Get matched with top concrete mudjacking pros in Condon, OR

The timeframe is generally a few hours, allowing for immediate use post-hydration, ensuring minimal disruption to surrounding activities.

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.

It’s best not to perform mudjacking in the winter unless the ground temperature remains above freezing. Freezing temperatures can cause the slurry to harden too quickly, compromising its strength and longevity. Concrete is also more susceptible to cracking and splitting in cold temperatures, so there’s a higher risk of damaging the slab during the drilling and lifting process in winter.

There is no real alternative to underpinning, although mudjacking and polyjacking are other repair methods that can add support from underneath your foundation. Rather than placing supportive piers under your structure, these involve pumping a material under your slab to lift a sunken section back into its original position. Polyjacking, in particular, is sometimes a suitable solution for stabilization issues under slab foundations, but underpinning is often accepted as the best and most permanent solution.