There are several different foundation repair methods, with traditional methods dating back centuries. Polyjacking is still relatively new in the world of concrete repair, but has quickly become the frontrunner in restoring foundations and repairing all manner of concrete issues!
So how does polyjacking compare to the alternatives? Here’s everything you need to know about polyjacking vs. traditional foundation repair methods.
Traditional Foundation Repair Methods: Pros and Cons
While all foundation repair methods involve inserting something beneath the surface of the existing concrete slabs, the materials and means of doing so can vary significantly. Here are four common foundation repair methods and the pros and cons of each:
1. Pressed Pilings
Pressed pilings can be made of either concrete or steel. Concrete cylinders in particular are popular in Texas for pressed piling foundation repair. With this method, several cylinders of concrete or steel are “piled” on top of each other until it firmly presses between the foundation and more stable soil or bedrock beneath. These cylinders are typically around 6” in diameter and 12” tall.
Advantages of Pressed Pilings for Foundation Repair
Pressed pilings can last as long as 30 years and have very high load-bearing capacity. They’re also a very versatile method of concrete repair, often used on unique structures like bridges. Because cylinders can be continuously added to reach deep into the underlying soil, they’re good for foundations requiring deep stabilization.
Disadvantages of Pressed Pilings for Foundation Repair
Unfortunately, pressed pilings are not at all environmentally friendly. The installation causes a lot of noise pollution, and the pilings can be disruptive to soil and nearby habitats. The installation process is also very complex, leaving a lot of room for error. If the repair fails, going back in to maintain and fix the issue is also disruptive and difficult. Pressed pilings also require a lot of space to be installed.
2. Push Piers
Push piers are hollow pipes installed beneath the foundation by a hydraulic ram. They are most commonly used for foundations experiencing differential foundation settlement (when the foundation settles unevenly). During installation, push piers use tension between the structure and the ground to press between the two until the foundation is level.
Advantages of Piers for Foundation Repair
Pressed piers can be installed in relatively tight spaces. They are also able to hold up very heavy structures and foundations—in fact, they depend on the weight of the structure to work properly!
Disadvantages of Piers for Foundation Repair
Because of their reliance on structural weight to create tension, piers won’t work for lighter homes and structures. They also can’t be installed if any foundation footings are broken or cracked, as they might just exacerbate the issue. As far as installation flexibility, piers don’t offer much. They have to be installed vertically, which is problematic as many foundation repairs need to happen at an angle.
3. Helical Piers
Helical piers are similar to push piers except they have a screw-like design and rotate as they are pressed beneath the foundation. They are popular for stabilizing structures commonly built on sand, like lighthouses, because they do well with unstable soils.
Advantages of Helical Piers
In addition to working well with sand and other loose soils, helical piers are much faster to install than push piers. They can be installed in any weather and soil conditions.
Disadvantages of Helical Piers
While they work with any soil situation, helical piers eventually require stable soil. This means they have to continue being pushed down through the soil until they reach stable enough soil to hold the foundation in place. This continued addition of shafts to the piers can get expensive. They also require a lot of space to install.
4. Mudjacking
Mudjacking is a method of foundation repair that injects a mixture of cement and other materials beneath individual concrete slabs to lift them up. It effectively adds on another layer beneath the foundation to fill voids and level slabs.
Advantages of Mudjacking
Mudjacking is preferable to other traditional foundation repair methods because it can be used on individual slabs of a foundation, rather than needing to be installed all throughout the foundation. It’s effective for any weight of structure or foundation as well.
Disadvantages of Mudjacking
While better than many other methods of foundation repair, mudjacking is still very disruptive and involves a lot of foundation drilling to create injection sites. It also adds a lot of weight to the foundation as it creates another layer underneath, which may cause the foundation to sink again in time. Because of this, you can expect a lot of ongoing maintenance when using mudjacking for your foundation.
Polyjacking: The Best Solution for Foundation Repair
It should come as no surprise that we think polyjacking is better than traditional foundation repair, but we have a good reason for choosing polyjacking as our method of choice (several good reasons, actually!). Polyjacking has all of the advantages of every other foundation repair method without any of the disadvantages. Polyjacking
- Works for any foundation or structure
- Is easy to install and nondisruptive
- Is eco-friendly
- Uses extremely lightweight materials that won’t weigh down the foundation
- Stabilizes soils of any kind
- Doesn’t require any digging beneath the foundation, and drill sites are extremely minuscule
- Requires no maintenance and lasts for the lifetime of your foundation.
The answer is pretty clear: when it comes to polyjacking vs. traditional foundation repair, polyjacking wins in every category. Contact us to learn more about how our polyjacking solutions can help with your foundation issues.