Newton BS 8102 2022 Technical Paper Apr22
Newton BS 8102 2022 Technical Paper Apr22
Newton BS 8102 2022 Technical Paper Apr22
TECHNICAL PAPER
TECHNICAL PAPER
CONTENTS PAGE
• Introduction 2
• Section 1 - Scope 2
• Summary 19
Page 2 of 19
INTRODUCTION
The British Standard 8102:2022 is the ‘Code of Practice for Protection of Below Ground Structures Against Water
Ingress’. The Standard takes the form of recommendations and guidance, and it is assumed in its preparation that
the execution of its provisions will be entrusted to appropriately qualified and experienced people.
The aim of this paper is to provide a section-by-section overview of the most important updates in the new 2022
version of the Standard, which replaces the previous version issued in 2009. Where possible, we will summarise
how this affects the waterproofing design philosophy and strategies that we are able to recommend and employ.
Newton Technical Director Richard Crossley (CSSW, WDS) was one of the specialist waterproofing experts
who contributed as part of the rewrite committee for the revision to the Standard. The committee consisted of
representatives from numerous waterproofing industry manufacturers, installers, designers, insurers, engineers,
gas specialists and trade associations. Every guidance statement and recommendation within the Standard
was considered and debated at length by the committee, and it is important that any individual statement is not
considered in isolation, but as one element of the many interlinked sections that make up the Standard.
Please note: This is not a comprehensive list of every single change made within the 2022 version of BS 8102.
Rather, this is our overview of what we consider to be the most significant and noteworthy updates.
The first, and most obvious amendment to note is the title of the Standard. The previous and current iterations of
the title are as follows:
The evolution of the title is to ensure that considerations are also made for protecting against water that is not
necessarily ground water. This includes, but is not limited to, water that may come to bear against a below-ground
structure as a result of rainfall and flood events, or from burst water mains, both of which would not be considered
as part of the normal water table within the ground.
SECTION 1 - SCOPE
An update to the scope of the standard was expected, and in this case the scope of BS 8102:2022 has been both
expanded and clarified with regards to several factors:
• Reference is now made to other factors that can be associated with the design of below ground structures,
such as ground gases and flooding;
• recognising that, in some cases, for example in civil engineering or energy sector projects, that the
guidance regarding acceptable levels of water ingress can be very different from those that are
outlined in the Standard.
This Section has been generally updated to reflect the status of the most relevant recognised Standards that are
linked with BS 8102:2022, and which have changed or updated since 2009.
Furthermore, previous references to material specification Standards for damp proof courses and bitumen or
mastic asphalt products have been removed. This is in favour of a more detailed commentary under the relevant
Sections later on in the Standard, specifically sections 6 and 8 which cover ‘Water-Resisting Design’ and ‘Type A
(Barrier) Protection’ respectively.
There are also some new reference Standards introduced into Section 2 of the 2022 version, in this case
concerning the execution of concrete structures, which is pertinent to Section 9 on ‘Type B (Structurally Integral)
Protection’ of British Standard 8102.
Several existing references have been the cause of some debate within industry in previous years, and
consequently this revision has attempted to provide clarity within the general context of the Standard. Furthermore,
in recognition of the revised Scope, some new references have also been included, for example for “buried decks”
and “ground gas barriers”.
Further new references are included in a technical context, such as for “fully bonded” and “water resisting
admixture” to reflect their common usage in the industry, and to cover similarly used hydrological terms such as
“hydrostatic pressure”.
The terms “ground barrier” and “vapour check” have both been removed in favour of more detailed technical
references, which have been included either in this section or elsewhere in the Standard.
Overall, added emphasis has been given to the importance and scope of the waterproofing designer role, and
the Standard now recommends that a waterproofing design specialist should be consulted at the earliest stage of
a project. This is ideally before the technical design stage, and the specialist should be consulted and approve of
any amendments which may impact on the overall waterproofing design.
The inclusion of a Waterproofing Specialist is recognised to offer the best chance of success and specialists
should be a Certificated Surveyor in Structural Waterproofing (CSSW) and/or a certified Waterproofing
Design Specialist (WDS).
In cases of litigation or dispute and where the design process is looked at and it is found that a
Waterproofing Design Specialist is not involved in the design process, the designer - and not just the
installer - can be culpable. Section 4.2 of the Standard states that:
“If the RIBA Stages are used, a waterproofing specialist should be appointed before the technical
design stage (STAGE 3) at the latest”
There has been a simplification to the primary and secondary research recommendations, with the aim of
ensuring that the studies are, in all parts, related to the relevant Eurocodes.
The minimal steps that are recommended to be undertaken as part of the site evaluation include:
The aim of the risk assessment is to provide the justification for the proposed waterproofing design, and there are
numerous parts of Section 5 that have been revised and added to, that you should be aware of:
This section of the Standard is a significant and lengthy one, and includes perhaps some of the most notable
changes in the 2022 version. These are summarised below:
“Waterproofing measures should be designed on the basis that water might come against
any part of the structure that is below DPC level or ground level, or is earth retaining at some
time during the life of the structure. Waterproofing should therefore, whenever practicable,
be taken above ground level and linked to the horizontal DPC
A new reference to BS EN 752 ‘Drain and sewer systems outside buildings - sewer system management’
has been included with regards to surcharge flooding from sewers:
“The risk of flooding from surcharge of sewers should be taken into account (see BS EN
752).
There is also a new recommendation that the Waterproofing Design Specialist, as part of the design team,
agrees on the potential head of water that may come to bear against the retaining structure, as based on
the site evaluation and risk assessment in Section 5 (covered above):
“The waterproofing specialist together with the design team should agree a head of water which
the system is designed to accommodate. This head of pressure should be informed by the risk
assessment covered in Clause 5.”
2) the impact on the existing structure on matters such as embedded timbers and moisture
balance.”
“Consideration should be given to the use of combined protection in various forms (e.g. Type
A + B, Type A + C, Type B + C, Type A + B + C, Type A + A) where in a single system:
Although structures with Type B protection are designed to be water resistant, additional
waterproofing systems may be applied internally or externally to control water vapour movement,
where appropriate.
Although structures with Type C protection are designed to control and manage seepage into
a structure, where this is deemed unacceptably high, the water resistance of the structure should
be improved prior to the installation of the Type C protection (see Clause 10 for more information
on Type C protection).
NOTE Suitable approaches include the application of Type A or Type B protection or the use of
resin injection (see Clause 11).
When combining types of protection, the compatibility of the different protection types should be
assessed in order to minimize the risks and negate the need for remedial measures.
When combining Type A and Type B, these systems should be integral (see Figure 7).”
Section 6.2.3 also includes three schematic illustrations regarding Type A, B and C waterproofing
respectively (Figures 2a, 2b and 2c), and these too have undergone updates:
Figure 2a - Type A (barrier) protection
The 2009 version of the Standard showed
three possible positions for Type A
waterproofing membranes - external, internal
and sandwiched.
Below is a copy of the new Table 2 from the 2022 version of the Standard:
SeepageB) and damp areasC) from internal and external sources are tolerable, where this does not
1a
impact on the proposed use of below ground structure.
1b No seepageB). Damp areasC) from internal and external sources are tolerable.
No seepageB) is acceptable.
2 C)
Damp areas as a result of internal air moisture/condensation are tolerable; measures might be
D)
required to manage water vapour/condensation .
C)
No water ingress or damp areas is acceptable.
3 D), E)
Ventilation, dehumidification or air conditioning necessary; appropriate to the intended use .
A) The agreed grade should meet with client’s expectations for the intended use of the below ground space.
Reducing the grade could increase the risk of not meeting the expectations of the client for the intended
use of the below ground space.
B) Seepage (sometimes referred to as weeping) is defined as in 3.14. If there is seepage, there is a possibility of
mineral deposits forming.
C) Damp area is defined as in 3.4.
D) The scope of this document is limited to detailing the process and best practices that can be followed
when creating a waterproof or water-resistant structure below ground, the additional considerations that
are required to achieve the required environment are beyond the scope of this document.
Page 9 of 19
E) See BS 5454 for recommendations for the storage and exhibition of archival documents.
Overall, the new Table 2 is more focused on how the design team should manage the client’s expectations
regarding the intended use of the structure, and the key recommendation is that the desired Grade of
waterproofing protection should be agreed at the earliest stage.
The most significant updates to note regarding this version of Table 2 compared to 2009 are:
• The examples of the user of the structure, that were previously provided for each of the Grades of
protection, have now been removed. This is to avoid any confusion regarding the intended end use
of the structure and the performance level that is required - for example, is there any reason why a
client wouldn’t want their car park to achieve Grade 3 protection instead of Grade 1?
• Grade 1 has now been split into Grade 1a and Grade 1b, and further definitions have been added
to Grade 2 and Grade 3. This is to avoid confusion regarding what qualifies as a wet, damp or dry
structure, and whether the source of the damp comes from external or internal sources.
• Seepage has been defined separately to damp, and specifically mentioned as either acceptable or
unacceptable depending on the Grade of protection. This is mainly due to the risk that, if there is
seepage, then there is a possibility of mineral deposits also forming.
• BS 8485 ‘Code of practice for the design of protective measures for methane and carbon dioxide
ground gases for new buildings’
• BRE Report 211 (2015) ‘Radon: Protective measures for new buildings’
Page 10 of 19
“In the event that unexpected conditions are discovered that were not apparent during the site
assessment and planning stage, these should be reported to the design team and waterproofing
specialist.”
“there should be continuity linking the waterproofing to the horizontal damp proof course above
ground (see 6.2.1).”
“To avoid delays, additional costs and defects in the waterproofing systems, every effort should be
made at the planning and sequencing phase of the project to ensure that waterproofing works can
be carried out without obstruction or interruption.”
“Every effort should be made to prevent damage and maintain the integrity of these systems
during and after the construction phase.”
Page 11 of 19
A comprehensive part of the Standard covering the design and specification of Type A (barrier) waterproofing
membranes, there have been numerous updates throughout Section 8 with many regarding the importance of
continuity and buildability, and also the removal of sandwich waterproofing as a possible position for a Type A
waterproofing barrier.
1. ensure that designers consider detailing with a view to providing for the continuity of the
waterproofing;
2. ensure that, where external membranes are selected, the system maintains full performance should it
become unsupported due to settlement; and
3. provide clearer examples of the potential structural elements that designers must consider. For
example, the presence of props, waling beams, anchors and piles.
The above aims are supported by Figures 6a, 6b and 6c, which was one single illustration in 2009 but
has now been split into three illustrations to indicate where waterproofing systems can be employed, and
also show typical transitions through walls, across pile caps and across pile heads.
“A three-dimensional review of the waterstop network... to ensure full continuity of the system
and identify any areas or junctions that might require special consideration.”
Type A waterproofing is now clearly defined for use in either external or internal applications only, which
fits with the waterproofing products available in the modern market.
Furthermore, a number of additions have been made to the list of considerations that should be made by
designers regarding the product manufacturer’s instructions, including:
The overall aim is that the designer is informed of the full complexities of their design and can therefore
ensure that the proposed products are fully suited to the installation. This therefore leads into Table 3.
• The previous descriptions for the different types of barrier membranes in the 2009 version of the
Standard were outdated and too narrow in relation to the modern sheet membranes now available.
• The term “Bonded Sheet Membranes” has been removed and replaced with a differentiation between
pre-applied and post-applied membranes.
• A new column has been added to indicate the type of bond between a membrane and the structure.
• The types of membrane bonds are now defined as either full, partial or compartmental, in recognition
of the different products available in the market.
• A new type of barrier product has been defined as “Active core liners” to better suit available products
in the market - this includes both bentonite and polymer core products.
• More detail has been added regarding the abilities of “Cementitious crystallisation coatings”,
informing designers on the difference between this technology and multi-coat, cementitious renders.
• The ‘Relevant Standards’ column has been updated to include new standards in line with modern
Type A technologies.
The overall result of these updates is that designers can now more accurately use Table 3 in order to advise
them on the potentially different levels of performance between different Type A barrier systems.
It is also important to highlight the precautionary note that has been included regarding employing post-
applied membranes on certain types of composite formwork (such as ICF):
“Particular care should be taken with composite formwork systems where substrates might
potentially have an adverse reaction to solvent-based adhesives and primers, and when backfilling
against post-applied membranes to reduce the risk of damage.”
“When applied to the internal face of the structure, the membrane should be suitable to resist a
negative or counter thrust hydrostatic pressure without the need for a loading coat”
“Details on the preparation of the substrate, application rate, method and curing requirements
should be in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations.”
“The application of rigid systems should be delayed as long as practicable to allow for
dimensional change associated with building settlement and drying shrinkage to occur and for
construction processes that cause vibration to be completed.”
Furthermore, the ability to withstand increased water pressure loading should also be considered:
“Existing substrates and structural elements should be assessed for their suitability to withstand any
Page 14 of 19
increase in applied loads from water pressure and should be suitably prepared prior to the
application of the system.”
“Concretes, with or without water resisting admixtures, should be designed to meet minimum
design requirements for structural use and durability in the ground, and be properly placed and
compacted.
Reinforced concrete structures should be designed and detailed specifically to minimize water
ingress.
Where some seepage is tolerable (as Grade 1a), the provisions in tightness class 0 of BS EN
1992-1-1 may be adopted.
Where Grade 1b is required, the maximum permissible through crack width of the concrete should
conform to BS EN 1992-3:2006, tightness class 1.
Where higher waterproofing performance grades are required, additional measures (such as a
combined protection, water resisting admixture, pre- or post-tensioning) should be used.”
“The full waterstop network should be designed to ensure that a continuous system is created or is
appropriately terminated at ground level. Special attention is required where active and passive
waterstops are to be linked and act as a continuous network.”
Cavity drain waterproofing is perhaps one of the most commonly used waterproofing methods, so it was
important that this Section was updated to ensure that modern Type C systems are designed and used correctly.
The updates include a focus on the use of the systems in multi-level basement projects, and on the continuity of
waterproofing systems. Furthermore, it emphasises that the waterproofing designer responsible for the design must
ensure that it complies with all requirements and uses of the structure.
Page 15 of 19
Two more important additions are also with regards to the specific details on pumping systems and their discharge
options, as well as the importance of system maintenance, repair, commissioning and future servicing.
“The external elements of the structure should be capable of controlling the rate of water
ingress so as not to exceed the capabilities of the cavity drain system.”
“Before a cavity drain membrane is laid or fitted on walls and floors constructed of new
concrete, the concrete surface should be treated to reduce the risk of leaching of free lime or
mineral salts so as to avoid the obstruction of the drainage system.”
The Section also includes ‘Figure 8 - Example of a multi-level system’ which gives the reader an example
of a standardised design for draining through an intermediate floor.
• BS 8485 - Code of practice for the design of protective measures for methane and carbon dioxide
ground gases for new buildings.
• CIRIA C795 - Retrofitting hazardous ground gas protection measures in existing or refurbished
buildings.
As well as defining the most important considerations in such scenarios, this Section also highlights the
higher levels of risk associated with these forms of application, especially at penetrations through the
Page 16 of 19
• surcharge risk;
• maintainability;
• frozen discharge; and
• the inclusion of flood loops, also illustrated by ‘Figure 9 - Example of a flood loop discharge’
As well as the need for battery back-up pump systems in the event of power failure.
Regardless of the construction method and waterproofing systems employed however, a key
recommendation is that “Strategies for repair should be taken into account at the design stage”, referring
the reader back to Section 4 on ‘Design Philosophy’.
“A structural engineer should be consulted before repairing or stopping any leak which might be
releasing pressure on the structure.”
SUMMARY
Overall, we hope that this detailed document has provided you with a good summary of the many points that
have been updated as part of the 2022 revision to British Standard 8102. As the Code of Practice for the
‘Protection of Below Ground Structures Against Water Ingress’ it attempts to bring the Standard in line with
modern day best practice, as well as recognising the many technological developments and innovations in that
have taken place during the past 13 years in the waterproofing industry.
Furthermore, whilst considerations such as buildability, maintainability, repairability and waterproofing continuity
have become consistent themes in many of the updates that have been made, perhaps most important is the idea
that no individual statement or recommendation with BS 8102:2022 is considered in isolation, but as just one
element of the many interlinked sections that make up the Standard, and which should be considered as a whole.
Page 18 of 19
Revision 1.0 | April © 2022. John Newton & Company Ltd. All rights reserved.