Discussion in 'NZ Tilers Forum' started by jay, Sep 11, 2012.
Just wondering how it compares to OZ standards
Hi Jay.. We are supposed to be waterproofing to the Auzzie standard as recommended by the manufacturers being that it all comes pretty much from Auz. It is not NZ standard yet but will be very soon.
Surprised it is not in your standards already
NZ Building code ready for update... As registered applicators we do it to the manufacturers spec so it is Auz standard and council seems to also go by the gib guide, that has a waterproofing section. Every council has different rules with waterproofing, wet showers within the NZBC.
What cracks me up is the councils that come and inspect the waterproofing. My mate asked the inspector if he new what waterproofing brand he was looking at.. Response NO. Mate says so what are you looking for in the application. Response was I don't know but I guess I can see there is waterproofing here.
I mean what a joke are we going to give a producer statement for something not done or substandard
At least you get inspected they don't worry about it over here some councils ask you to fill out a form after the job is done but never been inspected
Yea I don't really see the point though, we are the ones that have to guarantee the product for 5yrs then there is a 15 yr manufacturers one. You would think council would be trying to have less responsibility not more.
They are only covering there backs if something goes wrong
They have made one big blunder with the waterproofing standard down here they let builders do waterproofing on the houses they build /does make you wonder
Do the builders have to be certified for the product they are applying and warranty it
Not in Tas they don't have to be certified bit of a joke different in other states
Heard about this the other day.
There really has to be something solid in place with all the new single part acrylic liquid membranes. There's just too much to go wrong. And it will be mr and mrs Bloggs left with the bill again.
Should be like Queensland the tiler can waterproof his own wet areas providing he is going to tile it .but cant waterproof for others
Funny how over here it's not a regulation or that you need a licence. Although still alot of tilers still don't know what waterproofing even is or even use it. Ask a builder over here to waterproof a wet area and he'll say oh I've used some waterproof PVA! Most plumbers also have never seen any kind of waterproofing!!
Just caught up with this post, and I am pretty sure I can give an up to the minute answer.
For the last 8 years I have been on the Waterproofing Membrane Association of NZ and, as a group, the Association is writing Codes of Practice for different aspects of waterproofing. The first one released was for Torch-on Membranes. There were 5000 copies printed and distributed to Councils. Architects, builder and applicators. In fact anyone who wanted one got a copy. This document has become the default standard, and referred to by all in the construction sector. At the request of the Department of Building & Housing. the next Code is the one for Wet Area Membranes (WAM). This particular document has taken over 2 years to put together, mainly because there are so many membranes available e.g. acrylics, polyurethanes, peel & stick sheets. fibre-glass etc. the list just goes on. New Zealand is swamped with membranes, nearly every type is represented here, and they all have to be considered. We believe the WAM Code will also become the default standard.
For the legal part, there are no waterproofing standards in NZ, nor is there any requirement to be licensed. There is, however, a joint AS/NZS 4858 standard, but this covers the material only, not the application. Internal wet areas are covered by a clause in the Building Code, that is E3, and this defines what are wet areas, and where waterproofing should be applied, and how much. However, this is also an old document and does not actually call it waterproofing but rather an "impervious surface". The problem with this document is that it does not spell out the actual rooms to be waterproofed, so there is a lot of mis-interpretation on the requirements. However, when checking with the Dept's other publications, it will be noted that basically any room with a water supply is considered a wet area. This includes kitchens, laundries etc.
There is also another clause in the Building Code, that is B2 Durability. This is the one that gets the most attention, because the products used must meet a given time of durability and performance. In the case of internal membranes this is 15 years. This is what the Councils require, and the way of confirming this is with a document known as a "Producer Statement". This is a statement, generally by the applicator, that the product used is fit for purpose, but more importantly, it has been applied in accordance with the manufacturer's instruction. For example, some companies might recommend 1.5mm thick and some only 1mm thick. The producer statement must confirm that the product used has been used to instruction. Also, producer statements are not warranties, but a number of applicators think they are and get caught. Warranties are a different beast.
As far as licensing goes, the only requirement to be licensed is for roof waterproofing. This does not cover the internal wet areas, but may cover decks etc, partiucularly if the deck is over a living area.
very good post
any chance of posting a copy of the mentioned document in a separate thread for discussion
Thanks, will try and get an electronic copy and post
Thanks Alec and welcome to the forum
Looking forward to getting my hands on a copy.
What's it going to take to get licensing compulsory? Watertight issues have been a major problem over the last 10 years as you well know, Alec. But we are still having some major problems and I think most of the time it would be incorrect application procedures
I think applicators should not only be product trained and certified but industry registered. Do you think this new code of practice can be the basis of product training? If so then perhaps any training and certifying by suppliers will have to have their training curriculum assessed and approved according to the code of practice. Just my humble opinion.
Oh, and welcome aboard Alec.
The Waterproofing Membrane Association has discussed training of applicators, and in fact, some of it's members are all part of BCITO, so it is something that will happen.
You will recall the training session I did. When I put that together, it was with the intention that it would become a "industry course" and that no-one could purchase waterproofing products unless they coulkd show they had been on the course. Some companies bought into the plan, but unfortunately, one in particular did not, and that set the ball rolling again, when all companies did their own thing. Nowadays, there are a few more companies around, so it will be pretty difficult to get everyone on board with the idea of one industry training.
However, it is something that should happen. It is like the Waterproofing Association, basically every company was invited to join, and are still being invited, but the truth of the matter is, some won't join and therefore do what they like. Large and major players in the market think they don't need a central body, so go off on their own, saying whatever they like.
I agree Bob you should not be able to buy the product without being a certified applicator.
Separate names with a comma.