CHAPTER-1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 OVERVIEW
One of the basic requirement in case of any building is that the structure should remain dry as far
as possible otherwise it may become un-habitable and unsafe from structural point of view. The
entry of water into a structure is termed as seepage or leakage. There are number of causes of
leakage or seepage in a structure i.e. action of rain, condensation, water entry through ground,
orientation of structure etc.

Seepage mainly occurs through walls and roofs due to improper drainage system, stagnation of
water, capillary action of water through ground etc. in this project, we try to eliminate the problem
of seepage through ground by capillary action of water.

1.2 OBJECTIVE
1). To study and analyze the causes of leakage or seepage and their remedies.

2). To find out chemicals and compounds to prevent entrance of water from ground in a new
structure.
3). To improve the quality of bricks, to make them impervious against water.

KEYWORD: Seepage analysis

Page | 1
 CHAPTER-2

LITERATURE REVIEW

Joseph Lstiburek Feb-2002, Moisture Control for infiltration in future construction

When designing a building’s envelope and its interaction with the mechanical system, temperature,
humidity, rain and the interior climate often are ignored. The focus for the building may be more
on aesthetics and cost than on performance. The concept of limit states (limiting conditions) plays
a key role in building durability. In structural engineering, loads and load resistance are considered
and limiting states, such as deflection, are specified. A similar approach is applied to moisture
engineering. Rain, temperature, humidity and the interior climate are considered environmental
loads with principal limiting conditions such as rot, decay, mold and corrosion. A damage function
(damage process) analysis is then used to determine whether a limiting condition, such as mold
growth, is achieved. Moisture engineering uses an iterative and interdisciplinary systems approach
to develop performance metrics to meet moisture-related objectives.
Building assemblies need to be protected from wetting via air transport and from vapor diffusion.
The typical strategies use vapor barriers, air barriers, air pressure control, and control of interior
moisture levels through ventilation and dehumidification. Climate location and season determine
the location of air barriers and vapor barriers, pressurization vs. depressurization, and ventilation
vs. dehumidification. Moisture usually moves from warm to cold (driven by the thermal gradient)
and from more to less (driven by the concentration gradient). In cold climates, moisture from the
interior flows toward the exterior by passing through the building envelope. In hot climates,
moisture from the exterior flows towards the cooled interior by passing through the building
envelope.

Dr. Annie R. Pearce, Dr. Christine M. Fiori, Mr. Michael O’Brien March-2008, An analysis
of waterproofing systems and materials brandom smith shell.

Waterproofing is an integral part of preserving not only the components of a building and interior
spaces but also human health. The intent of this paper’s analysis and comparisons of soil types,
building foundations and waterproofing techniques is to help building owners, contractors and
manufacturers properly safeguard the built environment. Much like capillary blocking, damp proofing
is most effective in the absence of hydrostatic pressure. Defined by the American Society for Testing and
Materials, damp proofing is the treatment of a surface or structure to block the flow of water in the absence
of hydrostatic pressure. More specifically, damp proofing resists vapor migration from soils to the interior
of buildings. Water vapor naturally diffuses from areas of higher pressure to lower pressure. Diffusion
typically occurs from soils and coarse aggregates which are areas of higher pressure, towards foundation
crawl spaces or basements which are areas of lower pressure. This vapor migration leaves buildings
susceptible to condensation not only within building materials but also within interior spaces. The proper
application of damp proofing materials reduces the transfer of water vapor to the interior of buildings and
materials. As mentioned earlier, damp proofing is acceptable for slab on grade and foundation walls with
crawl spaces slightly below grade. Damp proofing is not recommended in areas where soil moisture is
constantly high or water tables fluctuate to within less than six inches below the bottom of a slab. Designers
and builders only eliminate damp proofing when sites are exceedingly dry or when the bottom of a slab on
grade is higher than any surrounding grade. However, when damp proofing materials are eliminated
contractors must install subsurface drainage systems such as drainpipes and layers of coarse aggregate or

Page | 2
drain board as a precaution to unforeseen events.

Lstiburek, J. , February 2002 Moisture Control for infiltration in future construction

Moisture control is fundamental to the proper functioning of any building. Controlling moisture is
important to protect occupants from adverse health effects and to protect the building, its
mechanical systems and its contents from physical or chemical damage. Yet, moisture problems
are so common in buildings, many people consider them inevitable. The moisture content of materials
is usually expressed as the percentage of the weight of water in the material relative to the weight of the dry
material. In laboratories, moisture content can be calculated by weighing the test sample while damp, drying
the sample using heat or desiccant salts, and then reweighing the sample. Knowing the moisture content of
porous building materials other than wood or wood products, such as gypsum board and concrete slabs or
concrete masonry units, is also important. Some electronic moisture meters have calibrated scales for
materials other than wood, for example concrete, brick and plaster.

John F. Straube, E.F.P. Burnett - September 2000

The control of moisture in buildings is key to their durability, functionality, health, and efficiency.
Understanding the sources of moisture and the mechanisms by which they move within the
building and the building enclosure allows professionals to design better buildings and
conditioning systems. All moisture management and control strategies and techniques must be
solidly based on this understanding. Moisture is the most important natural agent responsible for
deterioration of the building enclosure. The amount of water deposited on the above-grade building
envelope by driving rain is generally larger than any other source, including condensation, in
almost all cases. Rain deposition can result in staining, leakage, dimensional change, freeze-thaw
damage, leaching, efflorescence, and biological deterioration. Water penetration of the cladding
can cause similar problems within a wall. Vapour diffusion can also move water that penetrates or
is stored in the cladding inward where it can cause serious wetting of framing, sheathing, etc.

Yanan, Liu & Qingsong, Zhang & Rentai, Liu & Yanxu, Guo & Xiaochen, Wang & Jian,
Chen & Yishan, Wei & Baozhi, Li. (2018).
Research on Comprehensive Analysis Method for Leakage Treatment of Underground Engineering
Lining. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 189. 022051. 10.1088/1755-
1315/189/2/022051. The number of tunnel lining leaks is currently increasing during construction
and operation. Through the comprehensive analysis of the system, the fundamental method for
solving the leakage problem of the lining is explored. Through the repeated occurrence of seepage
water leakage in the lining of Jinggangshan Station of Qingdao Metro, a set of system leakage
water treatment methods was proposed, from pre-grout preparation, general cement slurry
treatment, superfine cement slurry focus, chemical slurry replenishment. The lining aesthetics
restores the five processes for treatment, and the five steps are integrated to achieve the effect of
radical cure. And through field practice to verify, the method is highly feasible and the governance
effect is good. It has strong applicability to the leakage of underground engineering lining, and can
better solve the difficult problem of the lining leakage water that is currently faced.

Türkmen, Sedat. (2003). Treatment of the seepage problems at the Kalecik Dam (Turkey).
Engineering Geology - ENG GEOL. 68. 159-169. 10.1016/S0013-7952(02)00225-9.
Water leaked from the foundation of the dam after the impoundment. The dam, 77 m in height, was
constructed for irrigation purposes.The foundation consists of Mesozoic ophiolite, Paleocene
allochthonous units composed of different lithologies and Miocene conglomerate. Karstified and
fractured Paleocene limestone outcrops on the right bank of the dam foundation. This unit extends
Page | 3
into, and its thickness increases within, the right abutment. The leakage occurs towards the
downstream springs through the right bank limestone.The main grout curtain is 200 m long and 60
m deep and was constructed on the right bank. After reservoir impounding, new springs were
observed in the downstream area. Therefore, after the construction of the dam, remedial curtain
grouting was required and carried out in three stages. Firstly, the main grout curtain was
supplemented by additional grouting to seal the fractures and infill karstic cavities. The diversion
tunnel was also repaired. The curtain depth was the same as the depth of the previous curtain. The
second stage of additional treatment consisted of new deep grouting. Some investigation holes
were also drilled along the same alignment as the main curtain to locate the seepage in the region.
These holes were extended to an elevation of 442 m. The final stage of grouting measures was
between the spillway and the dam body and underneath the spillway.As a result of the additional
grouting measures, the spring discharges observed downstream of the dam embankment decreased.
However, the seepage paths were extended and were moved with time so that the seepage
problems are still continuing.

Kaini, Santosh & Hayde, Laszlo & Schultz, Bart & Marence, Miroslav. (2011). Seepage
analysis underneath the headwork of Chanda Mohana Irrigation Scheme, Sunsari, Nepal.
Seepage is one of the major causes of failure of irrigation headworks constructed on permeable
foundation in the Terai (plain) Region of Nepal. There is an urgent need to upgrade these schemes
in order to meet the increasing food demand. A seepage problem was seen at the headwork of
Chanda Mohana Irrigation Scheme, Sunsari situated at the confluence of Budhi and Katle Streams
from the very beginning of the commissioning in 2000. The headwork consists of a weir (65 m
span) with under-sluice (7 m opening). This research was focused in the seepage analysis
underneath the headwork. MSeep model (2-Dimensional) was used for seepage analysis. Different
scenarios were developed to represent the different works carried out in 2000, 2009 and 2010. The
results indicate that the exit gradient was within the range of permissible safe exit gradient without
considering the lateral flow. In contrast, the exit gradient was increased above the maximum
permissible limit considering lateral flow. Due to continuous seepage flow, the horizontal and
vertical hydraulic conductivities in 2009 might have been increased to 2.5 times and 1.3 times
respectively than the values in 2000. This has reduced the rate of head-loss and hence increased the
exit gradient. Therefore, this is one of the major causes for the failure of the structure in 2010
regardless of the maintenance carried out in 2009. The research finding suggests that the ongoing
maintenance work from 2010 is safe only if the pressure grouting recovers the soil parameters to
the stage during construction in 2000, which is generally not achievable. So, considering the
hydraulic conductivity and porosity of the soil as the average values of 2000 and 2009, extension
of the downstream floor with additional sheet piles is proposed as an alternative measure for
achieving the safety of the structure.

Venuja, T. & Kurukulasuriya, Chandana. (2020). Seepage in Iranamadu Dam and Its
Influence on the Stability. 10.1007/978-981-13-9749-3_33.
Earth dams have played an important role in agriculture since ancient times. Failure of side slopes
caused due to seepage or drawdown is one of the major considerations in the design of earth dams
as the failure of a slope is catastrophic. The Iranamadu dam which was raised at different times
showed a significant increase of seepage when the reservoir level increased beyond a certain
elevation. In this research, the seepage problem of the Iranamadu dam was analysed using Geo-
Studio (SEEP/W) software to estimate the seepage rate with the determination of the phreatic
surface and to investigate the influence of the anisotropy of hydraulic conductivity of core material
on seepage. For these analyses, volumetric water content function to be used in the unsaturated
Page | 4
zone above the phreatic surface was selected from the van Genuchten model. Both steady and
transient state seepage were carried out to compare the seepage rates with field measurements and
the effect of anisotropy of hydraulic conductivity using the observed reservoir level history
spanning over 170 days. Furthermore, the stability of the dam was assessed under seepage
conditions using the SLOPE/W software. SEEP/W results show a good agreement in seepage rates
with field measurements under both seepage condition when the reservoir level is above a certain
elevation. Within a small range of reservoir level, some deviation of the predicted seepage rate is
observed. Additionally, when the phreatic surface passes through the core section, a drop-in the
seepage rate was observed due to the low permeability of the clay core. The seepage rate increased
with ky/kx ratio and the Iranamadu dam seepage field measurements showed a good agreement
when ky/kx ratio is 1. Therefore, the behaviour of the Iranamadu dam with respect to the seepage
flow, shows a near isotropic hydraulic behaviour. The SLOPE/W results conclude that when the
reservoir water level increases, the stability of the downstream slope reduced beyond the
recommended value but the stability of the upstream slope was found to be satisfying the safety
criteria under both steady and transient seepage conditions.

Page | 5
 CHAPTER-3
METHODOLOGY

3.1 SAMPLES
COLLECTION

Firstly, we bought bricks from nearest brick supplier and casted some mortar bricks samples of
various thicknesses for seepage analysis through bricks and mortar. The mortar was of composition
1:4:1 i.e. one cement with four sand and one water.

3.2 CHEMICALS USED

We used Styrene Butadiene Rubber Latex (SBR Latex) as it bonds strongly to the old and new
concrete and plaster. It enhances bonding, erosion and corrosion, abrasion resistance, durability of
structure and a great waterproofing chemical. It forms an impervious layer to prevent entry of
water into the structure.

3.3 BRICK TESTS

3.3.1 Absorption Test

Absorption test is conducted on 3 samples of brick to find out the amount of moisture content
absorbed by them when immersed in water for 24 hrs.

3.3.2 Hardness Test

Page | 6
A good brick should resist scratches against sharp things.

3.3.3 Shape and Size

Shape and size of bricks are very important consideration. All bricks should be of same size with
sharp edges to avoid irregular construction.

3.3.4 Color Test

A good brick should possess bright uniform color throughout its body.

3.3.5 Efflorescence Test

A good quality brick should not contain any soluble salt as it will cause efflorescence on brick
surface.

3.4 SEEPAGE ANALYSIS

3.4.1 SEEPAGE ANALYSIS IN BRICKS

Seepage analysis was performed in two orientations i.e. lateral and vertical. Since we were not
having any précised or authenticated data for seepage in bricks, we took concurrent readings and
their average value is assumed to be true value. To study the seepage in bricks, we dipped brick
marked for every cm using scale into 1 cm deep water and the time taken by water to rise through
capillary action was recorded for each cm.

3.4.2 SEEPAGE ANALYSIS IN MORTAR BRICKS

Mortar bricks were casted using the mortar of composition 1:4. The samples casted were of
different thicknesses as different sections of a wall comprise different thickness of mortar. Mortar
bricks were immersed in 1 cm deep water and analysis was performed.

3.4.3 SEEPAGE ANALYSIS IN COMPOSITE SAMPLE

A composite sample of two bricks and mortar between them is prepared as wall consists their
composition and seepage analysis was performed to carry out results.

Page | 7
 Figure 1:2 brick composite sample with mortar

Figure-2: Seepage analysis in 3 bricks and mortar composition

3.4.4 SEEPAGE ANALYSIS IN BRICKS AND MORTAR BRICKS AFTER THE

APPLICATION OF CHEMICAL

To increase the time taken by water to rise through brick and mortar, we dipped bricks and mortar
samples into the SBR Latex for 24 hours and then left undisturbed for 24 hrs to get air dried. After
that, seepage analysis was performed.

Page | 8
 CHAPTER-4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 BRICK TESTS

4.1.1 Absorption Test

Initial weight Final weight Difference % increase in

wt
BRICK 1 2.450Kg 2.900Kg 0.450Kg 18.4%
BRICK 2 2.460Kg 2.870Kg 0.410Kg 16.67%
BRICK 3 2.450Kg 2.905Kg 0.455Kg 18.57%

Table-1: Result of absorption test

Table 1 shows the water absorbed by brick samples when immersed in water for 24 hrs. These
samples were air dried for 24 hrs for seepage analysis. Using this table, we will be able to find out
the % increase in weight after water absorption.

A good quality brick should not absorb more than 20% water by its weight. So we can say that
bricks are of good quality.

4.1.2 Shape and size

None of the bricks used was deformed and all are of same size.

4.1.3 Efflorescence Test

No white layer was observed over the surface of brick when two randomly chosen bricks were
immersed in water.

4.2 SEEPAGE ANALYSIS IN BRICKS

4.2.1 Seepage analysis in lateral direction

Height Time taken by water in different Brick samples(in seconds) Average

interval time(in sec
1 2 3 4 5
1-2 cm 3.1 5.73 4.11 7.51 6.09 5.308
2-3 cm 15.71 18.34 17.53 20.06 15.27 17.382
3-4 cm 33.69 31.87 39.86 44.31 31.59 36.264
4-5 cm 42.05 45.99 44.52 48.92 46.01 45.498
5-6 cm 55.48 53.18 59.61 50.42 52.80 54.298
6-7 cm 78.13 82.07 80.49 83.27 81.45 81.082
7-8 cm 116.71 120.06 115.79 119.76 92.78 113.02

Page | 9
 Table-2: Seepage analysis of brick in lateral direction

Table 2 depicts the analysis of seepage in 5 different brick samples when immersed in 1cm deep
water laterally. In table 2, time taken by water to rise through every cm for different brick sample
is shown. As the height increases, rate of seepage goes slows down.

400
350
300
time taken by water

250
BRICK 1
200 BRICK 2
150 BRICK 3
(in sec)

BRICK 4
100 BRICK 5
50 AVERAGE

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
height of bricks
(in cm)

GRAPH-1: Seepage analysis of bricks in lateral direction

This graph is plotted between height of brick (on x-axis) and time taken by water to rise through
these heights by capillary action (on y- axis). Graph shows the seepage analysis of different brick
samples as well as their average value (considered to be true value) when immersed 1cm in water
along its lateral direction.

Maximum time taken by water to rise throughout brick = 374.25seconds (By brick 4)
Minimum time taken by water to rise throughout brick = 325.99seconds (By brick 5)
Average time taken by water to rise throughout brick = 352.85seconds

4.2.2 Seepage analysis in vertical direction

Sometimes, on the edges of the wall we need to use bricks in vertical direction where space is not
sufficient for bricks to be placed horizontally. So, it is required to analyze the seepage in brick in
vertical direction also.

Height Time taken by water in different Brick samples(in seconds) Average

interval time(in sec
1 2 3 4 5
1-2 cm 3.67 2.83 3.02 3.25 2.96 3.146
Page | 10
 2-3 cm 6.73 7.09 6.95 6.88 6.97 6.924
3-4 cm 19.55 16.24 18.36 19.02 18.23 18.28
4-5 cm 37.49 27.96 33.12 35.66 30.23 32.892
5-6 cm 67.29 38.11 55.26 63.23 45.63 53.904
6-7 cm 83.91 43.38 78.36 80.32 73.26 71.846
7-8 cm 116.71 42.86 66.32 99.66 75.45 80.2
8-9 cm 120.06 51.03 85.25 99.66 67.25 84.65
9-10 cm 92.78 64.29 88.25 93.25 78.32 83.378
10-11 cm 115.79 79.36 110.23 113.28 95.36 102.804
11-12 cm 107.14 120.08 113.32 111.55 119.36 114.29
12-13 cm 104.17 135.48 105.32 103.23 99.45 109.53
13-14 cm 111.78 99.14 93.52 118.36 111.88 106.936
14-15 cm 119.76 108.49 117.25 126.36 101.56 114.684
15-16 cm 124.25 110.64 115.32 116.36 121.45 117.604
16-17 cm 120.84 97.29 114.25 108.23 107.36 109.594
17-18 cm 107.64 115.57 113.23 114.32 113.56 112.864
18-19 cm 119.87 102.65 108.56 106.33 107.98 109.078
Table-3: Seepage analysis of different bricks in vertical direction

Table 3 depicts the analysis of seepage in 5 different brick samples when immersed in 1cm deep
water laterally. In table 3, time taken by water to rise through every cm for different brick sample
is shown.

1800

1600

1400
Time taken by water

1200

1000 Brick 1
Brick 2
800
Brick 3
(in sec)

600 Brick 4
Brick 5
400 average
200

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
height of bricks
(in cm)

GRAPH-2: Seepage analysis in brick along its vertical direction

Graph-2 is plotted between height of brick (on x-axis) and time taken by water to rise through
these heights by capillary action (on y- axis). Graph shows the seepage analysis of different brick
samples as well as their average value (considered to be true value) when immersed 1cm in water
along its vertical direction.
Page | 11
Maximum time taken by water to rise throughout brick = 1579.43seconds (By brick 1)
Minimum time taken by water to rise throughout brick = 1262.49seconds (By brick 2)
Average time taken by water to rise throughout brick = 1432.60seconds

4.2.3 Seepage analysis in composition of brick and mortar

Seepage analysis was performed on combination of bricks and mortar to study their combined
behavior against seepage of water.
4.2.3.1 2 Brick sample

Height Time taken by water to rise through corress. Height (in sec) Average time
interval 1 2 3 4 (in seconds)
1-2 cm 4.75 3.24 5.21 3.20 4.1
2-3 cm 30.06 28.27 42.31 21.74 30.595
3-4 cm 58.38 62.27 102.41 59.72 70.695
4-5 cm 185.40 178.00 281.70 343.70 247.2
5-6 cm 333.41 449.72 528.34 254.00 391.3675
6-7 cm 293.96 229.73 588.34 642.10 438.5325
7-8 cm 301.26 290.05 335.47 413.88 335.165
8-9 cm 1362.56 1961.70 1699.73 1662.00 1671.498
9-10 cm - - - - -
10-11 cm - - - - -
11-12 cm - - - - -
12-13 cm - - - - -
13-14 cm - - - - -
14-15 cm - - - - -
15-16 cm - - - - -
16-17 cm - - - - -
Table-4: Seepage analysis in 2 brick with mortar sample

Table 4 shows the seepage analysis of two bricks and mortar combination. It shows the time
taken by water to rise through every cm.
There was a considerable difference in seepage of water through a brick and through a
combination of brick and mortar. As the water present in mortar was absorbed by bricks, seepage
goes slow down.
4.2.3.2 3 Brick sample

Table 5 shows the seepage analyzed in composite sample made up of three bricks and mortar of
composition 1:4.

Height Time taken by water to rise through corress. Height (in sec) Average time
interval 1 2 3 4 (in seconds)
1-2 cm 4.79 3.94 4.31 7.20 5.06

Page | 12
 2-3 cm 31.02 18.29 22.31 29.54 25.29
3-4 cm 102.41 62.27 58.38 59.72 70.695
4-5 cm 185.40 178.00 281.70 343.70 247.2
5-6 cm 229.73 449.72 642.10 254.00 393.8875
6-7 cm 293.96 333.41 588.34 528.34 436.0125
7-8 cm 313.26 390.05 535.47 413.88 413.165
8-9 cm 1723.60 1840.00 1757.26 1777.00 1774.465
9-10 cm - - - - -
10-11 cm - - - - -
11-12 cm - - - - -
12-13 cm - - - - -
13-14 cm - - - - -
14-15 cm - - - - -
15-16 cm - - - - -
16-17 cm - - - - -
17-18 cm - - - - -
18-19 cm - - - - -
19-20 cm - - - - -
20-21 cm - - - - -
21-22 cm - - - - -
22-23 cm - - - - -
23-24 cm - - - - -
24-25 cm - - - - -
25-26 cm - - - - -
Table 5: Seepage analysis in 3 brick sample

Table 5 shows the seepage analysis in combination of three bricks and mortar. In above table, the
mortar mentioned part shows the binding mortar between bricks. The time taken by water to rise
through brick and mortar was recorded.

4.2.4 Seepage analysis in mortar brick samples

In a wall, mortar is present within bricks with various thicknesses as shown in fig.2. It is a
necessity to study the seepage through that mortar also as water can enter through mortar as well.
So we made mortar bricks of different thickness and seepage is analyzed through mortar bricks and
then graph is plotted against height of brick and time taken by water to rise up to that corress.
height.

Page | 13
 Figure-3: Mortar bricks casted with various thicknesses
4.2.4.1 2cm Thick mortar brick sample

Height interval Time taken by water to rise upto corress. Height (in Average time (in
(in cm) sec) seconds)
1 2 3
1-2 cm 677 720 730 701
Table-6: Seepage analysis in 2cm thick mortar brick

4.2.4.2 3cm Thick mortar brick sample

Height interval Time taken by water to rise upto corress. Height (in Average time (in
(in cm) sec) seconds)
1 2 3
1-2 cm 640 590 715 648.33
2-3 cm 1898 1925 1853 1892
Table-7: Seepage analysis in 3cm thick mortar brick

4.2.4.3 4cm Thick mortar brick sample

Height interval Time taken by water to rise upto corress. Height (in Average time (in
(in cm) sec) seconds)
1 2 3
1-2 cm 635 640 683 652.67
2-3 cm 1857 1745 1886 1829.33
3-4 cm 7401 7943 7006 7450
Table-8: Seepage analysis in 4cm thick mortar brick

Page | 14
4.2.4.4 5cm Thick mortar brick sample

Height interval Time taken by water to rise upto corress. Height (in Average time (in
(in cm) sec) seconds)
1 2 3
1-2 cm 638 647 663 649.33
2-3 cm 1853 1817 1937 1869
3-4 cm 7303 7766 9577 8215.33
4-5 cm 23855 21816 25723 23798
Table-9: Seepage analysis in 5cm thick mortar brick

SEEPAGE ANALYSIS IN 5cm THICK MORTAR BRICK

40000
35000
30000
25000
BRICK 1
20000 BRICK 2
15000 BRICK 3
10000 AVERAGE

5000
0
1 2 3 4
HEIGHT OF BRICK
(in cm)

Graph-3: Seepage analysis in 5cm thick mortar brick

Above graph was plotted against height of brick (on x-axis) and time taken by water to rise through
corresponding height (on y-axis). This graph depicts the seepage analysis of three different 5cm
thick mortar samples as well as of their average value. The values recorded in table 9 were used to
plot the graph.

Maximum time taken by water to rise throughout whole brick = 37900seconds (by Brick 3)
Minimum time taken by water to rise throughout whole brick = 32046seconds (by brick 2)
Average time taken by water to rise throughout whole brick = 34531.67seconds

4.2.4.5 Vertically analysis of seepage in 1cm thick mortar sample

In a wall, which is built for decorative purpose, we can use stack bond as they are not require to
Page | 15
transfer loads. In stack bond all the bricks are plainly loaded on top of each other and held with
mortar where all bonds are perfectly aligned. For such kind of wall, we can see that there is a 1 cm
thick mortar layer up to the height of wall between the bricks. So, for such wall we analyzed the
seepage in 1cm thick mortar brick in vertical direction.

Figure-4: Stack bond between bricks

Table 10 shows the seepage of water through 1 cm thick mortar brick along its vertical direction.
After rising up to a height of 7cm in approximate 1.5 day, water is not observed rising further. So,
there’s no reading after reaching the height of 7cm.

Height interval (in Time taken by water (in sec) Average time (in sec)
cm) 1 2
1-2 cm 587 708 647.5
2-3 cm 1919 1820 1869.5
3-4 cm 7600 7152 7376
4-5 cm 21446 22168 21807
5-6 cm 36896 37194 37045
6-7 cm 50756 51681 51218.5
7-8 cm - - -
8-9 cm - - -
9-10 cm - - -
10-11 cm - - -
11-12 cm - - -
12-13 cm - - -
13-14 cm - - -
14-15 cm - - -
15-16 cm - - -
16-17 cm - - -
17-18 cm - - -
18-19 cm - - -
Table-10: Seepage analysis of 1cm thick mortar sample along vertical direction

Page | 16
 SEEPAGE ANALYSIS IN 1cm THICK MORTAR BRICK SAMPLE
140000
time taken by water to rise

120000
100000
80000 SAMPLE 1
60000 SAMPLE 2
AVERAGE
40000
(in sec)

20000
0
1 2 3 4 5 6
height of brick
(in cm)

Graph-4: seepage analysis in 1cm thick mortar brick sample

4.2.5 Seepage analysis after application of chemicals on different samples

We immersed bricks and different mortar brick samples in SBR Latex for 24 hrs and let them air
dried for next 24 hrs for further study of seepage in them.

Initial weight Final weight Chemical % increase in

(in Kg) (in kg) absorbed (in kg) weight
Brick 1 2.640 2.875 0.235 8.9%
Brick 2 2.640 2.945 0.305 11.55%
Brick 3 2.640 2.980 0.340 12.87%
Brick 4 2.645 2.865 0.220 8.32%
Brick 5 2.650 3.040 0.390 14.72%
Table-11: % increase in weight after chemical absorption

Thickness (in Initial weight Final weight Chemical % increase in

cm) (in Kg) (in kg) absorbed (in kg) weight
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 1 Sample 2
1 0.715 0.720 0.740 0.752 0.025 0.032 3.5% 4.44%
2 1.195 1.190 1.285 1.305 0.090 0.115 7.53% 9.67%
3 1.350 1.343 1.475 1.455 0.125 0.112 9.26% 8.34%
4 1.530 1.550 1.615 1.612 0.085 0.062 5.55% 4%
5 1.565 1.575 1.670 1.635 0.105 0.060 6.7% 3.81%
Table-12: % increase in weight after immersing in SBR Latex

Table-11 and table-12 shows the chemical absorbed by bricks and mortar bricks respectively.
These tables show the % increase in weight of different samples after 24 hrs immersion in SBR
Latex.

Page | 17
4.2.5.1 Seepage analysis of brick after application of chemical

Height interval (in Time taken by water (in seconds) Average time (in
cm) Brick 1 Brick 2 seconds)
1-2 cm 16602 22272 19437
2-3 cm 43841 47437 45639
3-4 cm - - -
4-5 cm - - -
5-6 cm - - -
6-7 cm - - -
7-8 cm - - -
Table-13: Seepage analysis of brick after chemical application along its lateral direction

In table 13, we can see that seepage has been improved very much as compared to past results.

4.2.5.2 Seepage analysis of brick after application of chemical

Height interval (in Time taken by water (in seconds) Average time (in
cm) Brick 1 Brick 2 seconds)
1-2 cm 20,778 19,314 20,046
2-3 cm 51,645 50,853 51,249
3-4 cm - - -
4-5 cm - - -
5-6 cm - - -
6-7 cm - - -
7-8 cm - - -
8-9 cm - - -
9-10 cm - - -
10-11 cm - - -
11-12 cm - - -
12-13 cm - - -
13-14 cm - - -
14-15 cm - - -
15-16 cm - - -
16-17 cm - - -
17-18 cm - - -
Table-14: Seepage analysis of brick after chemical application along its vertical direction

4.2.5.3 Seepage analysis of 2cm thick mortar brick after application of chemical

Height interval Time taken by water to rise upto corress. Height (in Average time (in
(in cm) sec) seconds)
1 2 3
1-2 cm 23,537 24,103 17,443 21694.33
Page | 18
 Table-15: Seepage analysis in 2cm thick mortar brick after application of chemical

4.2.5.4 Seepage analysis of 3cm thick mortar brick after application of chemical

Height interval Time taken by water to rise upto corress. Height (in Average time (in
(in cm) sec) seconds)
1 2 3
1-2 cm 24,256 17,383 19,111 20,250
2-3 cm - - - -
Table-16: Seepage analysis in 3cm thick mortar brick after application of chemical

4.2.5.5 Seepage analysis of 4cm thick mortar brick after application of chemical

Height interval Time taken by water to rise upto corress. Height (in Average time (in
(in cm) sec) seconds)
1 2 3
1-2 cm 22,581 23,392 24,697 23,556.67
2-3 cm - - - -
3-4 cm - - - -
Table-17: Seepage analysis in 4cm thick mortar brick after application of chemical

4.2.5.6 Seepage analysis of 5cm thick mortar brick after application of chemical

Height interval Time taken by water to rise upto corress. Height (in Average time (in
(in cm) sec) seconds)
1 2 3
1-2 cm 23,693 22,723 25,939 24,118.33
2-3 cm - - - -
3-4 cm - - - -
4-5 cm - - - -
Table-18: Seepage analysis in 5cm thick mortar brick after application of chemical

4.2.5.7 Seepage analysis of 1cm thick mortar brick after application of chemical along
vertical direction

Height interval (in Time taken by water (in sec) Average time (in sec)
cm) 1 2
1-2 cm 22,834 23,874 23,354
2-3 cm 72,000 72,000 72,000
3-4 cm - - -
4-5 cm - - -
5-6 cm - - -
Page | 19
 6-7 cm - - -
7-8 cm - - -
8-9 cm - - -
9-10 cm - - -
10-11 cm - - -
11-12 cm - - -
12-13 cm - - -
13-14 cm - - -
14-15 cm - - -
15-16 cm - - -
16-17 cm - - -
17-18 cm - - -
18-19 cm - - -
Table-19: Seepage analysis in 1cm thick mortar brick after application of chemical along its
vertical direction

Page | 20
 CHAPTER-5

CONCLUSION

From results shown in previous chapters, we can see the effect of styrene butadiene rubber latex. It
forms an impervious layer around brick and mortar to prevent the entry of water in it. It improves
the seepage in a good extent. Table-20 shows the improvement of seepage after application of
chemical in a brick.

Height interval Time taken before Time taken after Difference

chemical (in sec) chemical (in sec)
1-2 cm 5.308 19437 19,431.692
2-3 cm 17.382 45639 45,621.618
3-4 cm 36.264 - -
4-5 cm 45.498 - -
5-6 cm 54.298 - -
6-7 cm 81.082 - -
7-8 cm 113.02 - -

Table-20: Comparison of seepage in brick before after use of chemical

Height interval Time taken before Time taken after Difference

chemical (in sec) chemical (in sec)
1-2 cm 3.146 20,046 20,042.854
2-3 cm 6.924 51,249 51,242.076
3-4 cm 18.28 - -
4-5 cm 32.892 - -
5-6 cm 53.904 - -
6-7 cm 71.846 - -
7-8 cm 80.2 - -
8-9 cm 84.65 - -
9-10 cm 83.378 - -
10-11 cm 102.804 - -
11-12 cm 114.29 - -
12-13 cm 109.53 - -
13-14 cm 106.936 - -
14-15 cm 114.684 - -
15-16 cm 117.604 - -
16-17 cm 109.594 - -

Table-21: Comparison in seepage of brick in vertical direction before and after application of
chemical

Page | 21
 Height interval Time taken before Time taken after Difference
chemical (in sec) chemical (in sec)
1-2 cm 649.33 24,118.33 23,469.0
2-3 cm 1869 - -
3-4 cm 8215.33 - -
4-5 cm 23798 - -

Table-22: Comparison in seepage in 5 cm thick mortar brick before and after use of chemical
(In above tables, average values of the desired value are taken as they are treated as true value.)

From table-20, 21 & 22, we can observe the improvement of seepage in brick as well as mortar. By
using the above procedure and method, we can treat the seepage of water in a new or old structure
occurring through ground.

Page | 22
 CHAPTER-6

REFERENCES

[1] Lstiburek, J.,Moisture Control for infiltration in future construction

[2] Dr.Annie.r. Pearce, An analysis of waterproofing systems and materials brandom
smith shell.
[3] John F. Straube, ASHRAE Journal, February 2002, pp. 36-41.
[4] I.S. 1346 for waterproofing
[5] Yanan, Liu & Qingsong, Zhang & Rentai, Liu & Yanxu, Guo & Xiaochen, Wang &
Jian, Chen & Yishan, Wei & Baozhi, Li. (2018).

[6] Türkmen, Sedat. (2003). Treatment of the seepage problems at the Kalecik Dam
(Turkey). Engineering Geology - ENG GEOL. 68. 159-169. 10.1016/S0013-
7952(02)00225-9.

[7] Kaini, Santosh & Hayde, Laszlo & Schultz, Bart & Marence, Miroslav. (2011).
Seepage analysis underneath the headwork of Chanda Mohana Irrigation Scheme,
Sunsari, Nepal.

[8] Venuja, T. & Kurukulasuriya, Chandana. (2020). Seepage in Iranamadu Dam and
Its Influence on the Stability. 10.1007/978-981-13-9749-3_33.
Wang, Zhenyu & Yang, Lingqiang & Sun, Naidong. (2019). Research on optimal
design of slope anti-seepage. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental
Science. 304. 042041. 10.1088/1755-1315/304/4/042041.

[9] Wang, R & Zhu, Y. (2019). Finite element analysis of seepage of earth-rock dams
in dry and rainy seasons. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science.
344. 012112. 10.1088/1755-1315/344/1/012112.

Page | 23