25
a.
b.
Soprema
WR Grace
20
CRREL
15
CRREL
10
Supplier
5
Supplier
0
25
c.
d.
Polyguard
Protecto Wrap
20
CRREL
15
CRREL
10
Supplier
Supplier
5
0
25
e.
f.
NEI
Royston
20
15
CRREL
10
CRREL
5
Supplier
0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
Displacement (in.)
Figure 4. Adhesion test results. Each curve is the average of up to 15 test strips. Surprisingly, the CRREL
samples consistently developed high overall, but low individual, adhesion values (Fig. 4 vs. App. B).
Here, the Protecto Wrap and W.R. Grace mem-
provide a consistent adhesion in the field from job
branes become the membranes with the least po-
to job and contractor to contractor.
tential problems. They exhibit moderate, but very
uniform, adhesion values with little indication of
TENSILE STRENGTH AND ELONGATION
weak spots (Fig. 4a and 4d). Interestingly, the
Protecto Wrap membrane seemed the least influ-
Waterproofing membranes must be able to span
enced by the source of the samples for testing. This
active cracks in a deck, especially at low tempera-
uniformity suggests that this membrane would
tures, when cracks widen most. To do this, a mem-
7
Previous Page
