Redgard (and similar) vs. Henry Dura-Brite for waterproofing. [Archive] - Ceramic Tile Advice Forums - John Bridge Ceramic Tile

PDA

View Full Version : Redgard (and similar) vs. Henry Dura-Brite for waterproofing.


Zambash
07-15-2019, 09:16 PM
Hello everyone.

I am new here and I am a DIY homeowner planning to tile a bath/shower alcove. There's no way I can afford the insanely expensive systems like Wedi board, so I am planning on using a 6-mil poly sheet covered by Durock as my tile backer.

My research has led me to believe that even though I am just doing the walls (not floor) of a standard (not steam) shower alcove, it will still probably be a good idea to use another moisture barrier on top of the Durock cement board.

However, I got sticker shock again when I looked and saw that Redgard and similar barriers (Aquadefense etc.) are almost $50 per gallon or more. It is a pretty small area I'm doing, only about 60 square feet, but even so, I'm worried it might take more than one gallon to put on a couple solid coats. I found that I have most of a gallon of Henry Dura-Brite white elastomeric roof coating left from a previous project, and it is about half the cost of Redgard. It is a 100% acrylic product and I figure if it can hold up on a roof, why not on a cement backer board?

I have been looking all over though and I can't find exactly what it is about Redgard and similar products that makes them so expensive, they don't say anything about what they are actually made out of right on the can. What exactly is it that makes them so expensive and would the Henry Dura-Brite serve as an acceptable alternative?

Thanks,
Robert

Sponsored Links


cx
07-15-2019, 09:50 PM
Welcome, Robert. :)

Sounds like you are doing a tub/shower and if you install an appropriate moisture barrier properly behind your CBU wallboard, you do not need, nor do you want, a direct bonded waterproofing membrane on the inside face of your walls.

I'm not familiar with your Henry Dura-Brite, but if it's designed as a "reflective" roof coating and, therefore, a wear surface, it's gonna be a different formulation than one of the direct bonded waterproofing membranes tested to the requirements of ANSI A118.10. All those products are made to accept a bond with cementitious thinset mortar and none of them is permitted by the manufacturer to be used as a wear surface. Different animals.

What's actually in each of the products? I dunno. I do know that your shower walls will see a whole hellofa lot more water in their lifetime than will your roof, though.

But since you won't be using any such product, it's really a moot point, eh?

My opinion; worth price charged.

Zambash
07-15-2019, 10:01 PM
You are correct, I am doing a tile surround for a bathtub. So you are saying that for non-steam shower walls, a plastic barrier behind Durock properly jointed with fiberglass mesh and thinset will be sufficient?

cx
07-15-2019, 10:02 PM
So long as the moisture barrier drapes over the tub's tiling flange on the drain side, that's an acceptable water containment method for a tile shower.