Poly vs Mudjacking
Why Choose Polyurethane Foam vs Mudjacking?
Concrete settling and sinking are not fun situations to be in, but they happen often to residences and businesses. It can often be attributed to poor compaction of the soil underneath your concrete structure during the installation process, natural earth settling, or excessive moisture.
Concrete lifting helps with the process of filling voids underneath the concrete, which helps lift and restore the concrete slab to its original condition. Two methods of concrete lifting involve either polyurethane foam or mudjacking.
Though the latter method is more expensive than mudjacking, it offers homeowners and businesses several advantages. Here is why you should consider using polyurethane foam for your next concrete lifting project.
Polyurethane foam is less invasive than mudjacking for your repair site. The latter approach requires several holes to be filled into your concrete slab, placed anywhere from two to four feet apart. Foamjacking, on the other hand, requires hole that are only half an inch wide each – often the size of a dime.
If you want to repair your driveway or pool bottom as unobtrusively as possible, polyurethane foam is the more practical solution. Foot traffic is allowed as the process is being completed, and additional construction and heavy vehicular traffic can be carried out immediately afterwards. In comparison, mudjacking can require a wait of up to 24 hours before the concrete can be used
Though effective, mudjacking can be 50x heavier than polyurethane foam and can inflict unnecessary strain on a property. The heaviness of this process can compact loose foundational soil, leading to resettlement only a few years down the road. The use of polyurethane foam lessens the chances of your concrete slab resettling, meaning that repairs will be less likely in the future.