Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

19 days to build a 57-storey tower

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 118 posts

Re: 19 days to build a 57-storey tower

#81

Post by brudgers »

minthd wrote: post #79
brudgers wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Development projects stall for many reasons among them are modifications of the developer's pro forma that reduce the viability of a project - interest rates go up, the cost of construction goes up, rents go down, local occupancy rates dip, etc. etc. The technology has the potential for some small incremental change to the real-estate development process, but it doesn't alter the underlying market forces where a hous…

Can't these kinds of buildings change the dynamic in real-estate ? For example , in israel, where the land is usually bought from the state, sometimes groups of private people gather together to build an apartment complex and save a bit of money.But that's a long(and maybe risky) project, so people rarely do so. But let's say it was a short process - a group gathers, gives the funds , and in month they enter their ap…

Real-estate markets are markets. They seek equilibrium. When a building is delivered, supply increases, demand goes down and a new equilibrium is established. Groups of people who would build apartments have the option of moving in to existing apartments without the impedance of land entitlement, large project financing, or construction timelines. Speed to market presents less risk to developers except when everyone else can get to market just as fast. Then the risk that someone else delivers and the market becomes over-supplied comes back.

Re: 19 days to build a 57-storey tower

#82

Post by gambiting »

zimpenfish wrote: post #36
duiker101 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still amazing if you ask me...

I'm not denying that - the whole process is good stuff. But I'm suggesting that "assembled in 19 days" is more accurate than "built in 19 days".

My dad used to work on 1 day houses. Essentially the whole house would arrive from the factory and just had to be assembled. In the morning, there was nothing, in the evening, you had a complete house, with windows and doors which could be locked. Still, the foundations took a month to settle properly before the construction could start,but it didn't change the fact that the whole house was actually assembled in a day. You could leave for work in the morning, and arrive in the afternoon to see that your neighbor now has a house where 12 hours before there was just concrete.

Re: 19 days to build a 57-storey tower

#84

Post by ethagknight »

SanFranManDan wrote: post #49
melling wrote: post #46

The new World Trade Center took 8 years and is the most expensive building in the world: http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2013/may/11/one-world... Everything done is the U.S. takes more time and costs a lot more money. Consider, for example, that China has constructed 10,000 miles of high-speed rail in about a decade. We still have 0.0 miles. Yeah, yeah, we don't need 10k but we need more than 0. Airports, subw…

Im not saying that this particular tower is unsafe, but in the US we have loads of regulation. Depending on your political view, this can mean either the US is helping to protect citizens or it means that it gets in the way of business/progress. Having some regulation in place helps prevent things like: http://i.imgur.com/McgeoNa.jpg But that doesn't mean that US isn't over regulated.

Great point. Additional note- even with heavy US regulation, US still has its share of engineering disasters. Building code is written in response to such disasters albeit more frequently from non-catastrophic failures. For example, we might see high-strength steel requirements evolve in response to the new Bay Bridge's faulty steel rods.

The US has had its share of disasters too. We studied these in-depth in civil engineering school, including the design decisions and cost compromises made along the way. Look up Citicorp Tower's tuned mass damper in NYC (disaster pre-empted), Kansas City Hyatt Regency walkway collapse (killed 114), as well as Berkman Plaza parking garage collapse during construction in Jacksonville, FL (killed 1).

Back to OP, A general rule of thumb in engineering, there's cost, quality, and schedule: pick two. I always scratch my head at celebrating at some huge engineering feat completed in a small fraction of the typical timeframe, because it surely leaves out either value engineering/cost) or quality/safety. Schedule should be optimized, but prioritized?

It's also possible that the Broad's schedule is merely a byproduct of the modular technique. The article doesn't mention cost beyond saying its a problem, and I assume that modular, industrialized construction requires factoring costs in a method similar to airplane accounting, a function of the quantity built.

To be sure, there's room for huge innovation in the construction industry, and I'm excited to see how Broad develops their methods.

Re: 19 days to build a 57-storey tower

#85

Post by protomyth »

gambiting wrote: post #82
zimpenfish wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not denying that - the whole process is good stuff. But I'm suggesting that "assembled in 19 days" is more accurate than "built in 19 days".

My dad used to work on 1 day houses. Essentially the whole house would arrive from the factory and just had to be assembled. In the morning, there was nothing, in the evening, you had a complete house, with windows and doors which could be locked. Still, the foundations took a month to settle properly before the construction could start,but it didn't change the fact that the whole house was actually assembled in a da…

There is a company out of Oregon that did that with geodesic domes (suitable for homes or offices). You poured a concrete slab or basement to their specs before they showed up, and they would unload a semi and setup the dome in one day with an electrician and plumber hooking up the utilities. I know a place that bought two and was amazed at how quick it went and how well they held up to the winter / summer of the northern plains.

Re: 19 days to build a 57-storey tower

#86

Post by protomyth »

melling wrote: post #46

The new World Trade Center took 8 years and is the most expensive building in the world: http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2013/may/11/one-world... Everything done is the U.S. takes more time and costs a lot more money. Consider, for example, that China has constructed 10,000 miles of high-speed rail in about a decade. We still have 0.0 miles. Yeah, yeah, we don't need 10k but we need more than 0. Airports, subw…

"Everything done is the U.S. takes more time and costs a lot more money."

On the coasts, bureaucracy and politics are major costs in urban areas, the WTC being the #1 example of how much it can affect construct costs.

"China has constructed 10,000 miles of high-speed rail in about a decade. We still have 0.0 miles."

We have one of the best cargo rail networks in the world. That is what we chose to build. If high-speed rail was going to be profitable as cargo, it would be built (check Texas for an attempt).

On the other subject, China doesn't care what its citizens think beyond keeping them from revolting. They are dictating a policy.

Re: 19 days to build a 57-storey tower

#87

Post by drzaiusapelord »

melling wrote: post #46

The new World Trade Center took 8 years and is the most expensive building in the world: http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2013/may/11/one-world... Everything done is the U.S. takes more time and costs a lot more money. Consider, for example, that China has constructed 10,000 miles of high-speed rail in about a decade. We still have 0.0 miles. Yeah, yeah, we don't need 10k but we need more than 0. Airports, subw…

We can certainly dismiss regulations and have a Chinese-like system, its just you're going to have to deal with stuff like this more often:

http://i.imgur.com/McgeoNa.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_drywall

Let's not applaud the low regulation and quick and dirty school of construction too hard here.

This kind of stuff reminds me of "car guy" whining about crumple zones, ABS, air bags, etc making modern cars heavier and less efficient than 1960's deathtraps. Yeah, most civilized people prefer a democratic process in regards to the safety of their family in their dwellings. Autocratic and dictatorial tricks are cute, but come at the cost of safety, health, etc. Not to mention the limited ability to petition the autocratic government over these things.

tldr; How is the air in Beijing today?

Re: 19 days to build a 57-storey tower

#88

Post by nate_meurer »

donkeyd wrote: post #10

> “The biggest problem we face in the world right now isn't terrorism or world war. It's climate change,” he says. I really like seeing this quote from a Chinese business man.

Yes this Zhang Yue guy is my new hero. Talking about his new building,

> "It has huge benefits for future generations. If you tear it down 500 years from now it will leave a steel skeleton which is a resource for them, not just a load of rubbish. That’s what this is about."

I can't express how grateful and refreshed I am to hear a builder say such a thing. Especially coming as I am from the U.S., where we seem to specialize in building shit designed for obsolescence without a thought toward maintainability or recycling.

There may be a bit of light appearing at the end of the American tunnel; New York's "B2" building, built by developer Forest City Ratner (FCS), is 32 stories of stacked modular apartments. Hope this catches on

Re: 19 days to build a 57-storey tower

#89

Post by jonknee »

mikeash wrote: post #67
jonknee wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have clean air (any many other nice things!) because of regulation. China can do things faster, but pays a very high cost in public health and safety. The US could also build things a lot faster/cheaper if we didn't worry about the consequences.

Regulation isn't a monolithic entity. The regulations that keep our air clean and our structures safe aren't the ones slowing everything down, as far as I can see.

I highly doubt the construction of this building went through rigorous environmental impact studies. Or that the contractors were required to dispose of things properly. Or that the building materials were deemed safe (I hear China is great at making drywall!).

Re: 19 days to build a 57-storey tower

#90

Post by nate_meurer »

gambiting wrote: post #82
zimpenfish wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not denying that - the whole process is good stuff. But I'm suggesting that "assembled in 19 days" is more accurate than "built in 19 days".

My dad used to work on 1 day houses. Essentially the whole house would arrive from the factory and just had to be assembled. In the morning, there was nothing, in the evening, you had a complete house, with windows and doors which could be locked. Still, the foundations took a month to settle properly before the construction could start,but it didn't change the fact that the whole house was actually assembled in a da…

A hundred years ago in the U.S. you could order a house from the Sears Modern Home catalog. They had dozens of different models. A kit containing everything you needed to build the house was delivered to the site on trucks, and you could assemble it yourself. The kit came with comprehensive instructions, and assembly points were marked with numbers and arrows.

How far we have fallen.

Post reply on HN