The performance of surface treatments for the

conservation of historic brick masonry

R.P.J. van Hees
Department of Building Technology, TN0 Building and Construction Research, Delft,
the Netherlands

Abstract
An evaluation was made of the performance and the effectiveness of surface
treatments, mainly water repellents, applied in the past on historic brick masonry. In
the three European countries involved in the project over 60 case studies were carried
out. Besides, laboratory research was carried out, so that the two research lines could
be combined. The main aim of the project was the assessment of the performance of
surface treatments for the conservation of masonry monuments, and, further, to
evaluate the risks of failure and damage and to develop methods for the prediction of
the performance.
Essential for the assessment of the performance of water repellents in the field and
in the laboratory is the water repellent behaviour, checked on the brick / mortar
system, and the evaluation of any damage observed, in relation with the presence of
the treatment. This approach to the evaluation of the effects of treatments, using
materials in combination, forming thus a system, proved to be very important: a
different behaviour of brick and mortar after treatment could be observed, as well as
interactions and mutual influences.
The effectiveness (water repellency) of a treatment can last for a long time, even
more than 30 years. To this conclusion the following should be added: i) there is no
clear relation between the age of the treatment and its effectiveness, ii) the
effectiveness of the treatment within one building, even within one wall is quite
variable, iii) the mortar joint is, from the point of view of water penetration, the
weakest part of the (treated) system. The main reason for an insufficient performance
of treatments lies in most cases in the lack of preliminary investigations, meant to
outline the state of conservation of a building and to furnish the basis for: i) deciding
on the necessity of a treatment, ii) selecting the most suitable treatment product.
This paper is an elaboration of the Summary Report, by R.P.J. van Hees and S.
Naldini, which forms part of the final report on the project ‘Evaluation of the
performance of surface treatments for the conservation of historic brick masonry’. The
project was carried out within the EU Environment Programme, under contract nr.
EV5V-CT94-05 15.
Keywords: historic brick masonry, water repellents.
1. Introduction

Surface treatments, as part of the conservation, are carried out aiming to preserve from
further decay and to prolong the life in service of monuments.
The application of surface treatments (of the type studied) on historic buildings started
in the 1960’s, but still the knowledge on treatment products and their effects on the
materials should be improved. The situation in the three participating countries,
Belgium, Italy and the Netherlands forms the base for this research project. The
situation in the three countries is considered reasonably representative for the countries
within the European Union.
In Italy treatments have been always used, whereas in Belgium they were not met with
favour in the beginning; in the Netherlands only water repellents have been applied:
after a period of favour, the attitude has become more cautious.
Main aim of the project was, to improve the knowledge on the effects of surface
treatments on the service life of walls in historic buildings; most important aspects are:
i) the performance in the course of time, ii) the risks of failure and damage, iii) the
prediction of the performance.
In this paper an overview is given of the main research lines and results of the proiect.
withoui however being extensive and complete.

2. Methodology

2.1 Research lines

The evaluation of the performance and durability of surface treatments resulted
the following (interrelated) research lines:

l assessment of the state of preservation of treated walls of historic buildings;

l assessment of the performance of treatments in laboratory, making use of: i) smgre
materials, ii) little test walls (combination of materials, that is brick and mortar), iii)
real scale test buildings located in the open air.

In Italy and Belgium, water repellents (protectives) are often used in combination with
consolidants, whereas, in the Netherlands, only water repellents are used. The study of
water repellents was therefore essential to evaluate the state of treated monuments.
Treated monuments to be investigated were chosen with the help of the authorities in
charge of their care, restoration architects and producers of treatments. Prior to the
investigation on treated walls in monuments, a research was carried out aiming at
collecting information on the reasons for treating, the treatment performed and the
methodology followed. The results of the research where quite alarming:

l in most cases no report existed on the work performed;

l information was difficult to be obtained;
l motivations for treating, when traceable, were hardly scientifically based.

Therefore it is advised that authorities should dispose of reports on treatments

performed (incl. motivations and monitoring), which should be available for
consultation.
A study was carried out on the attitude of governmental Bodies responsible for the
monuments towards treatments. The restoration ethics of each country influences the
philosophy of the conservation interventions. Although in several countries guidelines
on treatments exist, there may be a gap between theory and practice.

2.2 The choice of materials and of treatment products for testing

Old, traditional and (to a certain extent) inhomogeneous bricks were used for testing,
as they possess similar characteristics to those of the bricks found in monuments.
Further, the choice was based on the fact that they also have a life in service and a
history. Mortars were chosen that are used for restoration in the participating countries.
Water repellents and consolidants were chosen, which were and still are available
on the market; the selection was completed with a water repellent which had been used
in the past, but was no longer available. The products were obtained from the
producers. 4 Types of water repellents (8 on single materials) and 2 types of
consolidants have been used in the laboratory research.

3. Results and discussion

3.1 General
In the study on the attitude of authorities towards treatments it was found that:

l Documents concerning philosophical and ethical aspects of restoration are often

found too theoretical and far from the practical problems met by those involved in
conservation.
l Guidelines on treatments are sometimes so extensive and therefore so complicated
that they are not used. End users need above all realistic guidelines and documents.

Important conclusions on the performance of treatments could be derived from the

combination of results obtained in laboratory with results obtained in case studies.
The water repellent effect of a treatment can not be considered the only criterion to
assess its performance. The performance of a treatment should be evaluated, taking
into account its various functions, which are or are claimed to be:
l to make the treated surface water repellent and to avoid water penetration;
l to protect the surface from damaging mechanisms in which moisture is essential;
l to avoid chemical transformation of calcitic materials, due to wet and dry deposition
and moisture;
l to prevent biological growth (especially thriving of algae).

Essential for the assessment of the performance of water repellents in the field and in
the laboratory is the water repellent behaviour, checked on treated brick, mortar and
the brick / mortar system, and the evaluation of any damage observed, in relation with
the presence of the treatment. This approach to the evaluation of the effects of
treatments, using materials in combination, forming thus a system, proved to be very
important: a different behaviour of brick and mortar after treatment could be observed,
as well as interactions and mutual influences.
 3.2 Laboratory research on single materials, little walls and test buildings
3.2.1 Single materials
Research on single materials has confirmed [4] that for one type of substrate,
differences in effectiveness are obtained after ageing, even within one class of
chemically similar water repellents. Moreover, for one type of water repellent, the
effectiveness depends on the substrate.

3.2.2 Little walls

The research showed that both water repellents and consolidants do improve the
durability of mortar joints under the attack of acid rain. Water repellents, though,
provide the better protection. Treatments (both water repellents and consolidants) may
give a (short term) protection against the growth of algae.
A big difference was found in laboratory comparing the consumption of treatment
products applied by capillary absorption (as is usual in case of small specimens of
single materials) with that of products applied by spraying until they flow over the
surface (as done in case of wallettes). Also a big difference in penetration depth was
found, especially concerning mortar joints. These findings are important as they
underline the difference that might exist between results of tests in laboratory and the
performance in practice.

3.2.3 Test buildings

The research on the walls of test buildings meant for studying the effects of treatments
confirmed the above mentioned results showing that:

l the way of application of treatment products can affect their penetration depth;
l decay related to rain penetration can take place when pointing is not treated:
l in the case of repointing, the new material should also be treated;
l the damaged (pointing) mortar should be maintained (repaired, substituted) before
treatment, in order to avoid the occurrence of damage.

3.4 Performance and failure. Combination of field and laboratory research

The effectiveness (water repellency) of a treatment can last for a long time, even more
than 30 years (see fig. 1). To this conclusion the following should be added:

l there is no clear relation between the age of the treatment and its effectiveness;
l the effectiveness of the treatment within one building, even within one wall is quite
variable;
l the mortar joint is, from the point of view of water penetration, the weakest part of
the (treated) system.

Although treatments have in general only a limited influence on vapour difmsion, their
influence on the drying behaviour of masonry is considerable. The drying behaviour of
, treated masonry was investigated in this research project as one of the aspects of the
performance of the treatment. The impact of treatments on drying proves to be quite
high. The importance is mainly shown in cases of water penetration (incl. rising damp,
leakages..) where the slower drying behaviour may support the development of
damage.

Case studies NL, water absorption brick

[Karsten)

0 5 IO 15 20 25 30 35
age treatment [years)

Case studies NL, waterabsorptim

pointing (Karsten)

= 2,5
E

7 2
4
)I I,5

0 5 IO 15 20 25 30 35
age treatment [year+)

Fig. 1 Effectiveness of water repellents. Water absorption (Karsten pipe) on brick and
pointing; best and poorest values for case-studies in the Netherlands, WA-K (ml)=
abs. after 15 min. 4 abs. after 5 min., see [l].
Re-treatment of substrates (treated with a water repellent in the past) is possible. The
first treatment has the highest influence on the drying behaviour. Only in case of the
first treatment being a water based product, the next treatment was found to have a
significant influence on the drying behaviour.
Failures and causes of failure were evaluated. Combining the results of the
research in the field with those of the research in laboratory, the main causes of
damage could be understood and the role of the treatment evaluated, see [2], [6].
Important results are:

l treatments play an important role in damaging processes such as salt crystallization

and frost action: they may increase the damage to the materials or contribute to
develop circumstances suitable for damaging processes to occur;
l treatments can not (always) offer protection against dry deposition attack: (black)
crusts (gypsum) were found both in treated monuments and obtained in ageing tests
on treated materials;
l the application method has an important influence on the effectiveness of the
treatment: a different effectiveness was observed comparing brick and mortar
l joints; a low effectiveness of a treatment on mortar may explain water penetration
through mortar joints of a treated wall;
l lack of scientifically based planning and lack of knowledge on the behaviour of
treatments have serious consequences on the effects of treatments: in the case of
repointing of a treated building, for example, if new pointing is not treated, the
possibility of water penetration is almost equal to masonry not treated at all, which
increases the risk of damage;
l the lack of knowledge on products available on the market is quite alarming.
Products, of which the actual composition is not indicated, are put on the market as
reversible, natural, offering protection to the materials, without affecting them,
which responds to marketing strategies more then to the needs of the conservation
of monuments. A method was developed to determine the type and origin of a
product, applied in the past. This method allows to make a ‘fingerprint’ of the
applied product which can be compared to that of known products.

4. Conclusions and recommendations

The knowledge on historical building materials and on conservation treatments

possessed by the people involved in conservation, at all levels, needs improvement:
local authorities and restoration architects and technicians (the responsible people in
restoration campaigns) should be provided with thorough, but essential and clear
guidelines on treatments (when, how to perform treatments). An important task for
scientists is to make the results of their research available and applicable in practical
situations for different groups of end users.
The main reason for an insufficient performance of treatments lies in most cases in
the lack of preliminary investigations, meant to outline the state of conservation of a
building and to furnish the basis for:
l deciding on the necessity of a treatment;
l selecting the most suitable treatment product.
 ‘Golden rules’ are proposed including the methodology to carry out an effective
preliminary research, as well as guidelines to evaluate the obtained results in view of a
treatment, and the clue to select the correct treatment product (when necessary).
The main points for correctly proceeding in treating monuments are summarised as
follows:
Pre-investigations should be carried out for evaluating the state of preservation of
the monument, before deciding to use a treatment. The research should be centered
on the definition of the type/s of decay present and on the diagnosis of the decay
mechanisms leading to it/them (in particular: presence/sources of moisture, salts;
ref. PI, m-
In order to avoid confusion clear terminology and definitions to indicate damage
should be used. Definitions should be preferably based upon existing sources like
MDDS or Damage Atlas, that were developed in the EC project Expert system for
the evaluation of the deterioration of ancient brick masonry structures (EVSV-
CT92-0108), see [5], [7].
A well balanced choice should be made on treating or not treating and eventually on
the type of treatment. The decision should be based upon the results of the pre-
investigation.
Before treating, repair and substitution work (e.g. detailing, pointing, cracks; incl.
leakages and rising damp) should be done, for a good performance of the treatment.
The quality of products to be used should be guaranteed (for example through
certification).
The applicator should take into account the difference between brick and mortar
and the possible consequences of the inhomogeneity of the materials.
Restoration archives should be kept and maintained by the authorities. Archives
should be accessible for all people dealing with the conservation of monuments.‘
Treatment should be considered an important intervention and therefore be
documented in the restoration archive.
Control (monitoring) and maintenance of treated masonry are necessary. In case of
interventions like repointing, re-treatment needs to be done.

Future research
Several items were met that could not be studied in depth during the current project.
The most important findings that need further investigation and meet a real need in
building practice are given here:

Algae growth, a problem that occurs even after treating masonry with a water
repellent.
Problems concerning mortar joints (loss of bond, pushing out, disintegration) are
considered to be among the most budget consuming maintenance questions.
Maintenance, repair and choice of material are a very important research item.
Limits (quantity and quality) of salt content in relation to treatments.

Acknowledgements
This research was made possible by the financial support of the EU, DG XII (contract
nr. EV5V-CT94-0515) and was further sponsored by the Netherlands Governmental
Service for the Preservation of Monuments and Historic Buildings (RDMZ) and
Government Building Agency (RGD). Partners in this research project were: TN0
Building and Construction Research (TN0 Bouw) - Netherlands, co-ordinator; Royal
Institute for Cultural Heritage (IRPA - KIK) - Belgium, contractor; Polytechnic
University of Milan (PDM - DIS) - Italy, contractor; ICITE - Italy, subcontractor.

References
1 . Hees, R.P. J. van, Klugt, L. J.A.R van der, De Witte, E., De Clerq, H., Binda, L. And
Baronio, G. (1995), Test methods for the evaluation of the in situ performance of
water repellent treatments, Proceedings of the First International Symposium on
Surface Treatment of Building Materials with water repellent Agents, Delft.
2 . Klugt, L.J.A.R van der And Koek, J.A.G. (1995), The effective use of water
repellents, Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Surface Treatment
of Building Materials with water repellent Agents, Delft.
3 . Binda, L., T. Squarcina, T. And Hees, R.P.J. van (1996), Determination of moisture
content in masonry materials: calibration of some direct methods, Proceedings 8th
International Congress on Deterioration and Conservation of Stone, Berlin, pp. 423-
435.
4. De Witte, E., De Clercq, H., De Bruyn, R. And Pien, A. (1996), Systematic testing
of water repellent agents, International Journal for Restoration of Buildings and
Monuments, Vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 133-144.
5 . Van Balen, K., Binda, L., Hees, R.P. J. van And L. Franke, L. (1996), Damage to
historic brick masonry structures, Proceedings 8th International Congress on
Deterioration and Conservation of Stone, Berlin, pp. 1687-l 693.
6 . Hees, R.P.J. van, Koek, J.A.G., De Clerq, H., De Witte, E., Binda, L., Ferrieri, E.D.
And Carraro, E. (1997), The assessment of the performance of surface treatments in
the field. Results of 60 case studies confronted with lab results, Proceedings 4th
International Symposium on the Conservation of Monuments in the Mediterranean
Basin, Rhodes, pp. 395-413.
7 . Hees, R.P.J. van And Naldini, S. (1997), Diagnosis and damage to historic brick
masonry. Development and use of a knowledge based system, submitted for
publication in: WTA Schriftenreihe Instandsetzen von Mauerwerk