applied

sciences
Article
Viscosity and Waterproofing Performance Evaluation
of Synthetic Polymerized Rubber Gel (SPRG) after
Screw Mixing
Dong Soo Ahn 1 , Kyu Hwan Oh 2 , Jin Sang Park 3 and Sang Keun Oh 1, *
1 School of Architecture, Seoul National University of Science & Technology, 232 Gongneung-ro, Nowon-gu,
Seoul 01811, Korea; ahaind@naver.com
2 Department of Railway Construction, Graduate School of Railway, Seoul National University of Science and
Technology, 232 Gongneung-ro, Nowon-gu, Seoul 01811, Korea; kyuhwan.oh@seoultech.ac.kr
3 Program of Architecture of Convergence Institute of Biomedical Engineering and Biomaterials of Graduate
School, Seoul National University of Science and Technology, 232 Gongneung-ro, Nowon-gu,
Seoul 01811, Korea; waterproofing@seoultech.ac.kr
* Correspondence: ohsang@seoultech.ac.kr; Tel.: +82-2-970-6559




Received: 21 September 2018; Accepted: 16 October 2018; Published: 19 October 2018


Abstract: As opposed to asphalt emulsion waterproofing membrane, Synthetic Rubber Polymer

Gel (SPRG) waterproofing materials are not heated prior to installation in concrete structures.
SPRG materials are typically required to undergo a screw-mixing process to temporarily
reduce the high viscosity and facilitate membrane installation on a concrete surface. However,
there is no standard regulation on the duration of screw-mixing time during SPRG construction.
Reported construction cases indicate that SPRG are left under constant screw mixing and are reused
after hours or days of rest without being replaced with fresh products. When installed in this
condition, SPRGs are subject to waterproofing performance degradation. In this study, SPRG viscosity
properties are measured after five different screw-mixing procedures (no screw mixing, 10, 20, 30
and 60 min) and are set to rest in storage (2 h, 1, 2, 3, and 7 days). Specimens prepared under the
respective screw mixing and storage times are evaluated for their changes in waterproofing properties
through a series of ISO TS 16774 standard evaluation methods. A correlative comparison of the
property evaluation results is presented to provide the changes to SPRG property and waterproofing
performance. These results are then used to propose a general guideline for selecting optimal
screw-mixing time with respect to maintaining adequate waterproofing performance and the viscosity
recovery property of SPRG.

Keywords: concrete waterproofing; synthetic polymerized rubber gel; concrete crack; complex
waterproofing method; screw mixing; storage time

1. Introduction to SPRG Materials and Screw Mixing

1.1. Background
Synthetic polymerized rubber gel (SPRG) is commonly known to have higher adhesion and
elongation properties than most conventional waterproofing materials [1]. However, it is difficult to
install SPRG-based waterproofing sealants taken directly from factory manufacturing and achieve
an evenly distributed application without prior screw mixing. To secure adequate workability,
SPRG materials are placed in a screw-mixing apparatus to reduce viscosity [2].
A quality management-related problem is that construction site workers are unaware of the
consequences of excessive SPRG screw mixing. Often, workers leave the screw mixer apparatus

Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1989; doi:10.3390/app8101989 www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1989 2 of 20

running throughout the entire daily construction work time [3]. Moreover, in between waterproofing
the different sections, unused SPRG that was continuously screw mixed is reused instead of being
replaced with fresh products to reduce material costs. If screw mixed for short durations, SPRG
can recover to its original physical property with the intended, optimal waterproofing performance.
If the screw mixing time is too extended and storage occurs irregularly in between the screw-mixing
intervals, the shear stress caused by the rotating extruders can cause permanent physical degradation
in SPRG [4]. This study proposes a method to derive a standard screw-mixing time to minimize the
degradation of SPRG used for waterproofing in construction sites by comparing the waterproofing
performance of the SPRG after being subjected to different screw-mixing times.

1.2. SPRG Material

SPRG is a polymer modified (Styrene-Butadiene-Styrene (SBS) modified) bituminous emulsion
specifically designed for waterproofing applications. To constantly maintain a ‘non-curable’ state,
SPRG polymers are not completely cross-linked to permanently retain high viscoelasticity throughout
their lifetime [5]. This is intended to provide high resistance to long-term physical stress caused by
substrate joint movement and hydrostatic pressure, have self-healing properties, and resist deformation
due to environmental degradation factors [6].
The SPRG samples used in this study were selected based on the quality performance criteria
outlined in the “KS F 4935: 2008 Adhesive Flexible Rubber Asphalt-Based Injection-Type Sealant for
Repairing Leaks” test standard. The sample was manufactured by combining process oil and rubber
polymer (SBS 501) with bitumen resin compound (AP-3). The compounds were pumped from their
respective containers in a colloid mill and mixed. The colloid mill mixing rotation was set to between
1200 and 1300 RPM, and the temperature was set to 160~170 ◦ C. This SPRG sample is capable of
being installed as both a base coating material for composite sheet waterproofing membranes and
as grout injection repair material for concrete crack repairs, and has an average original viscosity of
3,512,000 cps after the manufacturing process. Refer to Table 1 for the SPRG structural component list
and specifications.

Table 1. Synthetic polymerized rubber gel structural component list and specifications.

Specific Gravity Original Viscosity Composition

Material
(g/mL) (cps) (20 ◦ C, Sp. 6) Component Name/Type Percentage Weight Ratio (%)
Asphalt (bitumen) 10~30
Process oil 10~40
Asphalt modifier 1~10
Heat resistant stiffener 1~10
Adhesion adjuvant 2~20
SPRG 1.1 3,512,000 Inorganic filler 10~20
Admixture for reducing flow rate 10~20
Recycled waste tire 1~10
Solubility modifier 0.3~5
Amphipathic adhesion adjuvant 1~5
Strength adjuvant 1~5

1.3. Application Methods/Types and Problems

1.3.1. Grout Injection Application for Concrete Leakage Crack Repair

Grout injection-type SPRG systems are installed through a positive side grout injection in leaking
concrete structures. The SPRG grout injection repair method is commonly used where the existing
waterproofing layer is installed on the positive side of walls, and not easily accessible for repair.
Maintenance injection holes are drilled into multiple locations and installed with injection ports,
through which the waterproofing gel (SPRG) is injected [7]. The SPRG is dispersed throughout the
positive side of the wall due to the injection pressure, forming a reinforcing layer on the existing
 Grout
Grout injection-type
injection-type SPRGSPRG systems
systems are
are installed
installed through
through aa positive
positive side
side grout
grout injection
injection in in
leaking concrete structures. The SPRG grout injection repair method is commonly
leaking concrete structures. The SPRG grout injection repair method is commonly used where the used where the
existing
existing waterproofing
waterproofing layer layer is
is installed
installed on
on the
the positive
positive side
side of
of walls,
walls, and
and not
not easily
easily accessible
accessible for
for
repair.
repair. Maintenance
Maintenance injection
injection holes
holes are
are drilled
drilled into
into multiple
multiple locations
locations and
and installed
installed with
with injection
injection
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1989 3 of 20
ports,
ports, through
through whichwhich thethe waterproofing
waterproofing gel gel (SPRG)
(SPRG) isis injected
injected [7].
[7]. The
The SPRG
SPRG isis dispersed
dispersed throughout
throughout
the
the positive
positive side
side of
of the
the wall
wall due
due toto the
the injection
injection pressure,
pressure, forming
forming aa reinforcing
reinforcing layer
layer on
on the
the existing
existing
waterproofing
waterproofing membrane layer and preventing further water leakage [8]. Figure 1 gives an
waterproofing membrane
membrane layer
layer and and preventing
preventing further
further water water
leakage leakage
[8]. [8].
Figure 1 Figure
gives an1 gives
illustration
an
illustration
of the groutof
illustration the
the grout
injection
of injection
method
grout using
injection method
SPRGusing
method SPRG
SPRG waterproofing
waterproofing
using material. material.
waterproofing material.

Figure
Figure 1.
Figure 1. Common
1. Common Synthetic
Synthetic polymerized
polymerized rubber gel injection
rubber gel injection in
in aa below-grade
below-grade concrete
concrete structure.
concrete structure.
structure.

1.3.2.
1.3.2. 1-Ply or 2-Ply Composite Sheet Membrane Application for Waterproofing
1.3.2. 1-Ply
1-Ply or
or 2-Ply
2-Ply Composite
Composite Sheet
Sheet Membrane
Membrane Application
Application forfor Waterproofing
Waterproofing
SPRG-based
SPRG-based waterproofing membrane sheets are composite (double-ply) waterproofing sheet
SPRG-based waterproofing
waterproofing membrane
membrane sheets
sheets are
are composite
composite (double-ply)
(double-ply) waterproofing
waterproofing sheet
sheet
membranes.
membranes. Composite SPRG waterproofing sheet membranes are installed by first applying the SPRG
membranes. Composite SPRG waterproofing sheet membranes are installed by first
Composite SPRG waterproofing sheet membranes are installed by first applying
applying the
the
directly
SPRG onto the
directly concrete
onto the structures
concrete (with or(with
structures without
or a primer,
without a depending
primer, on the concrete
depending on the base surface
concrete base
SPRG directly onto the concrete structures (with or without a primer, depending on the concrete base
condition),
surface followed by a conventional sheet membrane installed on top ofon the geloflayer. Figure 2
surface condition),
condition), followed
followed by by aa conventional
conventional sheet
sheet membrane
membrane installed
installed on top
top of the
the gel
gel layer.
layer.
below
Figure 2provides
2 below an illustration
below provides
provides an of the 2-ply
an illustration
illustration of composite
of the
the 2-ply type of
2-ply composite waterproofing
composite type
type of sheet
of waterproofingsystems.
waterproofing sheet
sheet systems.
systems.
Figure

Figure 2. Separate and integrated 2-ply type SPRG waterproofing systems.

Figure
Figure 2.
2. Separate
Separate and
and integrated
integrated 2-ply
2-ply type
type SPRG
SPRG waterproofing
waterproofing systems.
systems.
Much like the case with the grout injection-type application, the SPRG membrane layer can be
subject to severe degrees of deformation if it is screw mixed for too long. The cohesive bonding of the
SPRG can be weakened, which can result in the sheet membrane peeling off due to its own weight
during construction [9]. In such cases, the removal and reinstallation of both the SPRG layer and
the sheet membrane can extend the construction time and costs [10,11]. The deterioration effects
due to excessive screw mixing on the waterproofing performance can reduce the lifetime of SPRG
waterproofing systems. This is evidenced mostly by the results of water or SPRG supernatant (oil and
minimal filler content) leakage in the concrete structure [12].
during construction [9]. In such cases, the removal and reinstallation of both the SPRG layer and the
sheet membrane can extend the construction time and costs [10,11]. The deterioration effects due to
excessive screw mixing on the waterproofing performance can reduce the lifetime of SPRG
waterproofing systems. This is evidenced mostly by the results of water or SPRG supernatant (oil
and minimal
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8,filler
1989 content) leakage in the concrete structure [12]. 4 of 20

1.4. SPRG Degradation Mechanism Caused by Excessive Screw Mixing

1.4. SPRG Degradation Mechanism Caused by Excessive Screw Mixing
Composite SPRG waterproofing membrane installation is commonly conducted through the
Composite
following two steps: SPRGscrewwaterproofing
mixing ismembrane
conductedinstallation is commonly
with an extruder conducted
apparatus, through
and spread the
work,
following two steps: screw mixing is conducted with an extruder apparatus,
commonly with a long-handled roller. During the second step, the extruder apparatus is constantly and spread work,
commonly
left running with a long-handled
to ensure subsequent roller. During
SPRG the second
installation step,proceeds
work the extruder apparatus
without delayisand
constantly
to reduceleft
running to ensure subsequent SPRG installation work proceeds without delay and to
sequential installation time. On the surface, this result may seem like a positive outcome, but there isreduce sequential
installation time. On the
a risk of waterproofing surface, thisloss.
performance result may seem
A simple like a positive
experiment can be outcome,
referred tobut there is
in order to aobserve
risk of
waterproofing performanceduration
the effect of screw-mixing loss. A simple
on theexperiment
workabilitycan of be referred
SPRG. SPRGto samples
in order to observe
were the effect
prepared and
of screw-mixing duration on the workability of SPRG. SPRG samples were
the viscosity was measured immediately after the predetermined screw-mixing times. Afterwards,prepared and the viscosity
was measured
the same sampleimmediately after the
was installed overpredetermined
a 1 m2 concrete screw-mixing
slab surface times.
withAfterwards, the and
a small roller samemetallic
sample
was installed over 2
a 1 taken
m concrete slab
spatula and the time to install a surface
layer ofwith a small roller
approximately and thickness
2 mm metallic spatula and the time
was measured. The
taken to install a layer of approximately 2 mm thickness was measured.
results of the testing showed that the difference in the installation time was notably reduced The results of the testing in
showed that
relation to the
the difference
reduction of in
thethe installation
viscosity time rate.
recovery was notably reduced in relation to the reduction of
the viscosity
Figure 3recovery
and Table rate.
2 provide details.
Figure 3 and Table 2 provide details.

(a) (b)
Figure.3.3 SPRG Gel screw-mixing process prior to application; (a) screw mixing SPRG; (b) reduced
Figure
viscosity after mixing.

Table 2. Typical SPRG structural component list.

Table 2. Typical SPRG structural component list.
Time Taken to Viscosity
Time Taken to Install Viscosity Measurement Viscosity ViscosityLost
Viscosity Lost
Screw
ScrewMixing
Mixing Install 2 mm Measurement Viscosity After 2 h
2 mm Thickness over Immediately After After 2 h of (Max
(MaxViscosity:
Viscosity:
Time(min)
Time (min) Thickness over 1 Immediately After of Rest (cps)
1mm Surface(min)
(min) Screw Mixing 3,512,000
3,512,000cps)
cps)(%)
2 2Surface Screw Mixing (cps)(cps) Rest (cps) (%)
10 31 20,000 3,400,000 5
10 31 20,000 3,400,000 5
11 30 22,000 3,500,000 1
11 30 22,000 3,500,000 1
12 32 20,000 3,400,000 5
12 32 20,000 3,400,000 5
13
13 31
31 20,000
20,000 3,200,000
3,200,000 99
14
14 30
30 19,000
19,000 3,400,000
3,400,000 55
15
15 32 19,000
19,000 3,200,000
3,200,000 99
16
16 29 20,000
20,000 3,000,000
3,000,000 16
16
17
17 22 15,000
15,000 2,400,000
2,400,000 32
32
18
18 26
26 14,000
14,000 2,400,000
2,400,000 32
32
19
19 24
24 13,000
13,000 2,200,000
2,200,000 38
38
20
20 25
25 14,000
14,000 2,500,000
2,500,000 29
29
30 21 13,000 1,800,000 49
60 19 14,000 1,500,000 58

The correlation between viscosity reduction and the shortening of the installation time is already
a commonly known phenomenon for workers who are familiar with SPRG waterproofing materials,
but the consequence of permanent viscosity loss is not a factor that is normally taken into consideration.
While the installation mechanism is different in the case of grout injection for repairs, similar results
can be expected from excessive screw-mixing time. In order to disclose the potential problems that
 60 19 14,000 1,500,000 58

The correlation between viscosity reduction and the shortening of the installation time is already
a commonly known phenomenon for workers who are familiar with SPRG waterproofing materials,
but Sci.
Appl. the2018,
consequence
8, 1989 of permanent viscosity loss is not a factor that is normally taken5 of into
20
consideration. While the installation mechanism is different in the case of grout injection for repairs,
similar results can be expected from excessive screw-mixing time. In order to disclose the potential
could ensue due to excessive screw mixing, the respective degradation mechanisms caused by the
problems that could ensue due to excessive screw mixing, the respective degradation mechanisms
mechanical strain of the extruder need to be discussed.
caused by the mechanical strain of the extruder need to be discussed.
1.4.1. Physical Degradation Mechanism
1.4.1. Physical Degradation Mechanism
SPRG physical property degradation mechanism can be classified into two types: (1) polymeric
SPRGbreakage
crosslink physicaldue
property degradation
to shear stress; andmechanism
(2) particlecan be segregation
layer classified into
duetwo totypes: (1) polymeric
emulsion breaking
crosslink breakage due to shear stress; and (2) particle layer segregation due to
during storage after initial usage. Hooke’s Law explains that the deformation of lightly cross-linked emulsion breaking
during storage after initial usage. Hooke’s Law explains that the deformation of
polymeric materials with viscoelastic properties depends on the strain and temperature. Stress (σ) islightly cross-linked
polymeric materials
proportional to strainwith viscoelastic
(ε), which can beproperties
expresseddepends
with theon the strain
following and temperature.
equation of Hooke’s Stress
Law: (σ) is
proportional to strain (ε), which can be expressed with the following equation of Hooke’s Law:
Stress
Stress
σ𝜎==Eε𝐸𝜀ororStrain ==Constant
Constant (1)
(1)
Strain
As mentioned in Section 1.2, SPRGs have a naturally naturally weaker polymeric crosslink, and a lower
elastic
elastic limit as opposed to other types of polymeric rubber type waterproofing materials. Throughout
the ◦ C,
the screw-mixing
screw-mixing process,
process,thethetemperature
temperatureof ofSPRG
SPRGcancanrise
riseupuptoto 60~70
60~70 °C, which causes the viscosity
to be reduced to less than a tenth of the original viscosity of the SPRG
be reduced to less than a tenth of the original viscosity of the SPRG (Table (Table 2), in
2),accordance withwith
in accordance the
Arrhenius
the Arrhenius temperature-viscosity
temperature-viscositymodel.model.
In thisIn
state,
thispolymer crosslinkcrosslink
state, polymer breakagebreakage
is inducedisrelatively
induced
easily if screw mixing occurs for too long. Figure 4 gives an illustration of this concept.
relatively easily if screw mixing occurs for too long. Figure 4 gives an illustration of this concept.

Figure 4. Polymeric degradation due to continuous shear strain of screw-mixing process.

Figure 4. Polymeric degradation due to continuous shear strain of screw-mixing process.

When set to rest after the screw-mixing process, emulsion breaking and sediment layer hardening
When set to rest after the screw-mixing process, emulsion breaking and sediment layer
can occur more easily. Under normal circumstances, bitumen globules form larger particles when
hardening can occur more easily. Under normal circumstances, bitumen globules form larger
the small aggregate particles coalesce with the emulsifier and the binders, making the emulsion
particles when the small aggregate particles coalesce with the emulsifier and the binders, making
structure stable for a predetermined period [12]. When SPRG is screw mixed for too long, however,
the emulsion structure stable for a predetermined period [12]. When SPRG is screw mixed for too
the emulsifier is dispersed more thoroughly. In this state, a larger amount of emulsifier leaves the
long, however, the emulsifier is dispersed more thoroughly. In this state, a larger amount of
emulsion through the supernatant, mostly comprising process oil and a minimal amount of filler ash
emulsifier leaves the emulsion through the supernatant, mostly comprising process oil and a
content [12]. Supernatants have a higher flow velocity with very low viscosity, and are more easily
minimal amount of filler ash content [12]. Supernatants have a higher flow velocity with very low
able to flow through concrete cracks and leaks into the concrete interior. With a higher concentration
of solvent chemicals that were not able to bind to the aggregates, this type of supernatant leakage can
cause economic and environmental hazards [12]. Figure 5 below provides an illustration of this process.
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 21

viscosity, and are more easily able to flow through concrete cracks and leaks into the concrete interior.
With a higher concentration of solvent chemicals that were not able to bind to the aggregates, this
type of supernatant
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1989 leakage can cause economic and environmental hazards [12]. Figure 5 below 6 of 20
provides an illustration of this process.

5. Property
Figure 5.
Figure Propertychanges
changesin SPRG following
in SPRG the screw-mixing
following process;
the screw-mixing facilitated
process; emulsionemulsion
facilitated breaking
following filler particle and globule dispersion due to screw mixing.
breaking following filler particle and globule dispersion due to screw mixing.

During the
During the construction
construction period
period when
when the the SPRG
SPRG is is installed
installed onto
onto the
the concrete
concrete surface,
surface, oxidation
oxidation
of the binders in the emulsion can also occur and can weaken the physical
of the binders in the emulsion can also occur and can weaken the physical and chemical polymeric and chemical polymeric
crosslink when
crosslink when exposed
exposed to to heat,
heat, sunlight
sunlight andand oxygen
oxygen [13].
[13]. IfIfthe
theemulsifiers
emulsifiers are
are too
too dispersed
dispersed due
due to
to
excessive screw mixing, the SPRG could lose its self-healing properties
excessive screw mixing, the SPRG could lose its self-healing properties as well [14]. as well [14].
IfIfthe
theSPRG
SPRGisisreused
reusedafter
after storage
storage following
following an an excessive
excessive screw-mixing
screw-mixing time,
time, the SPRG
the SPRG maymaynot
not have recovered its original viscosity, and the waterproofing performance
have recovered its original viscosity, and the waterproofing performance may have been lost beyond may have been lost
beyond recovery. When subject to a minimum duration of screw mixing,
recovery. When subject to a minimum duration of screw mixing, the above-mentioned deformation the above-mentioned
deformationmay
mechanisms mechanisms
not applymay not apply
to certain SPRG to certain
products,SPRGandproducts,
reuse afterand reuse after
different different
storage periodsstorage
may
periods may even be possible. In this regard, viscosity recovery rate can be
even be possible. In this regard, viscosity recovery rate can be possible, but a stable screw-mixing possible, but a stable
screw-mixing
duration duration
threshold thresholdundefined.
is currently is currentlyDuring
undefined.
SPRGDuring SPRG construction,
construction, screw mixing screw mixing
should be
should be controlled to minimize the material degradation and risks
controlled to minimize the material degradation and risks of long-term durability failure. of long-term durability failure.

1.4.2. Effects on Waterproofing Performance and Requirements of New Evaluation Regimes

1.4.2. Effects on Waterproofing Performance and Requirements of New Evaluation Regimes
Conventional performance evaluation methods found in national standard test methods such as
Conventional performance evaluation methods found in national standard test methods such as
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), British Standard European Norm (BS EN), Korean
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), British Standard European Norm (BS EN),
Industrial Standard (KS) or Guo Biao (GB) have limitations on properly disclosing and assessing
Korean Industrial Standard (KS) or Guo Biao (GB) have limitations on properly disclosing and
precise deformation mechanism and SPRG waterproofing performance changes after excessive screw
assessing precise deformation mechanism and SPRG waterproofing performance changes after
mixing. Measuring only the viscosity change and recovery rate does not provide an indication of
excessive screw mixing. Measuring only the viscosity change and recovery rate does not provide an
the changes in the long-term durability of the waterproofing layer and the expected influence on
indication of the changes in the long-term durability of the waterproofing layer and the expected
the waterproofing performance. According to ISO TR 16475 Guidelines for the Repair of Water-Leakage
influence on the waterproofing performance. According to ISO TR 16475 Guidelines for the Repair of
Cracks in Concrete Structures, for sealant type waterproofing membranes used in below-grade concrete
Water-Leakage Cracks in Concrete Structures, for sealant type waterproofing membranes used in below-
structures (such as SPRG that can be used as grout materials or a base coating layer for composite
grade concrete structures (such as SPRG that can be used as grout materials or a base coating layer
sheet membrane), a qualitative waterproofing performance evaluation after exposure to physical
for composite sheet membrane), a qualitative waterproofing performance evaluation after exposure
degradation conditioning is required. Based on the degradation mechanism characteristics and the
to physical degradation conditioning is required. Based on the degradation mechanism
construction environment, the following 4 evaluation regimes were adopted from the related ISO
characteristics and the construction environment, the following 4 evaluation regimes were adopted
TS 16774 Test methods for Repair Materials for Water-leakage Cracks for Underground Concrete Structures.
from the related ISO TS 16774 Test methods for Repair Materials for Water-leakage Cracks for Underground
The reasoning for the selection of the 4 regimes is provided below.
Concrete Structures. The reasoning for the selection of the 4 regimes is provided below.
(1) Wash out (material loss) resistance performance
After excessive screw mixing, the rheological property of SPRG is subject to change. Most SPRG
type waterproofing materials are thixotropic, and the dispersion of particles and reduced elasticity
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1989 7 of 20

will increase the relative flow velocity. A higher relative flow velocity means SPRG will spread more
as it settles after installation, which can also indicate more exposed surface area for supernatant or
dispersed particles of the SPRG being ‘washed away’ (eroded from hydrostatic pressure). This is
particularly problematic during the construction period. Due to sudden rainfall or surrounding
water in the underground environment, the exposed supernatant could be washed out of the SPRG.
From a long-term perspective, this can result in the loss of self-healing or viscoelastic properties due to
facilitated demulsification, which results in the waterproofing membrane hardening.
(2) Cohesive stability/Adhesion strength performance
For the same reasons outlined above, in cases where SPRG is installed as a composite sheet
membrane, the waterproofing membrane could peel off (cohesive failure) due to the weight of the sheet,
slide off due to high temperature in the ambient condition, or fail to adhere to the wet concrete surface.
(3) Hydrostatic pressure resistance performance
While the impermeability properties of the SPRG membrane may be relatively unchanged from
screw mixing, it has been documented from case studies that the supernatant can be ‘pushed’ out
through concrete cracks due to hydrostatic pressure [12]. The installed waterproofing membrane can
also be physically displaced from the high hydrostatic pressure, creating leakage paths between the
adhesion interface for water migration.
(4) Hydrostatic pressure resistance after being subject to substrate movement stress performance
From a long-term perspective after construction has been completed, the SPRG membrane
will be subjected to cyclic concrete substrate movement. While properly installed SPRG after
minimal screw-mixing duration can normally withstand the continued zero-span tensile stress without
compromising waterproofing performance, excessively screw-mixed SPRG may have been degraded
to a point where it can no longer withstand hydrostatic pressure or substrate movement stress.
Based on the above waterproofing performance degradation and deformation mechanisms, new
evaluation criterion was designed for SPRG quality control, and a demonstration evaluation method
was conducted.

2. Evaluation and Experimental Methods: SPRG Evaluation Based on Screw-Mixing Time,

Storage and Waterproofing Performance Changes

2.1. Evaluation Plan Overview

In this study, an evaluation procedure was designed to evaluate SPRG waterproofing property
changes based on different screw mixing times and subsequent storage before re-usage in the same
construction project. Based on the respective screw-mixing time, the specimen was set to rest for
predetermined periods of storage. The viscosity change was measured throughout the daily intervals,
and the viscosity loss rate was derived. Once the viscosity of the SPRG sample had been measured at
the specific screw-mixing and storage interval, a specimen was made out of the sample to undergo four
different waterproofing performance change tests. After the results were obtained from the respective
evaluation methods, a comprehensive comparative analysis between specimens subjected to different
screw-mixing times was conducted. The flow chart in Figure 6 below gives a general overview of the
evaluation procedure.
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 21
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1989 8 of 20
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 21

Figure 6. Evaluation procedure flow chart.

Figure 6. Evaluation procedure flow chart.
2.2. Screw-Mixing Method Figure 6. Evaluation procedure flow chart.
2.2. Screw-Mixing Method
For
2.2. the screw-mixing
Screw-Mixing Methodconditioning of the SPRG specimen, a PFT N2 PUMP apparatus was used.
For the
The selected screw-mixing
SPRG sample forconditioning of the SPRG
this study commonly usesspecimen,
a PFT N2 aPUMP
PFT N2 PUMP apparatus
apparatus was used.
during concrete
The For the
selected screw-mixing
SPRG sample conditioning
for this studyof the SPRG
commonly
structure installation. Table 3 gives the device specifications.specimen,
uses a PFTa PFT
N2 N2
PUMP PUMP apparatus
apparatus was
during used.
concrete
The selected
structure SPRG sample
installation. Tablefor this study
3 gives commonly
the device uses a PFT N2 PUMP apparatus during concrete
specifications.
structure installation. Table 3 gives the device specifications.
Table 3. SPRG Screw-Mixing Apparatus Specifications.
Table 3. SPRG Screw-Mixing Apparatus Specifications.
Illustration Voltage
Table 3. Speed Flow
SPRG Screw-Mixing Rate Specifications.
Apparatus Mass Transportable Distance
Illustration Voltage Speed Flow Rate Mass Transportable Distance
Illustration Voltage Speed Flow Rate Mass Transportable Distance

380
380VV or
or Max.
Max. 22 Vertical: Horizontal:
Vertical: 30 Horizontal:
4 KW
280280
RPMRPM
L/min
107 kg
107 kg
m
4 KW 22 L/min 30 m 50 m 50 m
380 V or Max. Vertical: Horizontal:
280 RPM 107 kg
4 KW 22 L/min 30 m 50 m

2.3. Viscosity Change Measurement

2.3. Viscosity Change Measurement
2.3.1. Screw Mixing and Storage Time Conditions
2.3. Viscosity
2.3.1. Screw Change
Mixing andMeasurement
Storage Time Conditions
The screw-mixing time conditions and subsequent storage times are outlined in Table 4.
The
The
2.3.1. screw-mixing
conditions
Screw Mixingwereandtime
selectedconditions
Storage basedTime onand
the subsequent
below-gradestorage
Conditions times sites
construction are outlined in Table 4.inThe
often encountered Korea.
conditions
As therewere are no selected
reliablebased on the below-grade
documented records on construction
the screw-mixingsites often encountered
or storage times, itinwasKorea. As
assumed,
there
forare The
the no screw-mixing
sakereliable time conditions
documented
of demonstrating records
the on
evaluationandthesubsequentin thisstorage
screw-mixing
method times
or storage
study, that are outlined
thetimes, intime
Table
it was assumed,
screw-mixing can4.for
The
reach
theconditions
sake
as long of as were
up to selected
demonstratingone hour based
the without on the
evaluation below-grade
method
stopping inin construction
this
between study, thatsites
during often encountered
the screw-mixing
construction time A
intervals. in
canKorea.
reachAs
non-screw
there
as long
mixed are
as(NSM)no reliable
up to one documented
hour without
conditioned specimen records
stopping on the
in between
was also screw-mixing
included during or storage
construction
to serve as a referencetimes, it
intervals. was
point for assumed,
A non-screw
performance for
the
mixed sake of demonstrating
(NSM) conditioned
comparison criteria. Thespecimenthe evaluation
storage times was beforemethod
also included in
reuse werethis study,
to serve that the
as a reference
set between screw-mixing
point for
daily intervals time can
performance
(hereafter reach
referred
as long
comparison as
to as storage up to
criteria. one
time).The hour without
storagecondition
A period stopping
times before in between
of 2 hreuse
was were during construction
set between
also included as thisdaily intervals.
intervals
condition A non-screw
(hereafter
is an estimation
mixed
referred
of theto (NSM)
as time
stop conditioned
storage time). specimen
in between period was
Aconstruction also
condition
work,included
ofmoving tofrom
2 h was serve as
alsoone asite
reference
included pointas topoint
this for performance
condition
another, andisa 7-day
an
comparison
estimation
storage of period criteria.
the stopwastime The
alsoin storage
between
selected times before
forconstruction
experimental reuse
work, were set
moving from
observation between
one site
purposes. daily intervals
point to another,
Screw-mixing (hereafter
and
and storage
referred
a 7-day
time storage to asperiod
conditions storage
werewas time).
also A
subject to period
selected
change condition
for experimental
based of 2objectives
on the hobservation
was also and included
purposes. asScrew-mixing
requirements thisofcondition andis an
the evaluation.
estimation
storage of the
time conditions
The ambient stop time
conditionwere in
was set between
subject
to 20 to construction
◦ C andbased
± 3change work, moving
at 60 ±on5%the from
objectives
relative one
humidity site
and for point
requirements to another,
all screw-mixing of the and
and
a 7-day
evaluation. storage period was also selected for experimental observation
The ambient condition was set to 20 ± 3 °C and at 60 ± 5% relative humidity for all screw-
storage times. purposes. Screw-mixing and
storage
mixing andtime conditions
storage times. were subject to change based on the objectives and requirements of the
evaluation. The ambient condition was set to 20 ± 3 °C and at 60 ± 5% relative humidity for all screw-
mixing and storage times.
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1989 9 of 20
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 21

Table 4. Screw-mixing
Table 4. Screw-mixing and storage time
and storage time conditions.
conditions.

Stress
Stress Conditioning
Conditioning Duration (Time)
Duration (Time)
StepStep 1. Screw
1. Screw Mix Time
Mix Time (min) (min) NSMNSM 1010 20
20 3030 60 60
Step 2. Storage
Step TimeTime
2. Storage beforebefore
Reuse Reuse2 h 2 h 1 1day
day 22days
days 3 days
3 days 7 days
7 days

2.3.2. Viscosity
2.3.2. Viscosity Change
Change Measurement
Measurement Method
Method
Immediately after
Immediately after the
thescrew-mixing
screw-mixingprocess,
process,andandat at different
different storage
storage condition
condition intervals,
intervals, the
the viscosity of the SPRG was measured using a Brookfield viscometer in accordance
viscosity of the SPRG was measured using a Brookfield viscometer in accordance with the method with the method
outlined in
outlined in KS
KS MM ISO 2555 plastic-liquid,
ISO 2555 plastic-liquid, solid
solid tablet
tablet or
or dispersed
dispersed phase. A constant
phase. A amount of
constant amount of sample
sample
(approximately 10
(approximately 10 kg)
kg) of the SPRG
of the SPRG sample
sample was
was placed
placed inside
inside aa container
container and
and the
the spindle
spindle was
was placed
placed
into the material so that the tip of the spindle was at least 10 mm above the bottom of
into the material so that the tip of the spindle was at least 10 mm above the bottom of the container.the container.
The spindle −1 For each sample subjected to a specific screw-mixing
The spindle was
was rotated
rotated atat aa rate
rate of
of 10
10min
min−1.. For each sample subjected to a specific screw-mixing
time, the sample was measured again after the specified
time, the sample was measured again after the specified storage storage time
time hadhad passed.
passed. See See Figure
Figure 7 below.
7 below.

(a) (b)
Figure 7.
Figure Brookfield viscometer;
7. Brookfield viscometer; (a)
(a) apparatus;
apparatus; (b) measuring SPRG viscosity.

2.4. Waterproofing
2.4. Waterproofing Performance
Performance Test
Test Method
Method
Four different
Four differenttest
testmethods
methodswerewereused
usedto to
assess thethe
assess waterproofing performance
waterproofing of the
performance ofSPRGs after
the SPRGs
the respective screw-mixing and storage times. The each of the four different method’s process
after the respective screw-mixing and storage times. The each of the four different method’s process and
regime are outlined in the following sections below.
and regime are outlined in the following sections below.
2.4.1. Washout Resistance Testing
2.4.1. Washout Resistance Testing
In this evaluation method, a glass petri dish is filled with the SPRG sample. The surface of the
In this evaluation method, a glass petri dish is filled with the SPRG sample. The surface of the
SPRG specimen is treated with a trowel or metal spatula to acquire a surface that is as even as possible.
SPRG specimen is treated with a trowel or metal spatula to acquire a surface that is as even as
The specimens are cured in a test room for a minimum of three days, or for as long as required by the
possible. The specimens are cured in a test room for a minimum of three days, or for as long as
manufacturer’s specifications. The specimen installation process is conducted under normal laboratory
required by the manufacturer’s specifications. The specimen installation process is conducted under
ambient conditions, with the temperature set at 20 ± 3 ◦ C and relative humidity of 60 ± 5%. Five sets
normal laboratory ambient conditions, with the temperature set at 20 ± 3 °C and relative humidity of
of 150 ± 1 g of SPRG specimen are placed in a water flow chamber.
60 ± 5%. Five sets of 150 ± 1 g of SPRG specimen are placed in a water flow chamber.
The specimens are subjected to 0.2 m/s of cycling water flow for 48 h. Next, the specimens
The specimens are subjected to 0.2 m/s of cycling water flow for 48 h. Next, the specimens are
are taken out and placed in a desiccator for four days, until they reach constant mass at 20 ± 3 ◦ C
taken out and placed in a desiccator for four days, until they reach constant mass at 20 ± 3 °C and 60
and 60 ± 5% relative humidity. Afterwards, the mass change of the specimen is measured down
± 5% relative humidity. Afterwards, the mass change of the specimen is measured down to 2 decimal
to 2 decimal places and recorded. For acceptable performance, total mass loss over the evaluation
places and recorded. For acceptable performance, total mass loss over the evaluation period must be
period must be less than 0.1% of the original mass. Figure 8 below provides an illustration of the
less than 0.1% of the original mass. Figure 8 below provides an illustration of the test procedure.
test procedure.
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 21

Appl. Sci.
Appl. Sci. 2018,
2018, 8,
8, 1989
x FOR PEER REVIEW 10
10 of 20
21

(a) (b)
Figure 8. Test(a) (b) flow testing.
method apparatus; (a) specimen placement; (b) water
Figure 8. Test method apparatus;
apparatus; (a)
(a) specimen
specimen placement;
placement; (b)
(b) water
water flow
flow testing.
testing.
2.4.2. Cohesion/Adhesion Strength Testing on Wet Substrate Surface
2.4.2. Cohesion/Adhesion Strength Testing on Wet Substrate Surface
2.4.2.InCohesion/Adhesion
this evaluation method, Strength fiveTesting
sets ofon Wet Substrate
SPRG Surface are prepared by injecting the
sample specimens
In this
SPRGIninthis evaluation
between method,
two substrate five sets
partssets of
(the SPRG sample specimens are prepared by injecting as the
evaluation method, five of substrate
SPRG sample parts specimens
will henceforth be differentiated
are prepared by injecting the
the
SPRG
upper in betweenpart
substrate two(USP)
substrateand parts
the (the substrate
bottom substrateparts
partwill henceforth
(BSP), be differentiated
respectively). Spacers areas placed
the upperon
SPRG in between two substrate parts (the substrate parts will henceforth be differentiated as the
substrate
the spacer part (USP)
holes partof the and the
bottom bottom substrate part (BSP), respectively). Spacers are placed on the
upper substrate (USP) andsubstrate.
the bottom Next, 3–5 mm
substrate partlayers
(BSP),ofrespectively).
mortar are cast (the upper
Spacers are placedside on
of
spacer
the BSP holes
and of the
the bottom
bottom side substrate.
of the USP) Next,
and 3–5
curedmm forlayers
28 days of in
mortar
a are castOnce
desiccator. (the upper
the side layers
mortar of the
the spacer holes of the bottom substrate. Next, 3–5 mm layers of mortar are cast (the upper side of
BSP
are and the bottom isside of the USP) and cured forBSP.
28 days inana desiccator. Once the mortar layers are
the cured,
BSP and the USP
the bottom placed
side on the USP)
of the spacers and ofcured
the for Next,
28 days acrylic
in band
a desiccator. is Once
placed over
the the
mortar 20 mm
layers
cured,
gap the USP
to prevent is placed
repair on
materialthe spacers of the BSP. Next, an acrylic band is placed over the 20 mm gap
are cured, the USP is placed on overflow
the spacers during
of theinjection.
BSP. Next,The an assembled
acrylic bandsubstrate
is placedisoversubmerged
the 20 mm in
to prevent
water and repair
the materialisoverflow
specimen installed during
via an injection.process.
injection The assembled
The substrate
specimen is submerged
preparation is in water
conducted
gap to prevent repair material overflow during injection. The assembled substrate is submerged in
and
under thenormal
specimen is installed
laboratory via an injection process. Thetemperature
specimen preparation 20 ±is3conducted under
water and the specimen isambient
installedconditions,
via an injection withprocess.
the The specimenset atpreparation °C, isand relative
conducted
◦ C, and relative humidity of
normal
humidity laboratory ambient
of 60 laboratory
± 5%. conditions, with the temperature set at 20 ± 3
under normal ambient conditions, with the temperature set at 20 ± 3 °C, and relative
60 ± As 5%.soon as the setting platform has been removed and the specimen set midair (hanging by the
humidity of 60 ± 5%.
As soon
connection toasthethe setting
USP), the platform
duration has for been removed and canthe specimenadhesion
set midair is (hanging
measuredby upthe
As soon as the setting platform haswhich the material
been removed and the maintain
specimen set midair (hanging by to
the
connection
aconnection
maximum to of
the60 USP),
s. theinterval
The durationatforwhichwhichadhesion
the material or can maintain
cohesion adhesion
failure of the ismaterial
measured up to is
occurs a
to the USP), the duration for which the material can maintain adhesion is measured up to
maximum
measured of
and60 s. The interval at which adhesion or cohesion failure of the material occurs is measured
a maximum of recorded
60 s. The (unit:interval second).
at which Foradhesion
acceptable or performance,
cohesion failure adhesive/cohesive
of the material occurs bonding is
and
shouldrecorded
hold (unit:
for up second).
to 60 s. For acceptable
Figure 9 provides performance,
an illustrationadhesive/cohesive
of the test bonding should hold for
procedure.
measured and recorded (unit: second). For acceptable performance, adhesive/cohesive bonding
up to 60 s. Figure 9 provides an illustration of the test procedure.
should hold for up to 60 s. Figure 9 provides an illustration of the test procedure.

(a) (b)
Figure9.9.Test
Figure Testmethod
methodfor (a)
foradhesion
adhesion on
on wet substrate; (a) specimen(b)
wet substrate; placement; (b)
placement; (b)water
waterflow
flowtesting.
testing.
Figure 9. TestPressure
2.4.3. Hydrostatic method for adhesion on
Resistance wet substrate; (a) specimen placement; (b) water flow testing.
Testing
2.4.3. Hydrostatic Pressure Resistance Testing
2.4.3.In this evaluation
InHydrostatic
this evaluation
method,
Pressure five setsTesting
Resistance
method,
of SPRG sample specimens are prepared by injecting the SPRG
five sets of SPRG sample specimens are prepared by injecting the
in between two substrate parts. Spacers are placed on the spacer holes of the bottom substrate. Next,
SPRGIninthisbetween two substrate parts.
evaluation Spacers are placed onspecimens
the spacer are
holes of the bottom substrate.
3–5 mm layers of mortarmethod, five upper
are cast (the sets ofside
SPRG sample
of the BSP and prepared
the bottom side of the by
USP)injecting the
and cured
Next,
SPRG 3–5
in mm layers
between two of mortar are
substrate cast
parts. (the upper
Spacers are side of
placed onthe
theBSP andholes
spacer the bottom
of the side ofsubstrate.
bottom the USP)
for 28 days in a desiccator. Once the mortar layers have been cured, the USP is placed on the spacers
and
Next,cured
3–5 mmfor 28 daysof
layers inmortar
a desiccator. Once
areis cast the
(theover mortar
upper layers have been cured, the USP
side isofplaced on
of the BSP. Next, the acrylic band placed theside
20 mm of the
gapBSP and the
to prevent bottom
repair material the USP)
overflow
the spacers
and cured of the
for 28The BSP.
days Next, the acrylic
in a desiccator. band
Onceisthe is placed over
mortar layers the 20 mm gap to prevent repair material
during injection specimen preparation conducted under have
normal been cured, the
laboratory USP isconditions,
ambient placed on
overflow
the spacers during injection
of the BSP.set The
Next, specimen preparation is conducted under normal laboratory ambient
with the temperature at 20the
± acrylic
3 ◦ C and band is placed
relative over the
humidity of 6020±mm5%.gap to prevent repair material
conditions,
overflow with
during the temperature
injection set at 20 ± 3 °C and relative humidity of 60 ± 5%.
To begin testing, the The specimen
acrylic band is preparation
removed from is conducted under normal
the specimen, laboratorypressure
and hydrostatic ambient
To begin
conditions, with testing,
the the acrylicset
temperature band
at 20is± removed
3 °C and from the
relative specimen,
humidity of and
60 ± hydrostatic pressure
5%.
testing is conducted by placing the SPRG installed specimen inside the permeability testing chamber.
testing
Toisbegin
conducted by placing the SPRG installed specimen inside the permeability testing chamber.
The chamber istesting, the with
then filled acrylic
1 Lband is
of water. removed
0.2 N/mm from
2 airthe specimen,
pressure and hydrostatic
is applied pressure
through a pressure
testing is conducted by placing the SPRG installed specimen inside the permeability testing chamber.
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 21
Appl.
Appl. Sci.
Sci. 2018,
2018, 8,
8, x1989
FOR PEER REVIEW 1111of
of 21
20
The chamber is then filled with 1 L of water. 0.2 N/mm2 air pressure is applied through a pressure
The chamber is then filled with 1 L of water. 0.2 N/mm2 air pressure is applied through a pressure
inlet located from the pressure inlet on the top of the chamber for 1 h. The time interval at which
inlet
inlet located
located from the
the pressure inlet on
on the top of the chamber for 1 h. The
The time
time interval
interval at
at which
leakage occursfrom pressure
is measured (unit:inlet
minute). Figure 10 below provides an illustration. which
leakage
leakage occurs is measured (unit: minute).
minute). Figure
Figure 10
10 below
below provides
provides an illustration.

Figure 10. Hydrostatic pressure testing illustration.

Figure 10.
Figure Hydrostatic pressure
10. Hydrostatic pressure testing
testing illustration.
illustration.

2.4.4.
2.4.4.Substrate
SubstrateMovement
Movement Resistance
Resistance Testing
Testing (Followed
(Followed bybyHydrostatic
Hydrostatic Pressure
Pressure Resistance
ResistanceTesting)
Testing)
2.4.4. Substrate Movement Resistance Testing (Followed by Hydrostatic Pressure Resistance Testing)
InInthis
thisevaluation method, five
evaluation method, fivesets
setsofofSPRG
SPRG sample
sample specimens
specimens are are prepared
prepared by injecting
by injecting the
the SPRG
In this evaluation method, five sets of SPRG sample specimens are prepared by injecting the
SPRG in between
in between two substrate
two substrate parts.parts.
SpacersSpacers are placed
are placed on the onspacer
the spacer
holesholes
of theofbottom
the bottom substrate.
substrate. Next,
SPRG in between two substrate parts. Spacers are placed on the spacer holes of the bottom substrate.
Next,
3–5 mm 3–5layers
mm layers of mortar
of mortar are castare
(thecast (the side
upper upperof side
the BSPof the
andBSPthe and
bottomtheside
bottom side
of the of the
USP) andUSP)
cured
Next, 3–5 mm layers of mortar are cast (the upper side of the BSP and the bottom side of the USP)
and
for cured
28 days forin28 days in a desiccator.
a desiccator. Once the
Once the mortar mortar
layers have layers
beenhave
cured,been
the cured,
USP is the USPon
placed is the
placed on
spacers
and cured for 28 days in a desiccator. Once the mortar layers have been cured, the USP is placed on
the
of spacers
the BSP.of the BSP.
Next, Next, the
the acrylic acrylic
band band over
is placed is placed
the 20over
mm thegap20 to
mm gap to repair
prevent prevent repair material
material overflow
the spacers of the BSP. Next, the acrylic band is placed over the 20 mm gap to prevent repair material
overflow during injection The specimen preparation is conducted under
during injection The specimen preparation is conducted under normal laboratory ambient conditions,normal laboratory ambient
overflow during injection The specimen preparation is conducted under normal laboratory ambient
conditions, with the temperature
with the temperature set at 20 ± set3 ◦Catand
20 ±relative
3 °C and relative of
humidity humidity
60 ± 5%. of 60 ± 5%.
conditions, with the temperature set at 20 ± 3 °C and relative humidity of 60 ± 5%.
ToTobegin
begintesting,
testing,the
theacrylic
acrylicband
bandisisremoved
removedfrom fromthethespecimen,
specimen,and andthe
thespecimen
specimenisissubjected
subjected
To begin testing, the acrylic band is removed from the specimen, and the specimen is subjected
totobehavioral movement of 600 movement cycles of 10 mm displacement
behavioral movement of 600 movement cycles of 10 mm displacement at a rate of 50 mm/min. at a rate of 50 mm/min.
to behavioral movement of 600 movement cycles of 10 mm displacement at a rate of 50 mm/min.
Afterwards,
Afterwards,the thespecimen
specimenisis subjected
subjected toto
hydrostatic
hydrostatic pressure
pressure testing. Hydrostatic
testing. Hydrostatic pressure testing
pressure is
testing
Afterwards, the specimen is subjected to hydrostatic pressure testing. Hydrostatic pressure testing is
conducted by placing the SPRG installed specimen inside the permeability
is conducted by placing the SPRG installed specimen inside the permeability testing chamber. testing chamber. The
conducted by placing the SPRG installed specimen inside the 2permeability2 testing chamber. The
chamber
The chamberis thenisfilled
thenwith 1 Lwith
filled of water.
1 L ofAirwater.
pressureAirofpressure
0.2 N/mmof is0.2 applied
N/mm through a pressure
is applied inleta
through
chamber is then filled with 1 L of water. Air pressure of 0.2 N/mm2 is applied through a pressure inlet
located
pressure frominletthelocated
pressurefrominlet
theon the top inlet
pressure of theonchamber
the top for 1 h.chamber
of the The timefor interval
1 h. Theat which leakageat
time interval
located from the pressure inlet on the top of the chamber for 1 h. The time interval at which leakage
occurs is measured in minutes. Figure 11 below provides an illustration.
which leakage occurs is measured in minutes. Figure 11 below provides an illustration.
occurs is measured in minutes. Figure 11 below provides an illustration.

Figure 11. Illustration of substrate movement resistance testing.

Figure 11. Illustration of substrate movement resistance testing.
Figure 11. Illustration of substrate movement resistance testing.
Appl. Sci.
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1989
2018, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12
12 of
of 21
20

3. Results and Discussion

3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Viscosity Measurement Results
3.1. Viscosity Measurement Results
Table 5 shows the viscosity measurements of SPRG samples screw mixed and stored at
Table 5times
respective shows
forthe viscosity measurements
predetermined of SPRG
periods (outlined samples
in Table 5). screw mixed and
The maximum stored at
viscosity ofrespective
the SPRG
times for predetermined periods (outlined in Table 5). The maximum viscosity of the SPRG
evaluated in this study was obtained from the data sheet of the product specification, which was evaluated
in this to
found study was obtained
be 3,512,000 from
cps (to the dataosheet
be labelled of thecalculation
for future product specification, whichsections
in the upcoming was found to be
below).
3,512,000 cps (to be labelled o for future calculation in the upcoming sections below).
Table 5. Viscosity measurement in accordance with predetermined screw-mixing and storage times.
Table 5. Viscosity measurement in accordance with predetermined screw-mixing and storage times.
Screw Viscosity Measurement at Different Storage Average Viscosity over 7
Original Viscosity Measurement at (cps)
Different Storage Period Average Viscosity
Original Mixing Screw Period Intervals Day Period
Viscosity
Viscosity Time Mixing Intervals (cps) over 7 Day Period
Viscosity
(a. (a.
cps) (o)
cps) (o) Time (min)2h 1 Day 2 Days 3 Days 7 Days Viscositycps/o
cps/ocps
cps(%)
(min) 2h 1 Day 2 Days 3 Days 7 Days (cps)
(cps) (%)
NSMNSM1 3,431,000 3,421,000 3,452,000 3,443,000 3,461,000
1 3,431,000 3,421,000 3,452,000 3,443,000 3,461,000 3,441,000
3,441,000 98
98
10 103,221,000 3,241,000 3,236,000 3,451,000 3,479,000 3,326,000
3,221,000 3,241,000 3,236,000 3,451,000 3,479,000 3,326,000
95
95
3,512,000 cps
3,512,000 cps 20 2,531,000 2,024,000 2,248,000 2,498,000 2,038,000 2,268,000 65
20 2,531,000 2,024,000 2,248,000 2,498,000 2,038,000 2,268,000 65
30 1,784,000 2,131,000 2,152,000 2,064,000 2,021,000 2,030,000 58
30 1,784,000 2,131,000 2,152,000 2,064,000 2,021,000 2,030,000 58
60 1,540,000 1,993,000 1,787,000 1,538,000 1,553,000 1,682,000 48
60 1,540,000 1,993,000 1,787,000 1,538,000 1,553,000 1,682,000 48
1 NSM: Non-screw mixed.
1 NSM: Non-screw mixed.

For this
For this SPRG
SPRG sample,
sample, it was shown
it was shown that
that after
after 1010 min
min of
of screw
screw mixing,
mixing, an
an average
average viscosity
viscosity
change throughout
change throughoutthe thedifferent
differentstorage
storageperiods
periods of of
upup to 95%
to 95% waswas possible,
possible, whereas
whereas withwith samples
samples that
that were screw mixed for longer than 20 min, the viscosity percentage reached around
were screw mixed for longer than 20 min, the viscosity percentage reached around 65%. For a clearer65%. For a
clearer illustration, refer to the below graph in
illustration, refer to the below graph in Figure 12. Figure 12.

Figure 12. SPRG

Figure 12. SPRGviscosity
viscositychange
changeover
overdifferent storage
different periods
storage based
periods on respective
based screw-mixing
on respective time.
screw-mixing
time.
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1989 13 of 20

3.2. Experimental Results of Waterproofing Performance Evaluation

Table 6 shows the experimental results of the waterproofing performance test methods in
accordance with different screw-mixing and storage times. For each of the five specimens, washout
resistance (mass lost in grams), cohesion/adhesion strength (seconds), and hydrostatic pressure
resistance with and without substrate movement conditioning (minutes) were recorded and averaged,
and a total average value was also derived.
For the washout (material loss) resistance performance test results, the SPRG samples satisfied
the performance requirement for all screw-mixing and storage duration conditions, but the mass loss
increased relative to the increasing screw-mixing duration.
For the washout resistance test method results, performance failure was observed from the 30 min
mark through cohesive failure of the SPRG layer. Past the 2 days of storage period, cohesive failure no
longer occurred for any specimens. For specimens that were screw mixed for 60 min, performance
failure occurred throughout the entire storage time conditioning without signs of recovery.
For the hydrostatic pressure resistance test method results, waterproofing performance failure
was apparent from the 20-min mark, showing signs of recovery at the 7 days of storage time interval.
Past this point, waterproofing performance failure began to occur throughout the other screw mixing
times, but showed minor signs of performance recovery after a longer storage period.
For the substrate movement resistance test method results, waterproofing performance failure was
apparent from the 10-min screw-mixing time. Due to the tensile stress from the substrate movement,
performance recovery with respect to storage duration was no longer apparent.
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1989 14 of 20

Table 6. Waterproofing performance testing results based on different screw-mixing times over predetermined storage periods.
Screw Mix Time Per Specimen
Test Method Storage Time No Screw Mixing 10 min 20 min 30 min 60 min
A B C D E Avg A B C D E Avg A B C D E Avg A B C D E Avg A B C D E Avg
2h 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.08 0.02 0.00 0.07 0.03 0.11 0.08 0.13 0.10 0.07 0.10 0.12 0.22 0.17 0.09 0.11 0.14
1 day 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.11 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.02 0.04 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.06 0.08 0.12 0.11 0.09 0.09 0.11 0.16 0.14 0.10 0.12 0.13
Washout Resistance 2 days 0.10 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.07 0.05 0.05 0.07 0.05 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.10 0.09 0.06 0.02 0.07 0.07 0.12 0.14 0.18 0.13 0.12 0.14 0.12 0.21 0.06 0.14 0.11 0.13
(g) 3 days 0.08 0.02 0.03 0.10 0.03 0.05 0.07 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.08 0.04 0.08 0.04 0.00 0.10 0.03 0.05 0.08 0.12 0.14 0.05 0.16 0.11 0.11 0.24 0.08 0.14 0.15 0.14
7 days 0.04 0.10 0.00 0.10 0.03 0.05 0.01 0.05 0.04 0.06 0.07 0.05 0.10 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.07 0.10 0.09 0.08 0.09 0.11 0.14 0.07 0.12 0.11
Avg.(w) 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.03 0.06 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.09 0.10 0.13 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.19 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.13
2h 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 22 35 37 41 32 33 12 27 11 15 16 16
1 day 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 29 54 26 47 36 38 11 8 9 16 10 11
Cohesion/Adhesion 2 days 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 21 15 24 17 8 17
Strength (S) 3 days 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 23 16 21 24 29 23
7 days 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 16 18 21 15 17 17
Avg (ts ) 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 46 54 49 54 50 50 17 17 17 17 16 17
2h 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 49 28 31 26 38 34 12 21 8 2 6 10 0 5 0 2 12 4
1 day 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 33 42 37 26 37 35 26 19 48 0 9 20 6 0 9 0 0 3
Hydrostatic Pressure 2 days 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 43 38 24 39 41 11 17 24 42 7 20 11 0 24 6 14 11
Resistance (min) 3 days 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 36 47 42 35 29 39 12 60 35 7 37 30 27 32 0 15 37 22
7 days 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 36 21 47 32 26 32 39 60 44 0 26 34
Avg. (ti ) 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 48 44 42 34 41 49 19 28 32 17 17 22 17 19 15 5 18 15
2h 60 60 60 60 60 60 56 60 43 52 60 54 16 21 17 0 23 15 18 6 14 4 26 14 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hydrostatic Pressure 1 day 60 60 60 60 60 60 42 60 39 16 48 41 0 0 5 29 0 7 32 0 20 13 22 17 0 12 0 26 0 8
Resistance after 2 days 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 13 47 60 48 37 18 40 13 46 31 36 22 24 45 27 31 0 60 0 0 0 12
Substrate Movement 3 days 60 60 60 60 60 60 37 49 45 36 60 45 19 60 7 56 32 35 45 19 0 11 12 17 0 0 0 0 0 0
(min) 7 days 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 54 60 50 26 50 47 60 60 60 0 45 22 46 2 33 40 29 0 0 0 35 14 10
Avg.(tsm ) 60 60 60 60 60 60 51 57 40 40 51 48 24 32 26 32 20 27 31 19 12 21 25 22 0 14 0 12 3 6
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1989 15 of 20

3.3. Comparative Evaluation on Change in Waterproofing Performance (Estimation)

Based on the results of the viscosity change measurement throughout the storage period and
the waterproofing performance testing results, the loss/failure percentage ratio was calculated and
compared for a comprehensive evaluation of the respective performance and property changes due
to different screw-mixing and storage times. The ratios were derived using the viscosity change
measurement data from Table 5 and the averaged measurements of performance evaluation data in
Table 6. The ratios were all calculated such that higher ratios represent higher deformation or deviation
from optimal conditions.

3.3.1. Viscosity Loss Ratio Based on the Results of the Viscosity Change Measurements
SPRG viscosity loss ratio is measured using the following equation;

100% − v/o × 100% = Vl (2)

where:

v: measured viscosity after screw-mixing condition (cps) (value obtained from Table 6).
o: original viscosity (3,512,000 cps).
Vl : viscosity loss ratio.

3.3.2. Mass Loss Ratio Based on Washout Resistance Testing Results

The mass loss ratio of the SPRG is measured using the following equation, based on the results of
the washout resistance test results:

{w/(150 g × 0.1%)} × 100% = Wl (3)

where:

w: average mass lost during the water flow cycle (g) (value obtained from Table 6).
Wl : mass loss ratio.

3.3.3. Failure Ratio Based on Cohesion/Adhesion Strength Testing Results

The adhesion failure ratio of the SPRG is measured using the following equation, based on the
results of the cohesion/adhesion strength test:

(60 − ts (seconds))/60 (seconds) × 100% = Tf (4)

where:

ts : average number of seconds taken before performance failure occurred (value obtained from Table 6)
Tf : adhesion degradation ratio indicating how quickly material failure occurred.

3.3.4. Failure Ratio Based on Results of Hydrostatic Pressure Resistance Testing Results
The impermeability failure ratio of the SPRG is measured using the following equation, based on
the results of the hydrostatic pressure resistance testing:

(60 (minutes) − ti )/60 (minutes) × 100% = Tif (5)

where:

ti : average number of minutes taken before performance failure occurred during hydrostatic pressure
testing (value obtained from Table 6).
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1989 16 of 20

Tif : impermeability degradation ratio indicating how quickly material failure occurred.

3.3.5. Failure Ratio after Substrate Movement Stress Based on Results of Hydrostatic Pressure
Resistance Test after Substrate Movement Testing Results
The impermeability failure ratio of the SPRG after substrate movement stress conditioning is
measured using the following equation, based on the results of the substrate movement resistance test:

(60 (minutes) − tsm )/60 (minutes) × 100% = Tsmf (6)

where:

tsm : average number of minutes taken before performance failure occurred during hydrostatic pressure
testing after substrate movement stress (value obtained from Table 6).
Tsmf : adhesion degradation ratio indicating how quickly material failure occurred.

3.4. Evaluation Results of the Failure/Loss Ratios of Respective Performance Criteria of SPRG
A comprehensive representation of the overall changes to the waterproofing performance and
property changes to the SPRG when subject to screw mixing and extended storage, and the ratios of the
respective performance properties obtained from Section 3.2, Table 6, are outlined below. The failure
ratios were calculated from the averaged rate results between the five specimens. The respective failure
or loss ratios of viscosity and waterproofing performance were averaged to derive a comprehensive
deviancy ratio per screw-mixing time at different storage periods. Tables 7–11 provide details.

Table 7. Estimation of the deviancy from the expected performance of SPRG (2 h storage).

Ratio per Screw Mixing Time (%)

Degradation Factors
NSM 10 min 20 min 30 min 60 min
Viscosity loss ratio (Vl ) 2 8 2 49 56
Mass loss ratio (Wl ) 13 7 20 67 93
Adhesion failure ratio (Tf ) 0 0 0 45 73
Impermeability failure ratio (Tif ) 0 1 43 83 93
Impermeability failure ratio after SMRT 1 (Tsmf ) 0 10 75 77 100
Averaged deviancy from expected performance 3 5.2 33.2 64.2 83
1 Substrate movement resistance testing.

Table 8. Estimation of the deviancy from the expected performance of SPRG (1 day storage).

Ratio per Screw Mixing Time (%)

Degradation Factors
NSM 10 min 20 min 30 min 60 min
Viscosity loss ratio (Vl ) 3 8 42 39 43
Mass loss ratio (Wl ) 2 13 13 60 87
Adhesion failure ratio (Tf ) 0 0.5 2.5 37 82
Impermeability failure ratio (Tif ) 0 0 42 67 95
Impermeability failure ratio after SMRT 1 (Tsmf ) 0 32 88 72 87
Averaged deviancy from expected performance 1 10.7 37.5 55 78.8
1 Substrate movement resistance testing.
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1989 17 of 20

Table 9. Estimation of the deviancy from the expected performance of SPRG (2 days storage).

Ratio per Screw Mixing Time (%)

Degradation Factors
NSM 10 min 20 min 30 min 60 min
Viscosity loss ratio (Vl ) 2 8 36 39 49
Mass loss ratio (Wl ) 33 27 47 93 87
Adhesion failure ratio (Tf ) 0 1 1 0 72
Impermeability failure ratio (Tif ) 0 1.5 32 67 82
Impermeability failure ratio after SMRT 1 (Tsmf ) 0 20 48 48 80
Averaged deviancy from expected performance 7 11.5 32.8 49.4 74
1 Substrate movement resistance testing.

Table 10. Estimation of the deviancy from the expected performance of SPRG (3 days storage).

Ratio per Screw Mixing Time (%)

Degradation Factors
NSM 10 min 20 min 30 min 60 min
Viscosity loss ratio (Vl ) 2 2 29 41 56
Mass loss ratio (Wl ) 34 27 33 73 93
Adhesion failure ratio (Tf ) 0 1.5 1.5 0 62
Impermeability failure ratio (Tif ) 0 1 35 50 63
Impermeability failure ratio after SMRT 1 (Tsmf ) 0 25 42 72 100
Averaged deviancy from expected performance 7.2 11.3 28.1 47.2 74.8
1 Substrate movement resistance testing.

Table 11. Estimation of the deviancy from the expected performance of SPRG (7 days storage).

Ratio per Screw Mixing Time (%)

Degradation Factors
NSM 10 min 20 min 30 min 60 min
Viscosity loss ratio (Vl ) 1 1 42 42 56
Mass loss ratio (Wl ) 32 33 33 53 73
Adhesion failure ratio (Tf ) 0 2 2 0 72
Impermeability failure ratio (Tif ) 0 2 0 47 43
Impermeability failure ratio after SMRT 1 (Tsmf ) 0 17 25 52 83
Averaged deviancy from expected performance 6.6 11 20.4 38.8 65.4
1 Substrate movement resistance testing.

With the increase in the screw-mixing time, the percentage of deformation ratio with respect
to viscosity and waterproofing performance were also shown to increase. While NSM condition
SPRG specimens had the lowest deformation percentage ratio, minimal screw mixing is still required
for SPRG to be used in construction sites. Based on the results of this demonstration evaluation,
a recommended screw-mixing time of 10-min of less can be proposed.
Next, a set of radar charts in Figure 13 was derived based on the results of the viscosity
measurement and the four waterproofing performance test results. In this case, the comparison
was derived based on different screw-mixing time conditions, and lines distributed based on different
storage conditions, to visually represent the degree of performance recovery of (1) viscosity and (2)
waterproofing performance throughout the storage period after screw mixing. The axes of the radar
charts were all designated so that higher values represent a greater degree of deviation or deformation
for the purpose of a facilitated visual comparison. Each of the performance failure ratios derived from
Section 3.2 formed an axis on the radar charts and the values were plotted respectively. Figure 13
provides details.
When visually represented with the radar graphs, the difference in the recovery of viscosity
and waterproofing performance was clear between different screw-mixing times throughout the
storage periods. In the case of up to 20 min of screw-mixing time, the viscosity and waterproofing
performances recovery by the seventh day of storage was fair, as the data on the deviation were closer
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1989 18 of 20

towards the center of the radar chart. Once the screw-mixing time reaches 60 min, all the property
and performance factors are at a significantly higher deviation state. At 60 min of screw mixing:
(1) relatively significant deformation and performance degradation is imminent, and (2) repeated
screw
Appl. Sci.mixing
2018, 8, at anyPEER
x FOR point of the storage time for reuse can result in a risk of even further performance
REVIEW 19 of 21
deterioration and waterproofing failure.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e)
Figure
Figure 13.
13. Radar
Radar charts
charts for
for comparative
comparative evaluation
evaluation of of overall
overall waterproofing
waterproofing performance;
performance; (a)
(a) results
results
for
for no
noscrew
screwmixing;
mixing;(b)
(b)results
resultsfor
for1010
min
min ofof
screw mixing;
screw mixing;(c) (c)
results for for
results 20 min of screw
20 min mixing;
of screw (d)
mixing;
results for 30
(d) results formin of screw
30 min mixing;
of screw (e) results
mixing; for for
(e) results 60 min of screw
60 min of screwmixing.
mixing.

4. Conclusions
4. Conclusions
This study
This study proposes
proposes that
that an
an optimized
optimized screw-mixing
screw-mixing time
time for
for SPRG
SPRG waterproofing
waterproofing materials
materials
prior to
prior to installation
installation is
is required
required toto prevent
prevent property
property changes, viscosity loss
changes, viscosity loss and
and waterproofing
waterproofing
performance failures. While still necessary, if the screw-mixing time and storage for
performance failures. While still necessary, if the screw-mixing time and storage for reuse after reusescrew
after
screw mixing during construction are too long, the performance of the material can be negatively
mixing during construction are too long, the performance of the material can be negatively affected.
Prioritizing improving the workability or construction efficiency of SPRG should not come at the cost
of waterproofing performance. Otherwise, the construction can result in water leakage.
In this regard, the proposed evaluation procedure offers a new way to assess the waterproofing
performance deviation of SPRG in relation to the viscosity changes from different screw-mixing and
storage times. A comparative assessment of waterproofing performance using the testing regimes
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1989 19 of 20

affected. Prioritizing improving the workability or construction efficiency of SPRG should not come at
the cost of waterproofing performance. Otherwise, the construction can result in water leakage.
In this regard, the proposed evaluation procedure offers a new way to assess the waterproofing
performance deviation of SPRG in relation to the viscosity changes from different screw-mixing and
storage times. A comparative assessment of waterproofing performance using the testing regimes
outlined in the ISO TS 16774 series showed that screw mixing certainly affected SPRG waterproofing
performance. The final radar chart representation of the comparative evaluation data clearly expressed
that the recovery of SPRG viscosity and waterproofing performance is also different throughout the
different storage times after screw mixing. Based on the requirements of the construction specifications,
this evaluation method can provide a guideline as to how to best optimize the screw-mixing time,
and a warning of the potential risks of reuse after screw mixing.
Further research is required to improve the reliability and applicability of this evaluation regime,
for example by including the changes in construction efficiency in the evaluation criteria. At this
point, it is hoped that this study successfully demonstrated that optimized screw-mixing time and
storage time needs to be considered in future waterproofing construction using SPRG to achieve stable
performance and service life.

Author Contributions: S.K.O. and D.S.A. conceived and designed the experiments; D.S.A., K.H.O. and J.S.P.
performed the experiments; D.S.A., K.H.O. analyzed the data; D.S.A. and K.H.O. wrote the paper.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Acknowledgments: This research was supported by a grant (18RERP-B082204-05) from Residential Environment
Research Program funded by Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport of Korean government.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The founding sponsors had no role in: the design
of the study; the collection, analyses, or interpretation of the data; the writing of the manuscript, or the decision to
publish the results.

Abbreviations
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
BS EN British Standard European Norm
BSP Bottom Substrate Part
GB Guo Biao
ISO International Standard Organization
KS Korean Industrial Standards
LH KOREA LAND & HOUSING CORPORATION
NSM Non-screw mixed
RPM Rotations Per Minute
SBS Styrene-Butadiene-Styrene
SMRT Substrate Movement Resistance Test
SPRG Synthetic Polymer Rubber Gel
USP Upper Substrate Part

References
1. Oh, S.-K.; Shim, J.-S. Maintenance for Leakage due to Cracking in Concrete Structures-Guidelines for Repair
of Water-Leakage Cracks in Concrete Structures. J. Korea Concr. Inst. 2011, 23, 47–52.
2. Park, J.S.; Kim, D.B.; Park, W.G.; Oh, S.K. Analysis on the Causes of the Oil Leakage Phenomenon for
Complex Waterproofing Methods of Asphalt Mastic and Modified Asphalt Sheet. J. Korea Inst. Build. Constr.
2018, 18, 337–345.
3. Ahn, D.-S. A Study on the Physical Properties Change of Synthetic Rubber Polymer Gel by Using Stirring
Screw Mixer. Master’s Thesis, Seoul National University of Science and Technology, Seoul, Korea, 2015.
4. Oh, S.K.; Seo, S.J.; Park, J.S.; Kim, D.B.; Choi, S.Y.; Kim, B.I. A Study on Compatibility between Asphalt
Mastic and Poly Urethane Coating Material (Focused on Fatigue Resistance). J. Korea Inst. Build. Constr. 2018,
18, 255–256.
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1989 20 of 20

5. RE-Systems Group Americas. Polymer Rubber Gel Systems. Waterproof Magazine. 2014, pp. 26–29.
Available online: https://www.waterproofmag.com/downloads/2014-04/WP_2014-04_Polymer_Rubber.
pdf (accessed on 23 August 2018).
6. Oh, S.-K.; Lee, J.-H.; Choi, S.-M. An Experimental Study on the Highly Adhesive Composite Waterproofing
Sheet using Reclaimed Rubber. J. Archit. Inst. Korea 2014, 16, 279–284.
7. Oh, S.K.; Lee, J.H.; Song, J.Y.; Kim, S.Y. A Study on the Construction Detail of Waterproofing in Underground
of Apartments. J. Korea Inst. Build. Constr. 2017, 17, 215–216.
8. Seo, W.I.; Kim, S.Y.; Kwak, G.S.; Oh, S.G. A Study on Complex Waterproofing Method Using Part of Joint
Water-Tightness Improved Sheet; The Korea Institute of Building Construction: Seoul, Korea, 2004; Volume 7,
pp. 1–6.
9. Im, C.J. Waterproofing Performance Tests for a Composite Waterproofing Method of Asphalt Mastic Film
and Sheet. DONG-EUI Inst. Technol. 2000, 26, 53–62.
10. Rubber Asphalt Sheet Double Waterproofing; LH Guide Specifications 42531; Korea Land & Housing
Corporation: Seoul, Korea, 2015.
11. Chang, S.-J. Advanced Technology of Waterproofing. J. Archit. Inst. Korea 2005, 49, 57–60.
12. Park, J.-S.; Kim, D.-B.; Oh, K.-H.; Oh, S.-K. Field Evaluation of Synthetic Polymer Rubber Gel through Filler
Content and Oil Leakage Mass Measurement. Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 896. [CrossRef]
13. Cho, K.-S.; Park, W.-Y. The rooftop waterproof of public facilities and the study of improvement
way—Urethane rubber film waterproof. J. Korean Inst. Build. Constr. 2012, 12, 86–87.
14. Korea Land & Housing Corporation. Establishment of Measures to Improve Quality of House Waterproofing
Methods for Zero Defects in Quality Management; Public Housing Project Office: Seoul, Korea, 2017; pp. 1–3.

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).