Competitor Analysis – Lock Joint

Enquire Today

TripStop or Equivalent

There are no “Equivalents”.

TripStop is a unique patented profile that cannot be legally duplicated. TripStop`s profile was designed specifically to stop tree root invasion and soil movement from displacing concrete footpaths and cycleways. Unsurprisingly, as a result of our now dominant market position, some pre-existing jointing systems now claim equivalent functionality.

A Patented Bi-directional Articulating Jointing System

  • A structure in which relative motion is allowed to occur between parts, by means of a [double] hinged or sliding joint or joints (civil engineering definition).
  • TripStop was specifically designed to enable slabs to accommodate positive and negative articulation caused by tree root invasion, reactive soil movement and sand jacking (A Bi-directional  Articulation Joint).

Lock Joint

Lock Joint has been used by numerous councils over many years in Western Australia. So there is plenty of in ground evidence to view and analyse across various councils. And it did not take us long to locate evidence of poor performance and even outright failure.

See the images, you be the judge.

If you want your concrete footpaths and cycleways to last 50 years plus, best you don`t specify Lock Joint.

Lock Joint - Glued rubber cap easily dislodged
Lock Joint - Glued rubber cap easily dislodged
Lock Joint - Glued rubber cap not fit for purpose
Lock Joint - Joint structure not sustainable
Lock Joint - Comprehensive fracturing creates a hazard
Lock Joint - Extreme fracturing extreme hazard
Lock Joint - Hazard extends 60mm above the pavement
Lock Joint
Lock Joint
Lock Joint

TripStop v Lock Joint

TripStop was specifically designed to accommodate tree root invasion and soil movement.

Lock Joint does not effectively accommodate tree root invasion or soil movement.

See the images, you be the judge.

TripStop v Lock Joint v Trees

TripStop v Lock Joint – A Detailed Analysis

A Technical Analysis

An independent Finite Element Analysis (FEA) comparing TripStop with Lock Joint

An independent FEA that presents the results of computer simulation studies on two PVC profiles used for jointing of pedestrian pavement concrete slabs. The aim of the computer simulation studies was to compare the behavior/movement of the two profiles and the resulting stress distribution in the concrete and PVC components.

The following key points and conclusions can be made from the computer simulation studies:

  • Overall, the Lock Joint system experiences much higher stresses than the TripStop system.
  • The point of maximum stress occurs at a much lower lift height for the Lock Joint profile compared to the TripStop profile.
  • The TripStop profile does not lift adjacent slabs as high as the Lock Joint profile, reducing the overall mass which is being lifted and likely reducing the stress in the system as a result.
  • The TripStop system includes a plasticized (soft) PVC capping at the top and bottom of the rigid pro-file, allowing compression at the bottom when the slabs are lifted and vice versa, which reduces the forces exerted on the concrete slabs.
  • The maximum stress in the TripStop system occurs when the profile is being ‘pinched’ at lift heights 88mm thru 92mm. However, the stresses are small and not considered large enough to risk failure.
  • For the Lock Joint system, throughout the entire lift range (10mm thru 108mm) P1 stress readings indicate risk of failure, ranging from likely to highly likely, due to cracking/spalling.
  • The maximum Von Mises stresses are 3-4 times higher in the Lock Joint profile and concrete than the TripStop profile and concrete.
  • The maximum P1 (tensile) stresses in the concrete are 4-5 times higher when using a Lock Joint profile compared to when using a TripStop profile.

TripStop v Lock Joint
Simulation Report
Design + Industry
December 2019

TripStop – FEA Animated Simulation

Lock Joint – FEA Animated Simulation

Independent FEA Available Here

Document Request Form