Mesh in Concrete VS TripStop





The interactive transcript could not be loaded.



Rating is available when the video has been rented.
This feature is not available right now. Please try again later.
Published on Mar 23, 2015

This video compares hinging steel reinforcing mesh installed in a concrete path VS hinging TripStop installed in a concrete path.

The installation costs are very similar for both examples.

All results from these tests are published on our website, http://www.tripstop.net and have been verified by independent engineers that were present during the testing process.

The results from these tests are obvious - Whilst mesh will strengthen the slab that it is installed in, it is not designed to be run continuously through control joints. The mesh will hinge, stretch and snap when vertical movement is applied to the slab.

Mesh reinforced path cannot reliably transfer load between the slabs, and will create dangerous tripping hazards for pedestrians when the slab experiences ground movement, tree root invasion or erosion.

Replacing displaced mesh reinforced concrete is a costly exercise, as the slab cannot easily be broken apart by hand. Mesh also corrodes over time (particularly when exposed via cracks in the concrete). TripStop has no corrosion problems.

The practise of installing mesh through control joints is wrong. AS3727 8(e) states that mesh should not run continuously through control joints. The practice of installing mesh through control joints is dangerous, and over time will cost communities greatly through personal injury claims and more expensive slap replacements.

Consider the alternative. 50 years of replacement free & maintenance reduced paths - just by installing TripStop around easily identifiable movement zones.


When autoplay is enabled, a suggested video will automatically play next.

Up next

to add this to Watch Later

Add to

Loading playlists...