The adoption of damp-proof cream application as a remedial solution in preventing rising damp in Ugandan residential houses.

Abstract

This study explores the adoption of damp-proof cream (DPC) as a remedial solution for rising damp in Ugandan residential houses, addressing the significant structural and aesthetic damage caused by absent or defective damp-proof courses. Rising damp, resulting from capillary action of groundwater through porous building materials, is worsened in Uganda by poor construction practices and substandard materials, rendering traditional remediation methods costly and often ineffective. The research seeks to evaluate current remediation practices, their limitations, and the potential of DPC as a cost-effective, less invasive alternative. A mixed-methods research design was employed, combining quantitative and qualitative approaches for a comprehensive analysis. Data was collected via structured questionnaires from 90 construction professionals, including quantity surveyors, architects, and civil engineers, with 81 responses received, achieving a high response rate. The sample was calculated using Yamane’s formula to ensure professional representation. Descriptive statistical analysis, including means and frequencies, was conducted using SPSS version 25, with a 5-point Likert scale to assess perceptions. The Friedman test was used to compare effectiveness ratings of remediation techniques and DPC characteristics, confirming significant differences in professional evaluations. Findings reveal that traditional remediation practices, such as foundation reconstruction and rigid damp-proof course insertion, are prevalent due to familiarity but are only moderately effective and face challenges like high costs, labour intensity, and limited material availability. Less common methods, including chemical impregnation and active electro-osmosis, are hindered by inconsistent results and perceived ineffectiveness. While awareness of DPC is moderate, its practical use remains low, primarily due to barriers such as limited awareness, high costs, lack of skilled applicators, and resistance to new technology. However, professionals rate DPC highly for its cost, durability, structural integrity, ease of repair, and health and safety, and believe it can significantly enhance remediation practices, as supported by significant Friedman test results (p<0.001). The study concludes that the inefficiencies of traditional methods necessitate alternatives like D