During the 1990s Building Diagnostics Asia Pacific

investigated tiling failures in several hotel and public

swimming pools in Australia and Southeast Asia. We found
that unsatisfactory performance of pool tiling in Asia is often
caused by poor concrete and render substrates, made worse
by rushing various stages of construction. Pool shells are
commonly not given time to cure fully before being screeded
and rendered. These substrates in turn are not given time
to dry before being tiled. It is harder to generalise about
the causes of pool tiling failures in Australia. However, it is
clear that inappropriate tile-fixing techniques continue to be
defended as common practice.
In the course of recent disputes over failures of tiling in
a community swimming pool in rural Queensland and
residential pools in suburban Sydney, tile suppliers, tiling
contractors and consultants enlisted as their advocates (in
other words, as potential expert witnesses in the event of
arbitration or litigation) have insisted that tile-fixing methods
complied with AS3958.1 - Guide to the installation of ceramic
tiling. Conversely, one putative experts explanation for tiling
failure was that the tiles were not fixed in accordance with
AS3958.1.
In all instances, AS3958.1 was not cited in specifications
for the work. That is not altogether surprising. The preface
to AS3958.1 cautions that the standard does not apply to
specialized applications such as swimming pools. That
message is repeated in Clause 1.1 - Scope - which refers to
Part 4 of the British Standard BS5385 for tiling in situations
where there are specific functional or environmental
considerations, notably conditions of permanent immersion.
The equivalent clause of AS3958.2 - Guide to the selection of
a ceramic tiling system - directs that:
Additional information on the fixing of tiles is specialist
situations, such as swimming pools, or where chemical
resistance is required, may be found in BS 5385 Part 4.
A licensed photocopy of Part 4 of BS5385 can be purchased
from Standards Australia. Only a few of the documents 30
pages deal directly with tiling of swimming pools, so it is
surprising that few specifiers and tradesmen are familiar
with its contents.
Clause 7.2.5 of the British Standard advises that tiles in
swimming pools:
...should be solidly bedded so that voids behind them are
eliminated as far as possible.
Philip Perkins, the author of Swimming Pools - A Treatise on
the Planning, Design and Construction, Water Treatment and
Other Services, Maintenance and Repairs, currently in its 3rd
edition, gives similar advice:
Irrespective of whether thick bed (10 mm) or thin bed
(3 mm) is used, the tiles must be fully bedded and all
necessary precautions taken to ensure this.
Solidly bedded and fully bedded mean 100% adhesive
coverage of adhesive on the back of the tile. In practice, the
so-called notched trowel method rarely achieves coverage
above 80% for thin-bed adhesives and tiles with shallow
embossments fixed to conventional flat floor slabs. The
chances of the same method achieving anything approaching
28

tiletoday.infotile.com.au

issue #28

100% coverage, with thin-bed

adhesives and tiles incorporating
deep keys or embossments, are
negligible.
The only practical way to
eliminate voids - or at
least to ensure that air pockets
in the adhesive paste are few, small and not connected
- is to employ the technique described in Clause 5.6.2(d)
of AS3958.1 as the combined method. This requires that
adhesive paste be trowelled in ribs on the substrate,
separately and evenly buttered on the back of each tile, and
the two layers carefully merged and beaten.
In the Queensland dispute noted above, the combined
method was clearly specified and described. Nevertheless,
the essential back-buttering was omitted throughout the work
that followed. A consultant engaged by the building contractor
was later to claim, seemingly seriously, that the combined
method is impracticable as it requires tilers to alternate
between notched trowels for the substrate and different
straight-edged trowels for buttering tiles. This putative expert
was evidently unfamiliar with the tiling industrys most
commonplace hand-tools. He may also believe that substrates
are separately trowelled for the area to be covered by each
tile. Such imaginative arguments were irrelevant to the tiling
subcontractor who, during repair work, was surprised to learn
that the combined method had been specified in the first
place. He is reported to have disclosed that the specification
was not made available to him when bidding the job and was
not sighted during construction.
The elimination of voids as far as possible in bedding tiles
is a disarmingly vague concept. In the event of an adhesion
failure, it simply invites the argument that We did as well
as possible and the familiar and more suspect assertion
that Weve always done it this way and weve never had
any problems; it must be the fault of ....the tiles, the screed,
the concrete, the adhesive, something in the water and
so on. It is therefore essential for architects to specify both
the desired result (minimum voids) and the way it is to be
achieved (the two-stage or combined tiling technique with
complete and even buttering of the tiles).
It is also important for supervisors, clerks of works (if
such still exist in the building industry) and even tilers to
lift the occasional tile to confirm that full bedding is being
consistently achieved. It is not a particularly onerous task
to lift and refix one tile in every 50 or 100 early in the job.
When tiles fall off a wall or lift from a floor, it is very easy
to discern whether isolated tiles were lifted and refixed
during the working time of the adhesive. BDAP staff
have examined failures caused by lapses in workmanship
that recur through thousands of square metres of tiling.
We rarely find evidence of occasional tiles having been
removed to confirm adequate adhesive coverage. In most
cases, critical deficiencies could have been detected in this
way and remedied from the outset. However, such simple
but tiresome tasks seem to fall through the cracks in the
obscure divisions of responsibilities between architects,
project managers, construction managers (some of whom
might also be described as builders) and sub-contractors.
Tiles on the floor of a filled swimming pool are subject
to much milder point loads than occur on tiled paving
surrounding the pool. The rolling loads of self-propelled
vacuum cleaners that meander around residential pools are

negligible. A large mass of water acts as an effective buffer

to both the range and rate of temperature change. Why,
then, is full bedding such an important factor for tiles in what
seem to be relatively benign environments?
It should be understood that conventional tiling does not
provide an impermeable barrier to water. It is reasonable
to assume that tiles, grouted joints, adhesive layers and
underlying screeds become saturated early in the life of
a pool. Even epoxy resin joint grouting cannot prevent
some water penetrating beneath tiles. Parts of cement
mortars and cement-based adhesive pastes are soluble
in water. When constantly immersed, they will gradually
dissolve until the pore solution reaches saturation. In water
held in small enclosed voids, dissolution probably occurs
quickly and reaches a harmless equilibrium. However,
wherever a network of voids between flattened ribs of
adhesive allows water to percolate within the tiling and to
flow back into the pool through grouted joints, there will be
a slow loss of mass from the adhesive layer. In simple terms,
some of the adhesive is chemically converted and some is
carried away.
Investigations of early adhesion failures in tiling of an indoor
public swimming pool in 1998 inadvertently confirmed how
far water can percolate through interconnected voids in
the adhesive layer. A small number of tiles in the floor of
the pool arched upwards within days of its first slow filling.
The pool was emptied and allowed to dry over a week. A
simulated beach with pebble finish at the shallow end of
the pool was covered with hessian and kept damp. When
tiles were lifted at the deep end of the pool, fine silica
particles and dark pigments were found in voids between
trowelled ribs of adhesive. The apparent source of these
deposits was the pebble aggregate finish 30 metres away.
This was demonstrated by injecting water containing yellow
dye into the cment-based topping of the sloping beach.
Within 48 hours, yellow water was found trickling through
gaps in the layer of trowelled adhesive at the deep end of
the pool. A network of interconnected voids under the tiles
was evidently allowing water to drain down the slope of the
pool. The extent to which percolation of water through tiling
slowly degrades adhesion in filled pools remains a matter
for speculation. It is clear that moving water dissolves
and removes some part of the mass of cement-based
mortars and adhesive pastes. Turbulence in wave pools and
convection currents in heated pools may drive the process.
Whatever the mechanism of slow water movement may
be, several tiling authorities in Britain and North America are
convinced that networks of interconnected voids in adhesive
and bedding layers play a significant part in adhesion failures
of pool tiling.

As rainwater and moisture from the

tile adhesive were absorbed by the glue
bonding tiles to the backing mesh, the thin
clear coating expanded to an insoluble
white gel which forced tiles from the
wall. Had the tile joints been successfully
grouted, failure of the tiling would have
been delayed until some time after the pool
was filled.

DECIDUOUS GLASS MOSAIC TILES

More than 30 years ago, early adhesion failures of mosaic
tiles in swimming pools and spas in Australia were attributed
to the use of inappropriate glues to bond tiles to backing
mesh. The same problem was reported in the USA where
the Materials & Methods Standards Association published
a cautionary bulletin titled Back-Mounted Ceramic Tile. The
following excerpts come from the March 1984 revision of
that bulletin:
Prior to the early 1950s, all large unit tiles...were installed
individually. Small mosaics, glass mosaics, etc., were face
mounted in 1 ft. x 1 ft. or 1 ft. x 2 ft. sheets at the factory by
applying non-perforated paper with a water soluble adhesive
to the face on top of the tiles. When the tiles were set
conventionally in mortar, the paper could be wet or soaked
by brushing the surface with water, and the paper stripped
off easily. Any glue left on the surface of the tile could easily
be washed off without disturbing the bond of the tile to the
setting bed.
With the advent and expanded use of thin bed materials,
face-mounted tiles became difficult to use on the job and
required special care and skill to install. The need for a
faster setting method of some sort became more apparent,
especially as labor costs rose and the popularity of smallsized tiles increased. Perforated paper, jute material,
nylon mesh, rubber and many other products were
used as mounting materials and applied by factories
to the underside or back of the tile. This permitted
the mechanic to install sheets of tile rapidly, observe
his work thoroughly, and make any corrections
immediately (such as replacing cracked or broken
tiles).

Mesh-mounted glass mosaic

tiles in this pool slipped
downwards and collapsed from
the walls of the pool before
joints had been grouted.

issue #28

tiletoday.infotile.com.au

29

A close view of the clear backing mesh

glue and entrapped bubbles of air. The glue
covers up to 100% of the back face of the
tiles where it acts as a barrier coat between
the cement-based tile adhesives. The glue
appears to have been applied in excess using
a paint roller or brush.

Failures have occurred through

the use of back-mounted tiles. In
many cases thin-bed adhesives
bonded to
either paper or a thin layer of
water-soluble glue on
the back of the tiles, with no
contact made to the tiles themselves. Water eventually
soaked through the Portland Cement grout joints and rewet
the mounting glue suficiently to break the bond and cause
failure.

We strongly urge all ceramic mosaic tile

manufacturers to clearly indicate on their cartons,
in the cartons or on each sheet of tile, whether
or not their mounted tiles are suitable for use in
swimming pools, exteriors or other wet areas.

A macrophotograph of the white gel after

eight days contact with a moist layer
of a popular tiling adhesive. BDAP tested
scores of samples, each of fifteen tiles, set
into shallow plastic trays of water, sand/
cement mortars and a range of proprietary
tile adhesives and adhesive additives
recommended for conditions of immersion.
In every test, the clear backing mesh glue
swelled to an insoluble white gel.

A macrophotograph of loose strands of

gel after 24 hours immersion in water.
Strands of the fine backing mesh are
visible within the layer of gel.

In response to widespread failures, producers of glass and

ceramic mosaic tiles changed their backing mesh glues and
the problem seemed to go away. Now it has returned as tiles
are sourced from new producers unaware of the lessons
of the past. Similar adhesion failures have recently been
reported in separate disputes over swimming pool tiling in
Sydney and northern New South Wales. In both instances,
imported glass mosaic tiles have fallen from walls before the
pools were filled for the first time. In both instances, the glue
bonding tiles to backing mesh initially has the appearance of
a thin clear and brittle film, with entrapped bubbles, covering
up to 100% of the back surface and mesh.
In both instances, tile merchants have defended the product
by seeking to attribute the failures to poor workmanship and/
or the use of inappropriate tile adhesives. Such explanations
are nonsense. A respected adhesive manufacturer has
tested the tiles and concluded that they are incompatible
with all of its products. By contrast, a tiling contractor,
acting on behalf of a wholesaler of the glass mosaic tiles,
has conducted his own tests and reported that the product
displays no problems in conditions of immersion ...as long
everything is done perfectly in the first place. I wonder
whether that peculiar caveat is expressed to unsuspecting
buyers and tiler-fixers. What does perfection mean in this
context? How will a tribunal enforcing the Trade Practices
Act respond to the implication that a product cannot be
expected to work in circumstances short of perfection?
BDAP has conducted extensive tests on samples of pristine
tiles supplied for the disputed pools. We have shown that
the mesh adhesive film, when exposed to normal moisture
in a range of mortar and adhesive paste mixes, slowly
expands to a become an insoluble white gel up to 1.5 mm
thick. When the bedding is saturated, the swelling of the gel
is discernible after 50 hours and complete after about 100
hours. It can be accelerated by heating. If a sample of tiles is
placed in a plastic tray of water and warmed in a microwave
oven, conversion of the backing adhesive to gel becomes
visible after a few minutes. Conversion is activated by
water. It is completely unrelated to any components of tiling
adhesive mixes other than water.
continued on page 90...

30

tiletoday.infotile.com.au

issue #28

advertisers
advertisers index index
...continued from page 30

Company

In practice, the backing mesh glue initially acts as a

barrier coat between mosaic tiles and thin-set tiling
adhesives. It prevents these adhesives bonding to
the tiles. The tiles remain in place because some of
the adhesive paste is forced into narrow joints and
around mesh fibres crossing joints. Attachment
at this stage is mechancial rather than adhesive.
Glass mosaic tiles are impervious to moisture, so
adhesion is purely a surface phenomenon. Unlike
slightly porous ceramic tiles, glass tiles do not
benefit from mechanical interlocking of cement
crystals within pores below the surface.
As the backing mesh glue becomes wet and
swells, tiles are pushed away from the layer of
tiling adhesive. The swelling slows to a halt as
the adhesive cures but starts again when water
penetrates joints. This has occurred soon after
rainwater flowed down walls of ungrouted tiling
in one pool and ponded on the finished floor of
another. Sooner or later, the tiles simply fall away
to expose a layer of seemingly vermiculated gel
over the strands of the backing mesh. Intact and
seemingly flawless glass mosaic tiling in a spa
deformed and collapsed within days of the pools
first shallow filling. It is possible that hydrostatic
pressure against the sides of a filled pool could
delay similar failures for months. If so, detachment
would probably commence at or close to the
waterline.
Glass mosaic tiles in these pools were supplied
in cardboard boxes which do not identify the
manufacturer and do not confirm the products
suitability for use in conditions of immersion.
During our investigation of the first failure, a
representative of the importer declared that it has
supplied more than five thousand square metres of
identical tiles and knows of no other problematic
installations. That quantity of tiles corresponds
to more than 30 moderately sized residential
swimming pools. Meanwhile, I suggest that
tilers follow the simple precaution of immersing
samples of mesh-mounted mosaic tiles in trays of
water to observe, over a few days, the behaviour
of the backing glue. If it swells to a white gel
reminiscent of damp polyvinyl acetate (PVA) wood
glue, beware. Buyers also seek written assurances
that mosaic tiles are suitable for use in conditions
of permanent or occasional immersion.
Peter Hartog
Principal
Building Diagnostics Asia Pacific

Page Nos.

for free product

information
Enter following
number on
Readerlink Card

Academy Tiles
75
150
Alumac Industries
55
140
Architectural & Structural Adhesives Inside back cover 161
Austile Design Company
73
149
Australian Building Ceramics
10, 53
113, 137
B.A.T. Trims
83
155
Bell Granito Ceramica Ltd - India
81
154
Ceramiche Artistiche LEA
5
116
Ceramiche Caesar
21
122
ceranova TILES
37
129
Cerim
32, 33
128
Cersaie
25
124
Cevisama
63
143
Contour Ceramics
54, 84
138, 156
Cotto DEste
9
118
Davco
23, 89 123, 107, 110
Decoramics
Back cover
162
Eczacibasi Karo Seramik (Vitra)
79
153
Essenza
69
147
Eureka Tiles
27
126
Fiordo Industrie Ceramiche S.r.l.
11
119
Gardenia Orchidea
2, 3
115
Gaya Fores
65
145
Genesis Themed Design & Construction
71
148
Germans Boada
64
144
Green Rhino
85
157
Halcon Ceramicas
61
142
Halliday Tile Graphics
10, 13
111, 120
InfoTile
77
151
Iris/Metric Tiles
41
131
Johnson Tiles
10, 46, 47
112, 134
Laticrete Pty Ltd
45
133
Mapei Australia
39
130
Multitech Ceramics
78, 89
152, 108
Niro Ceramic (M) Sdn Bhd
57
141
Norcros Building Products
51
136
Panaria Industrie Ceramiche S.p.A.
7
117
QEP Australia
87, 88
159, 114
Stone Age (NSW) Pty Ltd
Tasman Chemicals
Tau Ceramica
The Selective Tile & Design Centre
The Software Magician
Tile Power
Tiling Tool Specialists
Top Notch Tools
United Ceramics

66, 67
89
31
54
26
42, 43
88
86
17

146
109
127
139
125
132
160
158
121

FREE-FAX OR POST YOUR PRODUCT ENQUIRIES

90

tiletoday.infotile.com.au

issue #28

Listed by each advertisers name are page numbers on which their

products are featured. There is a Readerlink Number listed for each
advertiser, simply enter the number e.g. 101 in the appropriate space
on the Readerlink Card. Send form free-fax 1800 637 899 or mail it
freepost to address on rear of card. This index is supplied as a service to
our readers. No liability is created by or accepted for inadvertent errors
or omissions.