AU750994B2 - Chemical treatment system and method - Google Patents

Description

VI

P/00/01il 28/5/91 Regulation 3.2(2)

AUSTRALIA

Patents Act 1990

ORIGINAL

COMPLETE SPECIFICATION STANDARD PATENT a.

a a a a.

a a a. a a a.

a a.

a Application Number: Lodged: Invention Title: CHEMICAL

METHOD

TREATMENT SYSTEM AND The following statement is a full description of this invention, including the best method of performing it known to us:- CHEMICAL TREATMENT SYSTEM AND METHOD This invention relates to chemical treatment methods and apparatus for prevention of access of insects, especially termites, to buildings and like structures.

A major problem for builders in many countries is damage done to structures by insects, especially termites though the terms may be used interchangeably herein, the most voracious and notorious of the insect species known to damage property. In many parts of Australia, for example, are widely and commonly distributed termite species which have the ability to devastate property. The problem is also experienced in other sub- tropical climates but is not confined to these. It is known that termite problems also exist in the State of New York, United States, a temperate climate situation.

Therefore, it has been known for many years to take precautions against S the activity of such insects. In recent years, building codes have been 15 significantly strengthened to take account of the problem as well as the many factors which bear on the severity and nature of termite attack. However, methods commonly used in the past are no longer acceptable for environmental reasons.

In this respect, until relatively recently, the organo-chlorine insecticides 20 DDT, dieldrin, aldrin and others, were hand sprayed over the treatment area.

oo.. Commonly, the soil where the foundations of a building were to be laid would be sprayed with such chemicals. This method was reasonably effective, the chemicals had a long life leaving active residues but this suggested a major problem. Such chemicals were extremely toxic to humans and animals and posed great risk to all who came into contact with them, especially the hand spraying pest control operators.

Thus there was a trend toward use of less toxic chemicals but, as these were not as effective and potentially more expensive than organo-chlorines, the pest control industry was confronted with a consumer base that was unwilling to be exposed to chemicals, with this, a focus came onto passive barrier methods y ch may take the form of mesh, glass, plastic or granite aggregate barriers.

Other forms of termite-proofing involve active barriers underlying the foundation in which a non-adsorbent building material, for example, sand is impregnated with termiticide usually at extremely high concentrations to prolong effectiveness. Such barriers have a lifetime dictated by the half-life of the chemicals used to treat them because these may react with soil components, be leached away by rainfall or may be biodegraded over time. A problem then arises as to how the chemical barrier can be replenished and the building area re-treated. As codes may require re-treatment every five to seven years this is a serious problem and it is not a solution to use invasive techniques which reduce the amenity of the property and pose hazard to building occupier and pest control agent. Expense may also be a problem with some barriers.

An alternative to the above types of termite proofing systems is disclosed in Australian Patent Nos 583405 and 630228, the contents of which are hereby incorporated by reference. In these systems, a network of perforated pipes is laid beneath a waterproof sheet above which a foundation slab is laid. Insecticide may be pumped through the system at required concentration and distribution and infused into the surrounding ground to prevent infestations by subterranean termites. The method allows selectivity of distribution of insecticide by ready formation of pressure gradients by suitable design of the system which allows the desired treatment in all 20 areas necessary to protect the structure in accordance with the Australian Standard S: AS3660.1-1995 (Protection from Subterranean Termites). Retreatment is also easier S and safer. All other factors being equal, these systems are well suited for protection of the wet areas of the building (location of laundries, toilets, bathrooms etc) where the joint between the slab and the plumbing piping or other slab penetrations such as piers or load bearing members may open with contraction of the concrete slab as it sets and may result in a focus for termite infestation.

In this respect, termite problems are likely to appear in three key locations: at the perimeter apron of the building foundations, at construction joints, and at penetrations into wet areas of a building where plumbing lines or other protrusions penetrate through the waterproof sheet and slab. This assumes integrity of the slab otherwise but this cannot be assumed under all conditions. Under certain soil conditions, for example where soil type is reactive, this may not be the case. In q ain parts of Southern and Eastern Australia, soils comprise swellable clays.

When water is present, the clay swells but drying may then occur causing cavity formation and collapse of soil beneath the foundations. A slab built to Australian Standard 2870-1990 should not crack, but may separate from soil, forming cavities through which termites may track, entering the property especially at slab penetrations causing property degradation.

It is the object of the present invention to provide a termite-proofing system that has the advantages of safety and economy while addressing the problem of building access by termites, particularly at slab penetrations, under all soil conditions encountered in Australia allowing compliance and registration of the method by the various certifying authorities.

With this object in view, the present invention provides, in a first aspect, a pipe system for termite-proofing a sub-floor area of a structure having a foundation penetrated by at least one penetration and having an insecticide distributing pipe system, said pipe system including at least one pipe having S 15 apertures of such size and spacing that insecticide flows through the apertures and infuses the adjacent ground wherein an insecticide loaded adsorbent material is located proximate to portions of pipes or tubes comprised in said pipe system to maintain insecticide concentrations proximate said pipe or tube portions; and a physical barrier to termites, including an element for blocking termite access S 20 through a gap between slab and penetration, is located relative to said at least *:*one penetration for preventing termite access through said gap between •oo* foundation and slab penetration.

The present invention provides, in a second aspect, a pipe system for termite-proofing a sub-floor area of a structure having a foundation penetrated by at least one penetration including: a primary pipe system including at least one pipe or tube located substantially at or adjacent the perimeter of the foundation of the building; a secondary pipe system including at least one pipe or tube adjacent the at least one penetration for termite proofing at the penetration; said pipe system including means for charging either or both primary and secondary pipe systems with insecticide, the pipe systems including pipes or tubes perforated along a substantial portion of their length by a plurality of apertures of such size nd spacing that insecticide flows through the apertures and infuses the adjacent ground wherein an insecticide adsorbent material is located proximate to portions of pipes or tubes comprised in said pipe system to maintain insecticide concentrations proximate said pipe or tube portions; and a physical barrier to termites including an element for blocking termite access through a gap between slab and penetration is located relative to said at least one penetration for preventing termite access through the gap between foundation and slab penetration.

The primary pipe system may include a perimeter discharge pipe surrounding the edge of the foundation as the sole discharge pipe in the system with protection at slab penetrations being provided by the physical barrier.

The termite proofing method of the invention is particularly concerned with preventing access of the subterranean termites which may damage a structure especially at slab penetrations, thus the physical barrier may be a passive barrier or an active barrier. Passive barriers include an element that passively blocks 15 gaps that may appear between slab and penetration. Generally, such passive barriers include means to locate and fix the barrier in a foundation. Engagement of a portion of the barrier with the penetration along a portion which extends *through the slab or foundation is preferred. Collar/flange type barriers where the *...*collar engages the penetration with a flange below the slab to cover gaps are 20 suitable.

The pipe systems conveniently employed are those described in Australian coo• Patent Nos. 583405, 630228 and Australian Patent Application No. 34198/97 the contents of which are hereby incorporated by reference.

Conveniently, the physical barrier is an active barrier formed by adsorption or adherence of insecticide to an adsorbent material. Suitable materials especially include activated carbon in all its forms, though other carbon containing materials may be suitable. Other materials may be used which have termiticidal properties. Polymeric films may be suitable.

The applicant has found that certain textiles or geotextiles, especially as marketed by Geofabrics Australasia Pty Ltd, Albury, NSW, Australia for civil engineering applications, typically at drains and roads may have an adequate level of adsorbing carbon content or enable high adherency of insecticide, though s mechanism at play is not clear. It may be possible to formulate the material to (f Jer enhance a slow or gradual termiticide release characteristic.

The insecticide may be adhered or adsorbed or otherwise applied to the adsorbent material such, as the textile or fabric in any safe and effective manner, observing any safety guidelines applying to the insecticide and ensuring that termiticide concentrations are sufficient to provide treatment in accordance with the relevant standards: It is desirable that the adsorbing step be carried out in a controlled manner off-site so that the desired concentration of insecticide, especially termiticide, is achieved throughout the fabric or textile which will form the barrier layer.

Such fabrics or otherwise manufactured adsorbent material/insecticide constitutions may be suitable for construction of a barrier layer which may be located between the waterproof sheet laid at a prepared slab site and the slab; or located beneath the waterproof sheet as necessary to prevent access of termites to the building. However, this is not intended to be limiting and it may be possible to suitably prepare the waterproof layer or otherwise provide the treated 15 adsorbent to construct the desired barrier layer. For example, the adsorbent material could form one layer of a two layer film or material, the other layer being formed by a suitable waterproof material.

It may further be possible to treatcompacted soil in the area with fine .carbon or other adsorbent material to achieve the desired termite proofing effect.

20 A fill material having the desired concentration of loaded adsorbent could be used for example.

o° It is desirable that the method make allowance for re-treatment of critical •ouo• S termite entry areas as described above avoiding the above described difficulties.

Alternatively, the concentration of loaded adsorbent may be sufficient for long term, even life long, protection of the building.

Conveniently, an adsorbent containing fabric having the required adsorbent capacity for termiticide or like adsorbent material having the required termiticide capacity, or passive barriers, could be located in any suitable manner about the pqriphery of penetrations through the slab or foundation for preventing s of insects causing property damage as well as along portions of the pipes co ising the primary and/or secondary pipe systems to maintain insecticide concentrations. The treated fabric could be clipped, glued, stitched or otherwise located along the length of a section of the penetration passing through the slab.

Also may be envisaged use of the loaded adsorbent material, for example treated geotextile, as an active barrier layer below the waterproof sheet or integral with it together with the piping installations of the above patents which allow for ready re-treatment. In these aspects, the system and method may be applied to afford protection for the slab at points other than, or in addition to, slab penetrations. In such aspect, the present invention provides a method of insect proofing a structure comprising locating a barrier relative to the foundation of the structure which substantially prevents access of insects to the structure wherein the barrier is an active barrier formed by adsorbing or adhering an insecticide onto an adsorbent material.

In a further such aspect, the present invention provides a termite-proofing system comprising a structure having a foundation and an active barrier to access 15 of termites formed by adsorbing or adhering an insecticide onto an adsorbent material.

The advantages of the present invention are seen to be low cost, even relative to handspraying, suitable for many slab types and capable of addressing the access of subterranean termites especially at penetrations when a slab 20 separates from soil, especially a reactive clay type soil. Re-treatment facility without the problems previously referred to is also possible with the method and S systems.

There now follows a detailed illustrative description of preferred systems and methods in accordance, with some embodiments of the present invention.

The description is made with reference to the following drawings in which: Figure 1 is a perspective schematic of the pipe treatment system constructed in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention; Figure 2 is a section through a perimeter of the pipe treatment system shown in Figure 1; Figure 3 is a section through the slab of Figure 1 showing protection of a .penetration in accordance with an embodiment of the present invention; and Figure 4 shows a termite proofing system in accordance with a further embodiment of the apparatus of the invention.

Referring now to Figure 1, this shows a system similar to that described in co-pending application No 34198/97 with a modification as will be described hereinbelow. A structure has an Australian Standard concrete slab foundation of monolithic on-ground nature which is protected by a piping installation as follows. Other slab types such as infill/footing slabs may be protected. Materials other than concrete may be used for the foundation. Beneath slab 10, as will be described hereinbelow with reference to Figure 3, is a waterproof polymer sheet made, for example from PVC sheeting though any material of like waterproof characteristics may be employed.

Beyond the perimeter of the slab 10 is a primary pipe system comprising S an external perimeter pipe 20 connected to a insecticide filler point assembly which incorporates a non-return valve 27. The filler point assembly 25 is ideally S15 to be constructed with a child safety trap to prevent access to toxic chemicals and

S.

the assembly may likewise be located beyond the perimeter of the slab In this preferred embodiment, an inner perimeter pipe may be omitted from the piping system without impacting on the insecticide flow characteristics of the system. However, such could be included, if desired. However, if this is done, 20 the inner and external perimeter pipe systems, though charged with insecticide by the same filler point assembly may be independently supplied with insecticide.

The external perimeter pipe 20 may be located less than 150mm from the periphery of the slab 10 in a trench 40. This pipe is perforated such that termiticide charged into the filler point assembly and pumped or otherwise distributed through manifold 19 to the tube systems located around all wet areas, two only of which are shown for purposes of simplification, provide ongoing chemical infusion to prevent access to the structure by subterranean termites.

Charging may be undertaken at any time but especially when the first treatment or re-treatment is planned. Charging by portable pump is possible. Optional tube grids 16 and 17, connected to manifold 19 by feeder pipes 30, forming a secondary pipe system, surround plumbing penetrations 24 and 26. These tubes 8 are perforated and allow chemical to infuse into the surrounding ground following charging of the filling point assembly 25 in the manner above described.

The tube grids 16 and 17 may be square, rectangular or any convenient geometry and comprise 200mm diameter polymer, specifically PVC (unplasticised), pipe though it will be appreciated that other pipe materials and other pipe dimensions could be employed. The arrangement of the grids is such as to ensure the required concentrations of termiticide at the penetrations.

Referring now to Figure 3, there is shown the protection of a penetration using the system or method of the present invention. As was discussed above in relation to Figures 1 and 2, two penetration areas are surrounded by tube grids 16 and 17 which infuse termiticide into the areas to prevent substantial access of termites. These tube grids could, in a further embodiment, be omitted physical or I active barriers being employed as needed, even in combination, at the slab penetrations. Now, the situation may arise where the soil collapses away from the slab 10 creating cavities through which termites may track through the slab at the penetrations. For example, the soil may be of reactive type containing a water swellable clay. Further, as any movement of the slab 10 may result in a gap between the slab and the penetrating pipe termites may access the structure oo ~and cause damage.

20 To further minimise this possibility, a physical barrier is also employed to go complete the termite-proofing system. This barrier may be active with an coco insecticide loaded adsorbent material being used as barrier. Such material may S be A12 geotextile sourced from Geofabrics Australasia Pty Ltd, which is a nonwoven continuous filament needle punched polymeric material, 100% polyester.

This material may be dipped, impregnated or otherwise treated with termiticide and clipped, glued, stitched or otherwise secured to form a barrier in the form of layer 24a or permecover around the portion of the penetrating pipe 24 along the portion that penetrates through slab 10 though the fabric may be arranged in any manner desired to achieve a termite barrier. In any case, the treatment will be such as to maintain a high concentration of termiticide on the fabric and, in the embodiment shown, clip 50, any suitable number or arrangement of which may 9 be selected to firmly attach the fabric to the pipe 24 is employed to achieve attachment.

The treated fabric may be cut to size on-site or may be manufactured offsite to desired specifications.

The attachment stage will typically be prior to the laying of the waterproof sheet and the clip 50 may be pulled up through the sheet and the concrete poured securing the fabric into position with the clip embedded in the concrete itself. This construction method compensates for slab 10 and pipe 24 movement but other methods of construction which achieve a similar outcome may be employed, any method which enables a barrier to termite access being within the scope of the present invention.

Referring further to Figures 1 to 3, the barrier need not be located S: proximate only to slab penetration in the form of pipe 24 but the fabric could underlie the whole slab 10 acting as an extensive barrier layer. Desirably, the 15 fabric would be close to the tubes making up the primary and/or secondary tube systems, for example grid 16 or 17 as this allows ready recharging through the retreatment and charging processes described above. Such may take the form of permecovers 35 located along portions of all pipes making up the termite proofing S.system, but especially along those portions provided with apertures to allow 20 infusion of termiticides.

oo The properties of the active textile barrier were established in the following manner. Two rectangular plywood boxes of dimensions 2m x 300mm depth S were constructed and a length of 100mm diameter unplasticised PVC (upvc) piping placed in the centre at the full depth of each test box and 150mm deep sand added to the box. The sand was then compacted. A second layer of 150mm of black sandy loam soil was added and compacted to the Australian Standard AS 2870 1996. The 100mm pipe protruded 150mm above the sides of the box. A perforated tube was then installed about the penetration in the form of a square, analogous to tube grids 16 and 17, having dimension 220mm x 220mm.

The A12 geotextile was then installed around the penetration with both the soil S d the textile being sampled for pretreatment analysis. Plastic sheeting was then laid over the soil and perforated piping and a 100mm thick layer of concrete measuring 1 m x 1 m poured over the top and allowed to cure overnight.

Four litres of solution was made up by diluting either 89ml of David Gray MICRO LO® or 39.6 ml of FMC BIFLEX insecticides to 4 litres with water, following pre-mixing with a small amount of water. The four litres of solution was then pumped into the perforated tube "box" installed under the concrete. When the whole four litres was added the system was left for four hours before sampling. The procedure was then repeated for the second insecticide. After the four hours the concrete was broken up, taking care not to disturb the soil. Soil samples were taken at 100mm and 200mm distances from the perforated tube.

These samples were placed in plastic bags and frozen until analysis. Membrane samples were taken by removing all the membrane from around the perforated tube box and the 100mm PVC pipe and placed in separate plastic bags ready for analysis. The samples were frozen at -20°C until analysis. A sample was also i: 15 taken of both formulations in case the stated concentration needed to be confirmed.

Membrane samples were placed in a 500ml glass bottle and 200ml of Sacetone was added and the bottle capped with a foil lined lid. The bottles were swirled and analysed the next day by diluting the acetone with petroleum ether.

20 To l0g soil in a 500 ml bottle was added 100ml of acetone, the bottle capped and tumbled for 1.5 hours. The extract was diluted with petroleum either. The chlorphyrifos was determined by FID GAS chromatography and the bifenthrin using ECD gas chromatography.

Results of analyses of the solid and membrane samples are in Tables 1 and 2 below: 11 Table 1 Concentration of chlorpyrifos in soil and membrane samples following treatment with David Gray MICRO-LO® Chlorpyrifos Sample No. Material Distance from retreatment Residue box (mm) (mg/kg) Untreated soil _<2 Untreated membrane <2 1 soil 200 outward <2 2 soil 100- outward 176 3 soil 200 outward <2 4 soil 100 outward 63 soil 200 outward <2 6 soil 100 outward 7 soil 200 outward <2 8 soil 100 outward 120 9 soil 100 inward 742 10 soil 100 inward 1066 11 soil 100- inward 1314 12 soil 100 inward 608 13 membrane Around treatment tube 14300 14 membrane At upvc tube 11100 0 0 0O 0 0 0 0000 0 0 *0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Table 2 Concentration of bifenthrin in soil and following treatment with FMC Corporation BIFLEX® membrane samples 9 9 9 9* 9 9 9*9 9 94 9 .4 4 99 9999 9 9 44.9 9 9 Sample No. Material Distance from retreatment Residue box (mm) (mg/kg) Untreated soil <1 Untreated membrane <1 1 soil 200 outward <1 2 soil 100 outward 10.4 3 soil 200 outward <1 4 soil 100 outward 12.4 5 soil 200 outward 3.8 6 soil 100 outward 47.4 7 soil 200 outward <1 8 soil 100 outward 51.4 9 soil 100 inward 106 soil 100 inward 90.8 11 soil 100 inward 85.9 12 soil 100- inward 94.1 13 membrane Around treatment tube 1650 14 membrane At upvc tube 900 The results for both bifenthrin and chlorpyrifos show that residues occur in the soil at 100 mm from the treatment box tube but not at 200 mm. The results also show high levels of both bifenthrin and chlorpyrifos in the membrane around the 100 mm upvc pipe and around the penetration box. No chemical was found in the soil or the membrane before treatment.

Adsorption capacity of the adsorbent material may be established and a i~qthodology established for adsorbent/fabric type/thickness/dimensions for the desired concentration of termiticide to be achieved in the soil surrounding a structure. In this way, the efficiency of the method may be further improved.

There are other possible embodiments of the invention. For example, the waterproof sheet underlying the slab could be constructed with waterproof and insecticide adsorbent layers minimising treatment costs. Alternatively, fine carbon or other adsorbent materials could be treated with termiticides or insecticides known in the art and suitably incorporated within fill material to achieve the desired insect/termite barrier.

It may be that other adsorbent materials may be suitable for the application and these may present cost advantages over activated carbon and like adsorbents which have the advantage of being widely available as they are used in the gold mining industry in leaching/metal recovery applications. These adsorbents need not necessarily be carbonaceous though we are not concerned here with bedding sands which do not have high adsorption capacity and, in this 15 respect, the method is to be contrasted with conventional handspraying methods which lead to build-up on insecticides in the soil/fill.

It may be that other adsorbent or adherent substrates may be employed in the current method and it is not intended to limit the invention in this respect.

The barrier protecting slab penetrations may be passive, for example in the 20 form of collars, sheaths, tubes of plastic, metal or other portions engaging, Ssurrounding, or otherwise arranged about or relative to the penetrations typically ego* also having elements such as flanges that close off gaps, cracks and the like.

9 S9 Other forms of physical barrier known in this art may also be employed individually or in conjunction with the active barrier described herein particularly at the slab penetration(s). In an especially preferred embodiment, the barrier may be made of an insecticidal material or incorporate a termiticide.

A barrier of particularly preferred type is described in Australian Patent Application No. 58337/96 assigned to Key Plastics Pty Ltd, the contents of which are hereby incorporated by reference. There the physical barrier has a generally cylindrical collar engaging the slab penetration and a flange allowing coverage of gaps, location and fixing in the concrete forming the slab or foundation preventing 14 access of insects through gaps between the foundation and slab penetration.

Such a barrier may be made flexible to accommodate shrinkage of concrete and blocking gaps that may allow access by insects. The flange portion is suitably sized and flexible to block typical gap sizes that may be encountered in practice.

Elements that facilitate fixing in concrete may be included. Physical barriers may otherwise be included in the system.

Further, it is not intended to limit the design of pipe systems for distribution of termiticide for preventing access to any building structure by termites. Any suitable arrangement may be employed and used in conjunction with the adsorbent material to termite-proof the structure.

Referring, for example, to Figure 4, there is shown a variant of Figure 1 for an infill/footing slab construction where grid system 804, as well as inner and outer perimeter pipes 224 and 234 may be supported by physical or active So.: barriers for the penetrations 164. This drawing also shows intermediate perforated tubes 174 located to ensure insecticide depleted "shadows" are 0 avoided. Active or physical barriers also assist with this.

The termite proofing system could simply include an external perimeter pipe, with no tube grids 16 or 17. Physical or active barriers could be employed, as above described, at the slab penetrations. The active barrier may be located t 20 proximate the perimeter pipe(s) as described in respect of Figures 1 to 3.

Also envisaged is a system in which an insecticide manifold is located centrally of the slab, with lateral tube extensions at convenient spacings along the slab. The lateral tube extensions distribute termiticide to the surrounding ground proximate to the building foundations at various areas of the structure. The lateral tube extensions remote from the central manifold may be employed in conjunction with the adsorbent material, particularly the geotextile above described, to maintain termiticide concentration at sufficient levels. Other pipes may also have active barriers used in association with them. The physical or active barriers may be used at the slab penetrations. Such a pipe system may readily be integrated with inner perimeter and external perimeter pipes as illustrated in the above description and Figure 1.

A

Modifications and variations may be apparent to those skilled in the art reading this disclosure. Such modifications and variations fall within the scope of the present invention.

S

0e p. a. a. a. a a a a. a a a a S a. a.

a. .a a .a a. a. *a a..

a .a .a a a a a. .a *a a a a a a. a .a a a a. a a. *a a. a.

a aa

Claims (8)

1. A pipe system for termite-proofing a sub-floor area of a structure having a foundation slab penetrated by at least one penetration and having an insecticide distributing pipe system, said pipe system including at least one pipe having apertures of such size and spacing that insecticide flows through the apertures and infuses the adjacent ground wherein an insecticide adsorbent material is located proximate to portions of pipes or tubes comprised in said pipe system to maintain insecticide concentrations proximate said pipe or tube portions; and a physical barrier to termites, including an element for blocking termite access through any gap between slab and penetration, is located relative to said at least one penetration for preventing termite access through said gap between foundation and slab penetration. S2. A pipe system for termite-proofing a sub-floor area of a structure having a foundation slab penetrated by at least one penetration including: a primary pipe system including at least one pipe or tube located o00 substantially at or adjacent the perimeter of a foundation of the building; S: a secondary pipe system including at least one pipe or tube adjacent said at least one penetration for termite proofing at said penetration; said pipe system including means for charging either or both primary and secondary pipe S* •systems with insecticide, the pipe systems including pipes or tubes perforated along a substantial portion of their length by a plurality of apertures of such size and spacing that insecticide flows through the apertures and infuses the adjacent ground wherein an insecticide adsorbent material is located proximate to portions of pipes or tubes comprised in said pipe system to maintain insecticide concentrations, and a physical barrier to termites, including an element for blocking termite access through any gap between slab and penetration, is located relative to said at least one penetration for preventing termite access through said between foundation and slab penetration. 17

3. The pipe system of claim 1, wherein said primary pipe system includes a perimeter discharge pipe surrounding an edge of a foundation; said perimeter discharge pipe being the sole discharge pipe in the system.

4. The pipe system of claim 1 including at least one of: a primary pipe system including at least one pipe or tube located substantially at or adjacent the perimeter of a foundation of the building; and a secondary pipe system including at least one pipe or tube adjacent said at least one penetration for termite proofing at said penetration.

009.*: 5. The pipe system of any one of claims 1 to 4, wherein the physical barrier is of termiticidal material. 6. The pipe system of claim 5 wherein the physical barrier is located about the slab penetration along a portion passing through the foundation. 7. The pipe system of claim 5 or 6 wherein the physical barrier includes an insecticide adsorbent material selected from the group consisting of textiles and activated carbon loaded with insecticide. 8. The pipe system of any one of claims 1 to 7 wherein the foundation includes a monolithic slab. 9. The pipe system of any one of claims 1 to 8 wherein the foundation includes an infill/footing slab. The pipe system of any one of claims 1 to 9 wherein the physical barrier is a passive barrier having a portion surrounding the penetration. 18

11. The pipe system of claim 10 wherein the physical barrier includes a collar engaging the outer circumference of the slab penetration; and a flange extending from the collar which is at least partially embedded in the foundation to prevent access to the structure by insects.

12. The pipe system of any one of claims 1 to 11 wherein insecticide is adsorbed on, or adheres to, said physical barrier.

13. The pipe system of claim 2 or 4, wherein said secondary pipe or tube system is arranged to surround said penetration.

14. The pipe system of any one of claims 7 to 10, wherein said insecticide adsorbent material located proximate to said portions of pipes or tubes comprised in said pipe system is arranged as a sleeve about said pipe or tube portions. DATED this 20th day of June 2002 TERMGUARD PTY. LTD WATERMARK PATENT TRADEMARK ATTORNEYS 2 1 ST FLOOR, "ALLENDALE SQUARE TOWER" 77 ST GEORGE'S TERRACE PERTH WA 6000 -oo ooo o•c~