Get matched with top concrete mudjacking pros in Pippa Passes, KY

It restores concrete, prevents replacement cost disruptions, reduces trip hazards, and provides stability at a lower cost.

Trenching and boring are two distinct methods for installing underground utilities. Trenching involves digging a channel using equipment like an excavator, trencher, backhoe, or shovel. While it is a simpler process, it causes significant disruption to the surface, landscaping, and surrounding ecosystems.

Boring, also known as directional boring, is a less invasive alternative that uses a drill to create a tunnel for utility lines without disturbing the surface. This method is more precise and is ideal for installations that need to go underneath buildings, roads, or bodies of water. Although boring is less disruptive, it is generally more expensive than trenching.

Polyjacking and mudjacking can both be effective solutions for sinking concrete, but they have key differences. Polyjacking, which uses expanding polyurethane foam, is often considered a better option because the foam is significantly lighter than the cementitious material used for mudjacking. This reduced weight puts less pressure on the underlying soil and lowers the risk of future sinking. Polyjacking is suitable for any sinking concrete slab, while mudjacking is typically only recommended for non-structural concrete, such as sidewalks, patios, pool decks, and driveways. The primary drawback of polyjacking is its cost, which can be up to four times higher than mudjacking—as much as $25 per square foot compared to a maximum of about $6 per square foot for mudjacking.

Polyjacking can be a permanent solution to sunken concrete if you also address the underlying issue—like poor drainage—at the same time. The polyurethane material itself can last as long as or even outlast the concrete you’re lifting it with. Your sunken concrete issue will likely return if you don’t couple polyjacking with proper drainage to prevent future soil movement and sinking.