Mudjacking vs foam. Why foam jacking is scam process!

Posted in Foam Jacking / Concrete / Mudjacking



Mudjacking vs foam.  Why foam jacking is scam process!
Foam Jacking can lead to many problems in attempting to raise concrete. 
  • Most concrete slabs overlay a significant void condition that must be filled prior to being able to raise the concrete slab. Voids found around foundations may be as much as 18 inches or more, which would require a large volume of foam, the simple question to pose is what jacking material costs more? Polyurethane foam or mud? The answer to this question explains why it is important to get a comparable Mudjacking Slabjacking price, and to not accept the faulty premise promoted by the foam jacking company that foam jacking is less costly and less damaging.

 

  • Certainly, as in any business, experience is important to prevent damage. This applies to the foam applicator as it does to the Mudjacking foreman. The point to keep in mind is that Mudjacking in Regina has been raising concrete slabs for over thirty years. Whereas the use of foam, as advertised, is new process that has only been in use for year or so, an experience consideration that must be taken into account regarding the trial-and-error process of foam, which undoubtedly will result in slab damage during the process and damage soon after, simply because foam jacked concrete slabs are left poorly supported.

 

  • Does foam completely fill all cavities? From the foam jacking installation videos, it is clear the foam product is not being excreted all along the edges or up through any of the construction joints, which suggests the foam jacking process involves the uncontrolled formation of a pillow with a cavity around it. This condition not conducive to proper support or to sealing off water migration from below the concrete slab and into the basement.

 

  • Mudjacking uses a clay-base liquid material that completely fills the tapering cavity created by raising the slab, which results in a properly supported slab to withstand heavy vehicles and acts to seal the underside of the concrete slab, preventing wet/dry-freeze/thaw slab movements, creating a lasting stability that protects the concrete slab. This is an important feature mudjacking provides contrary to foam pillow installations.

 

  • Often a cavity under a front step must be filled prior to raising the adjacent front walk, otherwise the ground under the walk will simply slough in and raising the front walk will be short lived, this cavity typically requires 2 to 3 cubic yards of material, which would be a serious challenge for foam jackers not accustomed to handle such conditions when it comes to filling bulk cavities and washouts.

 

  • There is a possibility jacked concrete slabs can settle again and may require a later touch up. When this occurs with a Mudjacked slab, the same injection hole locations can be re-used and the slab can be adjusted to very fine increments, whereas foam is less controllable and can easily exceed such re-adjustments. We have all heard of foam insulation expanding in the wall to the extent that it pushes the wall board (drywall) right off of the wall studs. The guess work involved in the expanding foam is major control issue associated with all foaming applications.

 

  • The clay-base mudjacking material can be excavated and re-used, whereas polyurethane foam cannot be re-used or recycled and must be disposed of in a landfill. Polyurethane foam is not an environmentally friendly material and does contain various hazardous chemical and toxic substances.

 

  • Mudjacking companies typically offer a 2-year touch-up warrantee period, which is appreciated by the customer wanting assurance of value for their hard earned money. Some touch-up maybe less than ½ inch, which can only be accomplished with the use of flowable liquid mudjacking material, a control/fill condition beyond capabilities of foam jacking.

 

  • Foam fails to block out rodents, especially when used under front steps, where the critters simply burrow into and through the foam material. In fact, the warmth of foam insulation encourages such infestations. Whereas the strength and density of mudjack material, based on cement content, results in a material that will prevent rodents, insects, and will completely seal off the such areas.

The above lists only a few of polyurethane foam jacking disadvantages that must be seriously considered by a property owner deciding to raise their settled concrete slabs. We believe once mudjacking vs. foam jacking is compared, it will be clear that foam is not capable of providing a properly filled, universally supported concrete slab, for long-term reliability.

 


Comments