Introduction
Leaks that require waterproofing rarely announce themselves clearly. What starts as a faint stain, a damp patch, or recurring mould often points to a deeper issue within the structure. As such, choosing the right waterproofing approach early can mean the difference between a contained repair and a disruptive, costly overhaul.
Generally, there are two main options: hacking or non-hacking waterproofing. While both have their place, they serve very different purposes. Understanding when each method is appropriate helps prevent unnecessary demolition, wasted cost, and repeat failures.
Understanding Waterproofing
Waterproofing is the process of preventing water from penetrating building elements such as concrete slabs, walls, and joints. In residential properties, failures typically occur due to aging membranes, hairline cracks in concrete, poor detailing at joints, or long-term exposure to moisture.
Common problem areas include bathrooms, balconies, rooftops, planter boxes, and ceilings beneath wet areas. Because water travels through capillaries, cracks, and concealed pathways, visible damage is often only a symptom. Effective waterproofing therefore depends on identifying how and where water is moving, not simply where it appears.
What Is Hacking Waterproofing?
Hacking waterproofing involves removing the existing surface layer like tiles, screed or concrete before applying a new waterproof membrane directly on the substrate. This is the traditional way of waterproofing because it allows professionals to address issues from the base up.
Imagine a bathroom where water keeps seeping through despite multiple quick fixes. The floor tiles look fine, but the membrane beneath has failed and moisture has reached the concrete slab. In such cases, hacking becomes the only reliable option because it reveals what's happening below the surface and lets contractors fix the root cause rather than just the symptom.
Typical Use Cases
Hacking waterproofing is generally considered when:
- Waterproofing membranes have deteriorated beyond repair
- Concrete is badly cracked, spalled, or uneven
- Structural elements or reinforcements show signs of corrosion
- Previous surface treatments have repeatedly failed
While effective, hacking is disruptive, time-intensive, and costly. It should be approached as a corrective measure, not a default solution.
What Is Non-Hacking Waterproofing?
Non-hacking waterproofing addresses leakage without removing existing finishes. Using advanced coatings, sealants, injection grouts, and concrete treatments, this approach seals pores, micro-cracks, and water pathways from within or above the surface.
Rather than dismantling the space, non-hacking methods work with the existing structure, intervening precisely where water ingress occurs. When properly assessed and applied, they offer reliable protection with far less disruption.
Typical Use Cases
Non-hacking waterproofing is well-suited for:
- Hairline cracks or seepage through concrete slabs
- Leakage from bathrooms or balconies with intact finishes
- Ceiling leaks caused by moisture migration rather than structural failure
- Situations where demolition is undesirable or impractical
Because it preserves finishes and minimises downtime, non-hacking is often the preferred option when conditions allow.
Factors to Consider When Deciding
Choosing between hacking and non-hacking waterproofing should be guided by conditions on site, not assumptions.
Nature of the Problem
The type and extent of water intrusion largely determine which method is appropriate. Minor seepage, condensation, or hairline cracks can often be resolved through non-hacking systems such as Flood Infusion or PU Grouting, which seal internal pathways without removing finishes. Even in critical, structural issues, such as spalling concrete, non-hacking methods, such as our 5-Layer Waterproofing System can rehabilitate and protect the surface without full hacking.
However, if, for example, there is deep structural deterioration, hacking may still be necessary to ensure a lasting repair. A professional assessment can help determine whether the issue is superficial or structural in nature.
Accessibility
Accessibility plays a major role in deciding the approach. Areas that are difficult to reach, such as ceilings beneath occupied units, confined spaces, or finished wet areas, often benefit from non-hacking methods like Flood Infusion or PU Grouting that minimise disruption. Conversely, if the affected area is already undergoing renovation, hacking may sometimes be more practical.
Budget and Timeline
Cost and time considerations can influence the decision significantly. Hacking typically involves demolition, debris removal, and reinstatement of finishes, which increases both expense and project duration. Non-hacking methods are generally quicker and less labour-intensive, making them suitable for smaller-scale or time-sensitive repairs.
Our Recommendation
Where conditions permit, non-hacking waterproofing should be the first line of consideration. It resolves many leakage issues effectively while preserving finishes, controlling cost, and minimising disruption.
Hacking remains necessary in specific situations, for example, when structural components have collapsed or load bearing elements have weakened or decayed.
We recommend a thorough professional assessment from a waterproofing specialist to make sure the solution matches the problem, rather than defaulting to the most invasive or convenient option.
Looking to Waterproof Your Home?
Since 1999, Winborne has been helping homeowners and property managers across Singapore protect their spaces from water damage with reliable, non-hacking waterproofing solutions. Our team combines technical expertise with proven materials to deliver long-lasting results, without unnecessary disruption or demolition. If you're experiencing leaks or dampness, contact us today for a professional assessment.