Tag Archives: masonry

Masonry Sealers and Historic Exteriors


masonry-test-pmapdxAre masonry sealers necessary on historic multi-wythe exterior walls? In general, likely not. Traditional exterior mass unit masonry walls, 3 to 4 wythes thick, leak. But rarely does the amount of water intrusion cause damage to the masonry, the masonry ties, or the interior finishes. Why wouldn’t a sealer be effective for these older walls?

Traditional means and methods of construction multi-wythe walls consist of course work bonded and tied together with header courses, row-lock courses, hidden headers, and set in full beds and back beds of mortar. There is no direct pathway for water intrusion following the mortar beds. And most sealers do not bridge bond line cracks between the masonry unit and mortar bed.

brick-test-pmapdxThe porosity and absorption rates of older masonry are often exaggerated because of the brick appearance. Many older masonry units show the results of imperfect firing techniques. It is not unusual to see older masonry with vertical and horizontal cracks due to low firing temperatures or impurities in the original clay mix. The surface cracks may lead to higher rates of absorption around the crack but rarely increase the overall absorption or alter the overall characteristics of the masonry. Masonry sealers will not bridge these firing cracks.masonry-water-test-pmapdx

If older walls exhibit a level of moisture intrusion, the drying dynamics have traditionally been from warm interior side and evaporation towards the exterior. Interior insulation techniques will result in a colder exterior wall that will stay wetter longer. Masonry sealers can impede the natural drying process and movement of water towards the exterior. Vapor permeable “breathable” sealers limit the outward movement of water by natural capillary action impeding the drying dynamics. The major concern with applying sealers to masonry is related to drying.

The Brick Industry Association, Technical Note No. 6A states: “Application of a water repellent coating is not necessary to achieve water resistance in brickwork subjected to normal exposures where proper material selection, detailing, construction and maintenance have been executed.” BIA goes further: “Application is not recommended on newly constructed brick veneer or cavity walls…” There is little to no research showing the effectiveness of sealers on reducing water intrusion in masonry walls. Sealers primarily reduce the initial rate of absorption at the brick surface. Sealers also cannot change water intrusion due to poor construction techniques. Wind driven rain is rarely impeded by sealer applications. “the use of water-repellent coatings to eliminate water penetration in a wall with existing defects can be futile.”

WSU-DD-hall-building-envelope-pmapdxTo control water intrusion and to increase performance of a masonry wall, it is much more effective to maintain mortar joints through re-pointing process, assure that mortar joints have no voids, replace brick with spalled faces, replace brick that are cracked the full depth, and repair bond line failures. The use of masonry sealers should be based on known research and field tested success and not chosen as a means to remedy poor construction methods.

Written by Peter Meijer AIA, NCARB Principal

How to Determine the Cause of Masonry Failures

Masonry-Failures-pmapdx
Visual observations are not sufficient to determine the cause of failures in masonry walls. However, visual observations, combined with technical knowledge, provide a good direction for further investigation. In the Pacific Northwest, with the predominance of rainy winter weather, the effect of moisture saturation on masonry walls is readily apparent. Moisture is the primary cause of masonry deterioration. Horizontal surfaces will accumulate organic growth, mortar and masonry surfaces show rain water runoff patterns, and any discontinuity in roof runoff systems quickly cause further deterioration to the masonry walls. Severe masonry deterioration does occur in the northwest but its occurrence is considerably less dramatic when compared to harsher winter climates in the Midwest and East. For instance, brick spalls due to freeze thaw effect are a rare occurrence in the northwest.

Masonry-Failures-pmapdx When severe deterioration of masonry walls is not a prevalent condition, what other non-visual processes are employed to determine the cause of deterioration? Two common techniques, well known to historic preservation professionals, are non-destructive testing (NDT) and material testing in the laboratory. NDE methods include RILEM tube water absorption tests, metal detector scanning, video scopes, infra-red photography, ultra sound testing, ground penetrating radar, and in some cases, x-ray diffraction. Common laboratory testing include petrographic examination, electron microscopy, and Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) methods.

Masonry-Failures-pmapdxFTIR, when combined with the diagnostic RILEM tube field test, in particular is an effective evaluation to determine if masonry sealers have been applied to a wall surface impeding the capillary evaporation of trapped water. RILEM tests also provide an observation of a masonry wall’s initial rate of absorption under wind driven rain circumstances. Petrographic analysis of both masonry and mortars determines the material composition and will identify harmful natural elements and harmful additive elements like salts.

Masonry-Failures-pmapdxA common misconception in the northwest is that surface spalls are a result of freeze thaw cycles. Freeze thaw susceptibility can only be determined through laboratory testing. Visual observations are insufficient to conclude masonry spalls resulted from freeze thaw forces. Since freeze thaw tests are graded either pass or fail, further tests methods are typically required for additional diagnostic evaluation. More likely sources of surface spalls are hard Portland cement mortars which exceed the strength of the masonry, salts introduced into the masonry through incorrect material selection, or surface sealers impeding the evaporation of water and thus creating a saturated sub surface layer which will freeze. (It is important to distinguish that the masonry unit may not be susceptible to freeze thaw but rather the sealer creates a dam like effect inducing a layer of water subject to freezing)

Masonry-Failures-pmapdxBy combining visual observations with NDE and lab testing, most surface masonry deterioration can be determined and thereby implement proper repair, maintenance, and protection methods.

Written by Peter Meijer AIA, NCARB, Principal

Horizontal Ground Motion: A Call for More Seismic Research

There is a lack of significant research and seismic performance studies on the resiliency and inherent strength redundancy of older buildings.

U.S. Post Office & Courthouse, 7th & Mission Streets, SF

U.S. Post Office & Courthouse, 7th &; Mission Streets, SF

In specific, the capacity of existing buildings to resist ground motion associated with earthquakes has not been fully developed or thoroughly researched. Based on damage from earthquakes, especially the 2010 Canterbury and 2011 Christchurch earthquakes in New Zealand, with additional seismic activity lasting nearly one year, the general thought is that older existing buildings perform poorly in response to ground motion. When analyzed further, the damage from the Christchurch earthquake was predominantly due to acceleration in a vertical direction, literally tossing buildings in to the air. The peak vertical acceleration during the Christchurch earthquake exceeded the design criteria for today’s modern buildings. Not lessening the severity of the event, nor proposing for less stringent seismic codes, the Christchurch earthquake would flatten most modern cities regardless of building age. Adequate resistance to vertical movement cannot be achieved with current engineering techniques and therefore research and performance studies regarding the resiliency of existing structures must concentrate on horizontal ground motion.

1906 earthquake, Montgomery Street block, SF

1906 earthquake, Montgomery Street block, SF

Because little can be done to prevent building collapse during vertical motion, seismic strengthening techniques focusing on dampening and resisting horizontal motion are applicable to existing structures as well as new structures. However, there has not been significant studies documenting and establishing the inherent strength to resist horizontal motion due to redundancy and mass of archaic construction methodologies. Independent performance evaluations of unique structures have occurred in the United State, Italy, Mexico, the Baltic, and others regions around the world without formal comparative analysis of the results or thorough in-depth dissemination and publication of the studies. For instance, in Oregon, informal static shear testing of a circa 1925 public middle school’s interior fire block and plaster wall surprised structural engineers when the walls did not crack at the shear planes (i.e. floor and ceiling connections) and strength measurements exceeded code allowance fivefold. (2001 Portland Public Schools shear test) When calculated and tested, the ½ inch chalk boards added even more in-plane horizontal resistive strength. The result of the testing saved the school district approximately $ 1 million in seismic upgrade costs. There was no formal documentation of the result and there has been no known similar testing performed on other existing school properties.
mosque
The seismic resistance of existing structures is affected by the structural typology, the construction materials, the varying modifications, and deterioration and decay of materials over time resulting in unique conditions that are not readily transferrable to other structures. However, sporadic investigation and research performed on existing structures and published by the international RILEM Technical Committee 20 TBS in the article “Specific recommendations for the in situ load testing of dwellings and of public and industrial building structures,” and published accounts of independent studies in journals such as the Association of Preservation Technology Bulletin offer insight into the potential redundant strength capacity of existing structures to resist horizontal ground motion.

full scale shake tableThese studies combined with documented field assessments and field evidence of older structures surviving earthquakes and repeated ground motion disturbances over several hundred years are available in numerous communities and offer case study structures for further research. The numbers of university engineering departments with “shake tables” (e.g. Portland State University) create opportunities for joint partnership with private sector consultants, public agencies, and professional organizations to assess and analyze the unique aspects of archaic building materials and methodologies for seismic response. The collaboration between university and private cooperation for seismic research has the potential to develop a wealth of practical and applicable information. The current collaborative efforts involving energy consumption offer the model from which to base seismic research.

A development of systematic research, publication, and dissemination of the inherent strength of existing structures to resist horizontal ground motion would benefit all communities across the globe.


Written by Peter Meijer AIA, NCARB, Principal

The Challenges of Assessing Structural Brick Veneer Panels

The origin of Structural Brick Veneer Panel dates back to the early sixties when new “tensile strength intensive” exotic mortar combined with steel reinforcing to create a 4-inch thick, single wythe brick panel. Developments continued to occur throughout the 1960s and 1970s, peaking in use during the 1980s. The system was relatively expensive due to the use of the high tensile strength mortar.
Koin Center brick pane
Developments in both the high tensile strength mortar and the clay units continued to reduce cost and allow the use of regular reinforcing and standard mortar and grout. Newer systems and manufacturing processes accommodated both horizontal and vertical reinforcing and permitted high-lift grouting. Later advancements in the connections of the brick veneer panel system to the building frame resulted in the use of brick veneer panels system on multi-story high-rise office buildings, schools, apartment buildings, residences and many other applications throughout the United States and the Pacific Northwest.
cracked brick_design guide
Major Failure Mechanisms
There are two major failure mechanisms of Structural Brick Veneer Panels: water intrusion and mortar/grout additives. Water intrusion can occur from a lack of adequate flashing at the window head and sill interface, carbonization of the mortar, and structural cracking. Brick veneer panels are commonly designed to allow for limited cracking at the horizontal bed joints at the brick to mortar interface. Masonry veneer panels leak more through the mortar and brick interface than through the masonry unit itself. If the mortar and brick interface is cracked, as is permitted under structural design calculations, water infiltration will increase. A cement based material, panel mortar will carbonize over time decreasing the protective alkalinity environment surrounding the reinforcing bar and thus increasing the potential for corrosion. The largest volume of water intrusion is typically associated with inadequate window systems that fail to keep water out of both the structural brick veneer panel and the cavity interface.
024
The durability of the wall is highly influenced by the quality of the mortar joints and interior cell grout. The specification should require reconsolidation of the grout or the incorporation of additives that balance expanding, retarding, and water reducing agents to provide a slow, controlled expansion prior to the grout hardening. Mortar/grout additives, particularly those developed in the 1970s, containing vinylidene chloride can initiate and accelerate reinforcing steel corrosion under the right conditions. The composition of the mortar/grout is determined through laboratory analysis of chloride content, vinylidene chloride, and pH level.

Repairs to structural brick veneer panels is labor intensive and may involve panel replacement, panel encapsulation, window system replacement, and/or extensive individual masonry unit repair.


Written by Peter Meijer AIA,NCARB, Principal
—————

Acknowledgement: Tawresey, John G. & John M. Hochwalt, KPFF Structural Engineers, Design Guide for Structural Brick Veneer, 3rd Ed, Western State Clay Products Association