Chinese Firm Approved To Raise World's Tallest Building In 90 Days 307
kkleiner writes "The long anticipated Chinese construction project called Sky City, a 220-story building that can house 30,000 people, has finally received approval from the central government to break ground. The firm Broad Sustainable Building previously constructed a prefab 30-story building in 15 days, but for Sky City, they have an even more aggressive schedule: 90 days to build 2,750 feet into the air. Once completed, the building will be a place for people to both live and work, with recreational facilities, theaters, a school, and a hospital all within the structure."
And it takes 100 days to fix a clock? (Score:5, Funny)
Hey, that is 10 days less than it takes BBC to fix a clock on their homepage :)
Re:And it takes 100 days to fix a clock? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:And it takes 100 days to fix a clock? (Score:5, Funny)
Well that depends on how you calculate time doesn't it?
Time is a like a series of tubes, the more tubes you have, the faster time flows.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well that depends on how you calculate time doesn't it?
Time is a like a series of tubes, the more tubes you have, the faster time flows.
Well, that's true until you have a sufficiently large bit o' gravity nearby - then the tubes start clogging up like an old man's arteries.
Re: (Score:2)
Much like the exhaust headers on an engine! Get a 4-2-1 equal length time manifold and you'll really be clockin'!
Re: (Score:2)
Well that depends on how you calculate time doesn't it?
I know this is supposed to be funny, but if you change the definition of "completed" to "as large as it is going to get", then the calculation of time gets a lot shorter.
If you think this is ridiculous, just look at ship construction. A ship is "completed" when it is launched, but the time required for fitting the equipment and commissioning can take years.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Time is an illusion, BBC time doubly so.
Re: (Score:2)
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so.
Re: (Score:3)
Hey, that is 10 days less than it takes BBC to fix a clock on their homepage :)
That's relative. Clearly, the Chinese economy is moving faster that UK's.
Re: (Score:2)
Moving for the sake of movement, doesn't mean it's a good thing.
Bzzzt... wrong answer... the correct way to account for the difference of "100 staff x (UK) imperial days" into "90 days x Chinese units of length" is by using Lorentz transformation... speed needs to be taken into account, irrespective if it's good or bad.
Re: (Score:3)
You can't really compare the two. All days are working days in China.
Larry Niven's Oath of Fealty (Score:2)
Re:Larry Niven's Oath of Fealty (Score:5, Informative)
"Arcology" is the term of reference...
Re: (Score:2)
The Vertropolis is born!
Re: (Score:3)
Built in 90 days (Score:5, Insightful)
Falls down in 90 seconds.
And if anyone thinks I'm being unfair they should read up on the safety compromises chinese railways made in the rush to build high speed lines in record time.
Re: (Score:2)
The big question is, if it does fall down, will we have to endure 12 years of conspiracy theories about false flags, controlled demolition, and transwarpthermite? I don't think I would have the strength to endure that. Again.
Re: (Score:2)
will we have to endure 12 years of conspiracy theories about false flags
No .. it would collapse in record time. Even physics would fail in the face of the record conspiracy theory collapse, fueling still more'anecdotal' evidence of China's control of the masses.
Re:Built in 90 days (Score:5, Interesting)
You're not the only one that thinks so. From TFA:
Head of Structures for WSP Middle East, Bart Leclercq, told Middle East Architect, “I don’t think it’s possible to build [an 838m tower] as quickly as they claim. If they manage to build this structure in three months then I will give up structural engineering. I will hang my hat and retire. I will be eating humble pie as well.”
Leclercq likes the idea of prefabrication but says concrete poured onsite in tall buildings provides stiffness, and the time it takes concrete to cure is non-negotiable. He thinks the five-year mark set by the Burj Khalifa is about as good as it gets with current techniques and technologies.
Empire State Building Built in 14 months (Score:3, Interesting)
You're not the only one that thinks so. From TFA:
Head of Structures for WSP Middle East, Bart Leclercq, told Middle East Architect, “I don’t think it’s possible to build [an 838m tower] as quickly as they claim. If they manage to build this structure in three months then I will give up structural engineering. I will hang my hat and retire. I will be eating humble pie as well.”
Leclercq likes the idea of prefabrication but says concrete poured onsite in tall buildings provides stiffness, and the time it takes concrete to cure is non-negotiable. He thinks the five-year mark set by the Burj Khalifa is about as good as it gets with current techniques and technologies.
Five years to build with current technology?
The Empire State Building in New York was built in 14 months.
Maybe they should look at using 1930's technology.
Re: (Score:3)
Five years to build with current technology? The Empire State Building in New York was built in 14 months. Maybe they should look at using 1930's technology.
IANASE but I believe 1930's tech meant steel framed, whereas ferroconcrete is more popular these days. Concrete takes time to cure. It can be pre-fabbed, but some people are very skeptical of whether prefabbed concrete is good enough for a structure like this. It's also unclear exactly what "completed" means and whether that term is used consistently. Lastly, fast construction often costs more. In many cases it may not be worth the premium.
Re: (Score:3)
Reinforced concrete is used for most mid-rise buildings and some residential high-rise buildings because it sways less (and usually costs less, to a point). But steel is still the preferred choice for very tall buildings because it weighs less per unit strength, which makes a big difference since every floor has to support all the floors above it.
Re:Empire State Building Built in 14 months (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Sure but the question here isn't "can we do it without safety regs" it's "can we even accomplish this given modern technology". However, the Empire State Building is about 434m (according to wikipedia). I would be very surprised if the requirements didn't go up with height, and at nearly double that, I'm sure thing
Re: (Score:3)
They are not building it in 90 days, they are erecting it. The building is pre-fabricated in a factory and assembled on site. Lots of places do buildings that way, including Germany which is particular fond of it.
They are ambitious, but their plan is also quite solid (pun intended).
Re: (Score:3)
The building is effectively a pre-cast bridge standing on end, presumably with post-tensioning strands locking all the blocks together and to the foundation. Three months from breaking ground to occupancy would be a bit hard for me to believe, but three months to topping out I can almost believe. You wouldn't be able to tension the first vertical strands until about 35 days into construction, best-case, but I imagine they would be stacked to about 20% height by then-- that would seem to be your highest ris
Give them more credit than that... (Score:2)
Why do you think it will take them the full 90 days before it collapses?
Also, if the building is 838 meters tall, it will only take 13 seconds for the top of the building to hit fresh rubble, not accounting for the terminal velocity of a huge concrete block.
Re: (Score:3)
African or European?
The rubble will be Asian. The idea that they would ship in fresh rubble from another continent is hard to swallow.
This will be different, they promised.... (Score:2)
And a new nuclear reactor built-in to provide the electricity for it all.
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't know. I'm not a yank. Why do other trolls like you assume everyone on here is american?
Re: (Score:3)
A 90 Day Erection (Score:5, Funny)
Is something to be wary of.
Re:A 90 Day Erection (Score:4, Funny)
Is something to be wary of
You're a hard, hard man
Re: (Score:2)
You're a hard, hard man
A bit stiff if you ask my :D
Re:A 90 Day Erection (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Is something to be wary of.
Ah, to be 18 again.
Re: (Score:2)
Like a Star Wars marathon, most women get bored after about about the 4th hour.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah like this one: http://now.msn.com/penis-shaped-building-under-construction-in-beijing [msn.com] ... :P
Hive City (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
This is history in the making, humanity's first hive city [wikia.com]. Glory to the Emperor!
There were a couple places like this one in Hong Kong, north of the city even 15 years ago.
Its the scale that is new, not the concept.
Seems like overkill (Score:3, Insightful)
Shouldn't they work on filling those empty cities before they build more stuff? Or maybe reduce pollution?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Nah. Gotta keep up the imaginary growth factor, after all it's not like banks over there are already running into issues seizing assets from companies who've taken loans out against them. You know, two, three or sometimes four times. Wish I could find the article on zero hedge again but it was up sometime last year.
Re:Seems like overkill (Score:5, Insightful)
Nah. Gotta keep up the imaginary growth factor, after all it's not like banks over there are already running into issues seizing assets from companies who've taken loans out against them. You know, two, three or sometimes four times. Wish I could find the article on zero hedge again but it was up sometime last year.
Every country's growth is based on an imaginary growth factor.
At least they're getting infrastructure out of it.
Re: (Score:2)
At least they're getting infrastructure out of it.
The infrastructure does them no good so long as their society doesn't permit them to make use of it. They're unwilling or unable to put humans into a position to use it, and meanwhile it's rotting. It would make more sense to sell them to foreign investors than to just let them rot, but nobody would take that bet even if they'd be willing to give it; odds are they'd change their minds later, anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Their current solution for their pollution problems is telling people to stay inside. This seems like a logical next step in an idiotic pollution management system.
A year in development/approval (Score:2, Interesting)
The inhabitat story linked to in the prior post was written a year ago (with plans to be constructed by end of January 2013). So they are still covering at least some bases not rushing through for an arbitrary deadline.
Old news, obsoleted six months ago (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Old news, obsoleted six months ago (Score:5, Interesting)
I'll see your 210 days and raise you a Nov 16th, 2012 quote by Juliet Jiang, senior vice president of Broad Group [mmail.com.my]:
Units in the summary (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Learn to guesstimate big numbers. It will help reduce your apparent anxiety when confronted with American imperial units of measurement.
It takes about a second or so of guesswork - 1000 feet is about 300 meters. 2000 is 600. 75% of 300 is 225, so we get a guesstimate of 225 + 300 + 300 = 825m . In reality, we're off by about 13, but remember, that doesn't matter. If you're really good at math, you could subsitute 304 for 300 and get closer to the reality, but why bother? The more you do conversions like tha
Re:Units in the summary (Score:5, Insightful)
The US is one of only three countries in the world that uses that system. Some people in the UK do but it isn't taught at school any more. You expect the rest of the world to know conversion ratios for your archaic system. Feet just happen to be an easy 1/3 ratio with metres but most other Imperial units are not.
Politeness would be recognizing that you chose not to use the standard system everyone else does but still accommodating them with a quick google conversion.
Re: (Score:2)
And liters happens to have an easy 1/4 ratio with gallons.
So now you have easy conversions for approximations of distance, and volume.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Learn to guesstimate big numbers. It will help reduce your apparent anxiety when confronted with American imperial units of measurement.
I totally agree. I'm American and having done some international travel and having worked for an international company, I have some friends around the world who I stay in touch with from time to time and I've just learned how to do rough conversions in my head from imperial units to metric so I can tell them things like "I live about 40 km from my office" instead of saying "I live 25 miles from my office" and having them wonder whether that is a lot or not. Temperature conversions are not too difficult ei
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Condescending? I wasn't preaching imperial superiority or anything like that.
I already know the metric system. I accept the fact that there are two conventions, and I live with it. I agree the metric system is easier. At some point, however, you have to reconcile yourself to the undeniable fact that there are times in life you'll have to deal with imperial units. It sucks, but get over it. (That last bit was condescending, in case you missed it.)
As for the post that started this, he implied that the summary
Re: (Score:2)
Might I humbly suggest that you have a quick look at my slashdot signature that appears below?
Re: (Score:2)
Well, yes, there are times when I have to use the system of measurement used by roughly 5 % of the world population rather than the one used by the other 95%. But there shouldn't be so many of these occasions.
Just like a news report in the US should not assume familiarity with the Spanish language just because it's the mother tongue of 12 % of the US population.
Re: (Score:3)
That has to be one of the most condescending posts I have ever seen in the last 15 years on Slashdot.
Sure, you have. I've been reading Slashdot for a tad bit less and I have read more condescending posts. It's just not that hard.
Re: (Score:3)
Given the origin, imperial units are fine... except the empire that was used is totally wrong.
For the case at hand, it should have been expressed in chi [wikipedia.org]; the building will be 2514.6 chi high.
Seriously, one wonders when will those Western barbarians start to learn something?
Even if it's only the basic mandarin; can't be that hard, tens of millions of children learn it effortlessly.
(grin)
Re: (Score:2)
Metric is used in most of the world, including China where this is being built ...
The US uses metric for many things ...
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
There is no such thing as an American unit of measure. It's an a-national concept. The American military and scientists use metric. Do you hate our troops?
possibly rational (Score:3)
That's about $65/sq ft, somewhere around the cheapest US cities or Berlin. Most Asian and European cities are far more expensive. So, these kinds of building may make sense. I'd worry about maintenance, crime, and long-term value, though.
2,750 foot = 3048 african swallow wingspans. (Score:5, Funny)
I found it very hard to google the average foot size, so i converted it for you all to see.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
It would have been nice to provide european swallow wingspans in the summary in addition to the african swallow. Yes, I can go and convert them and so can others, but such accumulated waste of time could have been easily avoided.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, for those of you using the wonderfully obsolete furlongs/fortnight/hogshead system, 2750 feet is exactly 4 1/6 furlongs.
modular (Score:2)
The modular construction technique is pretty impressive, and while it would be great for shorter buildings I'm having my doubts as to its effectiveness in a skyscraper. Also while the structure looks pretty robust the facade, walls and flooring look a little flimsy and may not stand the test of time/usage.
What could go wrong? (Score:2)
What could go wrong?
towering inferno 2.0? (Score:2)
towering inferno 2.0? it's china they may just cut corners and safety.
Compensating for something? (Score:2)
I've seen this before (Score:2)
Why they can build faster in China (Score:2)
In China they can build faster because they don't install fire exits.
Re: (Score:2)
Fire exits? I hope they're stocked with parachutes. This is, after all, supposed to be the world's tallest building.
I sure hope they can pull it off. Because if not, the results will be horrifying.
An Urban Monad (Score:2)
See Robert Silverberg's "The World Inside", about humanity concentrated in near-wholly self-contained skyscrapers.
Too much housing in China already (Score:2)
How much "building time" is actual building? (Score:4, Interesting)
This isn't a rhetorical question. I really want to know. AFAIK in the US you have to have plans drawn before you build, so building time is actual building; but plans are sometimes changed even during building, right? How much do they fudge that to the point where "building" is actually planning and building? Now the WTC replacement took a really long time; but most of it was arguing.
Have the Chinese cut out all the arguing and decided that they won't modify plans during construction even if they should?
I'm inclined to think "no". If I had to come up with a plan to erect a skyscraper in 90 days, I'd design one prefab box that could be stacked N high, and I'd stack them. I'd base the "box" design on an entire previous building, just stronger. Having seen renderings of the proposed structure, it looks like that's what they did.
Re: (Score:2)
Coming Chinese real estate crash? (Score:4, Interesting)
Japan had plans to build crazy "arcologies" like this in the late '80s-early '90s, just before their real estate market cratered hard.
Given chinese quality (Score:3)
I would be really scared to be near this building- much less in it.
They need to require that any suppliers spend time in the building after it is finished.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
build 2,750 feet into the air
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Nah. Fill the whole damn building with them. The lower floors will be just as lethal whether this pancakes, shears, or tips over.
I am not one to wish ill on anyone, but the Chinese will have this one coming to them. Their lust for speed and the need to "wow the world with superior Chinese methodology" will ultimately fall around their ears. They may be building cities and building at break-neck speed, but a lot of their infrastructure is rotten to the core. My prediction? The failure of their bullet [guardian.co.uk]
Re:it's going to fail (Score:5, Insightful)
There are two kinds of failure. The failure of ambitious dreams that maybe we'll see in china. And the never ending failure of the miserable cynical bastards in the west who never open their mouths but to whine about how terrible everything is. People so fundamentally opposed to a better world tomorrow that the highest political ambition is austerity (both economic and environmental).
You want to talk about rotten infrastructure and social unrest? Let's see where another ten years of politicians "saving money" get's you.
Re: (Score:2)
Is it really cynical to say "Look, corner cutting in the name of big name projects is well documented. I worry this will end very poorly."?
Or are you just trying to make yourself feel superior?
Re:it's going to fail (Score:4, Insightful)
Couple this with the social unrest of the one-child per family, resulting in 30 million unmarried men [blogspot.com], and you have the fodder stimulating a revolution.
How is the imbalance caused by the one-child per family policy? It was caused by the selective abortion by short-sighted people who thought that having an unmarried male heir is better than a married female heir (either that or they thought that they were the only people with the genius idea of making sure they'd have a son)
Other points - spot on.
Re: (Score:3)
How do you carry on your family name with a female heir?
By not supporting archaic social customs that suggest males are superior to females and are the only way to extend your family legacy.
You forget not everyone has your cultural values
Right, some of us believe in equality.
Re:it's going to fail (Score:5, Insightful)
A primary result (intended or otherwise) of couples has always been reproduction.
The lineage of the Mother is never in doubt.
If the father has his name attached to said resulting offspring, and the assurances of the Mother that the child is his, he will usually accept that it is and help support both the child and the mother. Otherwise, there is a much lower rate of acceptance and fathers (or possible fathers) will leave them claiming it's another males child.
Strangely enough, this has been studied. I read a science article on it about a month or two ago.
No, I am not a sociologist or anything, but the info is out there, you just have to look for it.
Re: (Score:3)
Couple this with the social unrest of the one-child per family, resulting in 30 million unmarried men [blogspot.com], and you have the fodder stimulating a revolution.
Revolution, or war with Taiwan / US.
As soon as they figure out how to move a couple million guys across the water fast. Look out.
Re: (Score:2)
You still think China is a communist nation de facto and not just in name only?
What matters is that China still has an authoritarian non-representative government. Their economic system is another issue. What they choose to call their political or economic systems is utterly unimportant.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes if they'd only split their Communist Party into red and blue teams with minor ideological differences, and give lip service to the people's needs while clearly indicating that they give no fucks through their actions, they could be brought up to US standards of freedom and democracy.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes having a choice between Obama and Bush is much much better! China is a 1 party state, the USA is a "two" party state where both parties basically do exactly the same thing.
Your point is well taken, but so far there's still worlds of difference between China and the USA.
Re: (Score:3)
You only have a choice between Obama and Bush at the end of a very long and involved process of vetting and primaries that is reasonably democratic, although many people do not participate out of laziness and ignorance. It would be ridiculous to have 50 presidential candidates in the general election. You start with 50 but they get narrowed down to 2. I would personally prefer 3 but not more than that.
You are completely missing the point. Your primary system enforces a two party system. You can only declare yourself as a Republican, Democrat or Independent full stop.
Instead of primaries, other countries elect their party leaders at political conventions. The public "election" is held later which I think is a more sensible system. I also think it is a bit idiotic that state officials are involved in the federal election and that you elect everyone in one big election night.
In Canada, we have separate
Re: 90 days to raise... (Score:2, Interesting)
Reminds me of the Shanghai building collapse where a whole building fell over on its side.
http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2009/06/29/shanghai-building-collapses-nearly-intact/
Re: 90 days to raise... (Score:4, Informative)
The building itself is well built from what i can see, but you can't prefab a foundation, and a real foundation takes time.
IANASE (I am not a structural engineer) but there is serious concern about prefab for something this height. FTA:
Head of Structures for WSP Middle East, Bart Leclercq ... likes the idea of prefabrication but says concrete poured onsite in tall buildings provides stiffness, and the time it takes concrete to cure is non-negotiable. He thinks the five-year mark set by the Burj Khalifa is about as good as it gets with current techniques and technologies.
I'd be very interested to hear from anyone here who has expertise in concrete.
Re: 90 days to raise... (Score:5, Informative)
IAAASE (I actually AM a structural engineer) and I am definitely concerned. Concrete will have to be poured on site, since there will need to be a homogenous shear force resistance from the top of this thing all the way down to the bottom. If the sections were simply bolted together, then 200+ vertical slip-critical connections is going to give you a heck of a wobble.
Poured reinforced concrete is a composite connection, the steel acting to counter the moment effects and tension forces in concrete.
However, I have not seen all of the plans for this thing, and if they were to assemble, say, 20 storeys with formworks for shear assemblies, then poured a twenty story concrete lift on site, waited three days to achieve 75% curing strength, then kept going with 20 more storeys, this could work. It's not impossible, but there's a lot of problems that, while SOLVABLE, would never get approval in North America due to unacceptable levels of risk.
Re: (Score:3)
...a few seconds to collapse!
Prefab blocks, erected on site, what could possibly go wrong? [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds about as safe as nailing cables into the ice walls on Hoth.
Re: (Score:2)
Lots of American shit fell down too. Lots of European shit as well. China just gets more publicity because the narrative is that everything made in China is a cheap knock-off of some western product that inevitably crashes and burns.
China has a poor safety record. So does everyone else, at least historically. That's one of the reasons why they call them developing economies.
Re: (Score:3)
There is a difference between a building collapsing because it was the first of it's kind 100 years ago and a building collapsing because the inspector was paid off by the guy selling substandard cement, 100 years after the materials and architectural engineering have been worked out. There were some high-profile crane collapses in Manhattan in the past few years that demonstrate stupidity and corruption if you want a US example.
Re: (Score:2)
Sadly, that won't prevent people from trying to sue somebody, these days...