure 3) and, during heavy rain events, this room additionally flooded over the top of the below-grade CIP walls (Figure 4).

Assisted by a preeminent local geotechnical firm, Engineered Soil Repairs, we excavated an OSHA-compliant test hole 13-feet down to the footings in order to evaluate waterproofing failures. Upon commencing this excavation process, we exposed a raggedy, ripped, and poorly terminated sheet waterproofing membrane (see Figure 5) applied atop a layer of bentonite clay: “Bentonite is granulated smectite clay that provides waterproofing capabilities by swelling to nearly 15 times its dry volume when it absorbs water. In hydrated state, under sufficient hydrostatic pressure bentonite becomes a water-repelling gel that will adhere to many different materials – concrete, stone, wood.”

Unfortunately, the lack of a counterflashed, tightly secured “termination bar” (Figure 6) across the top edge of the “shot-pinned” (using a powder-actuated nail gun ) membrane had facilitated rain- and irrigation-water flow behind the sheet waterproofing. Also note at Figure 6, Figure 7, and Figure 8 that we found below-grade holes (allegedly, per the defense, caused by “snails” ) in vertical caulk joints at the reddish precast masonry panels. A test probe inserted into the damaged caulking seen in Figure 8 extended into the boiler room at the area of water staining seen at Figure 4. Further, per the exemplar “blob” seen in Figure 9, note that large portions of the bentonite clay had washed out of the system due the the above-identified deficiencies. Finally, note at Figure 10 that the horizontal caulk joint separating these two wall systems was not bonded to the precast masonry panels – providing yet another route for water infiltration into the boiler room.

Figure 1 – Case Study 1 – Typical entry stair landing at 50-building apartment complex in Phoenix, AZ.

Figure 1 – Boiler room has perimeter CIP concrete walls – commencing below-grade underneath the reddish precast masonry panels – that extend down to the concrete footings. (Whitish pre-cast panels extend up from the red panels.)

Figure 2 – Case Study 1 – Removal of concrete walking surface revealed improperly attached and terminated metal flashings.

Figure 2 – This CIP concrete wall encloses at 70-foot-long boiler room that serves the entire campus.

Figure 2 – Case Study 1 – Removal of concrete walking surface revealed improperly attached and terminated metal flashings.

Figure 3 – Even during dry weather, groundwater infiltrated the boiler room at floor-to-wall transitions. The water stains at the lower CIP wall (at left) resulted from leakage occurring at the top of the concrete wall (see Figure 4).

Figure 2 – Case Study 1 – Removal of concrete walking surface revealed improperly attached and terminated metal flashings.

Figure 4 – During rain events, water flooded down from the top of the CIP wall, which commences 20 inches below grade. (The precast masonry panels above are attached to the CIP walls with steel brackets.)

Figure 2 – Case Study 1 – Removal of concrete walking surface revealed improperly attached and terminated metal flashings.

Figure 5 – Upon commencing the excavation process, a raggedy, poorly attached, and extensively torn sheet waterproofing membrane was exposed. (The missing section at the top of this photo had been extracted for sampling purposes.)

Figure 2 – Case Study 1 – Removal of concrete walking surface revealed improperly attached and terminated metal flashings.

Figure 6 – The sheet waterproofing had been “shot-pinned” to the reddish precast masonry panels without a “termination bar” that would have served to prevent the membrane from tearing loose during later backfilling. (Also note at the top of this photo the holes in the vertical caulk joint separating two of these panels – also see Figure 7 and Figure 8. )

Figure 2 – Case Study 1 – Removal of concrete walking surface revealed improperly attached and terminated metal flashings.

Figure 7 – (Same caulk joint seen in Figure 6.) Defense consultants argued that these below-grade holes were caused by “snails”. At the upper hole, light from inside the boiler room can be seen.

Figure 2 – Case Study 1 – Removal of concrete walking surface revealed improperly attached and terminated metal flashings.

Figure 8 – Damaged caulking at transition between the reddish precast masonry panels (atop steel brackets) and underlying CIP wall. A probe inserted into this hole readily extended into the boiler room at the area of water staining seen at Figure 4.

Figure 2 – Case Study 1 – Removal of concrete walking surface revealed improperly attached and terminated metal flashings.

Figure 9 – During excavation, we found this “blob” of bentonite clay directly below the ripped membrane seen at Figure 8.

Figure 2 – Case Study 1 – Removal of concrete walking surface revealed improperly attached and terminated metal flashings.

Figure 10 – The horizontal caulk joint at the transition between the two wall systems did not provide a watertight bond.

Figure 2 – Case Study 1 – Removal of concrete walking surface revealed improperly attached and terminated metal flashings.

Figure 11 – Multiple breaches in the waterproofing membrane were observed at all levels of the excavation.

Figure 2 – Case Study 1 – Removal of concrete walking surface revealed improperly attached and terminated metal flashings.

Figure 12 – Contractor(s) severely damaged the sheet membrane during the backfilling process.

Figure 2 – Case Study 1 – Removal of concrete walking surface revealed improperly attached and terminated metal flashings.

Figure 13 – Near the bottom of the excavated trench, breaches in the waterproofing still remained prevalent.

As evidenced by Figure 11 (near the top of the trench), Figure 12 (halfway down), and Figure 13 (very near the bottom), contractor(s) had extensively damaged the sheet waterproofing membrane during the backfill process. Groundwater infiltration through these numerous breaches certainly contributed to the ongoing leakage at the floor slab-to-wall transition seen in Figure 3.

It also is important to note the absence of any mechanism – e. g. , a prefabricated “drainage composite” such as Miradrain® (or its many competitors) and/or a backfilled layer of 3/4-inch “drain rock” – to: a) promote direct drainage down to the footing drains at the bottom of the trench, and b) thereby, to relieve hydrostatic “head pressure” against the extensively ripped sheet membrane caused by groundwater trapped in the poorly draining backfill.

Alleged “Snail” Damage at the Vertical Caulk Joints
As noted above, the defense argued that the holes seen at Figure 6, Figure 7, and Figure 8 in the vertical caulk joints at the reddish precast masonry panels resulted from post-construction consumption of the polyurethane by “snails”. We observed no such “snails” (or comparable polyurethane-eating gastropods) at the site. Instead, we opined that these joint failures resulted from improper installation of the caulking in a manner inconsistent with industry standard ASTM C1193 (Standard Guide for Use Joint Sealants) and the manufacturer’s installation instructions.

In particular, we noted that: a) the thickness of the applied caulking did not meet the manufacturer’s minimum requirements; and b) the absence of the required foam “backer rod” that would have provided structural support to this polyurethane caulking as these precast masonry panels thermally expanded/contracted on a daily basis. In short, we opined that these failures most likely had been caused by stretching of the undue unduly thin caulking.

Summary Review of Documented Design and Construction Errors

During the ensuing litigation process, we highlighted key errors by the contractor and his subcontractors:

  • Failure to terminate the sheet waterproofing membrane above grade in accordance with industry standards: “Membrane waterproofing of all types …should terminate at least 8 in. above grade.” ;
  • Failure to install a continuous “termination bar” at the top edge of the sheet waterproofing, as required by the project specifications and associated contract documents;
  • Failure to provide a backfilled layer of 3/4-inch drain rock in accordance with the project specifications and associated contract documents;
  • Failure to prevent damage to the sheet waterproofing during the backfilling process, in accordance with the project specifications and associated contract documents;
  • Failure to provide a watertight seal at the horizontal caulk joint (Figure 10) at the transition from the reddish precast masonry panels to the underlying CIP concrete wall; and
  • At these these precast masonry panels, failure (as evidenced by Figure 6, Figure 7, and Figure 8) to provide vertical caulk joints conforming with industry standard ASTM C1193 and the manufacturer’s installation requirements. (The defense provided no credible evidence of attacks by polyurethane-eating gastropods.)

We opined during deposition that these egregious errors should have been obvious to any qualified contractor. The defense settled the case prior to trial.

RESOURCES

Pin It on Pinterest