Are excavators ever buried under large buildings to save money?
October 12, 2014 2:46 AM Subscribe
My brother claims that in large construction projects where excavators dig out underground carparks, the cost of removing the machinery exceeds the costs of replacing it so they are simply buried under all the concrete.
Can anyone please point to some kind of evidence? My googling hasn't turned up anything and there's $30 riding on it! Thanks
That was discussed in an FPP not all that long ago, also.
Edit: here is the link.
posted by Dip Flash at 2:54 AM on October 12, 2014 [2 favorites]
Edit: here is the link.
posted by Dip Flash at 2:54 AM on October 12, 2014 [2 favorites]
This is the plot of a classic children's book: Mike Mulligan and his Steam Shovel.
posted by mareli at 4:53 AM on October 12, 2014 [14 favorites]
posted by mareli at 4:53 AM on October 12, 2014 [14 favorites]
At the current price of steel I know scrappers that would remove the equipment for free or even pay a bit. But I can see a rich guy sometime being in a stupid hurry and the contractor saying , f** it, add it to the bill.
posted by sammyo at 5:16 AM on October 12, 2014
posted by sammyo at 5:16 AM on October 12, 2014
Best answer: I do know a bit about construction. No, the machines are in all usual cases far more expensive than the hassle of getting them out. Crappy little thing like this: $29 000. Cost of a crane hire for an hour to remove? Less than $1000, certainly.
As noted above, yes it HAS happened, in inner urban London where there is incredibly tight access for mega-multi-million dollar extensions. But for car parks etc? No way at all.
posted by wilful at 5:27 AM on October 12, 2014 [3 favorites]
As noted above, yes it HAS happened, in inner urban London where there is incredibly tight access for mega-multi-million dollar extensions. But for car parks etc? No way at all.
posted by wilful at 5:27 AM on October 12, 2014 [3 favorites]
Not sure about burying excavators, but on tunnelling projects walling in the boring machines in a purpose-built side tunnel at project end can and does happen. Such boring machines are generally designed for ONE project and for however long that project is expected to last. They are therefore unusable, as is, for any future project. And it's often too much of a hassle to dismantle them underground and extricate the parts.
posted by Mister Bijou at 5:37 AM on October 12, 2014 [3 favorites]
posted by Mister Bijou at 5:37 AM on October 12, 2014 [3 favorites]
The boring machines that created the Chunnel are still down there, drilled off to the side and left behind.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 7:06 AM on October 12, 2014 [3 favorites]
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 7:06 AM on October 12, 2014 [3 favorites]
Based on what I know of heavy equipment operator's skills and what engineers and come up with, I'd guess that getting them out is easier than it might appear.
posted by humboldt32 at 9:24 AM on October 12, 2014
posted by humboldt32 at 9:24 AM on October 12, 2014
Wouldn't a machine buried in concrete within the base of a building upset the structural integrity of the building?
posted by Jason and Laszlo at 9:43 AM on October 12, 2014 [1 favorite]
posted by Jason and Laszlo at 9:43 AM on October 12, 2014 [1 favorite]
It's not done on a whim; the engineers account for the burial of the equipment.
posted by Lyn Never at 9:59 AM on October 12, 2014
posted by Lyn Never at 9:59 AM on October 12, 2014
Ritchie Brothers is the largest seller of used construction equipment in the world. They sell excavation equipment at many of there auctions. One of their main auction sites is outside Orlando, Florida, and I have attended a few of their auctions.
Here is a Ritchie Brothers announcement from a few years ago about an upcoming auction selling off all the heavy equipment owned by a large commercial excavation company. Excavation equipment does not get buried and left behind - proof is the thriving market for the sale of the used excavation equipment.
posted by Flood at 10:35 AM on October 12, 2014 [2 favorites]
Here is a Ritchie Brothers announcement from a few years ago about an upcoming auction selling off all the heavy equipment owned by a large commercial excavation company. Excavation equipment does not get buried and left behind - proof is the thriving market for the sale of the used excavation equipment.
posted by Flood at 10:35 AM on October 12, 2014 [2 favorites]
Slightly OT, but when my woman was living in Dawson City, she overheard a gold miner telling his buddy on the phone, "yeah, it's so expensive to get the machinery up here, but the great thing is, you can just leave it in the bush when you're done..."
posted by klanawa at 11:13 AM on October 12, 2014
posted by klanawa at 11:13 AM on October 12, 2014
Best answer: Has it ever been done? Sure, almost definitely, under exceptional circumstances. Is it normal practice? No, it's almost always much cheaper to lift it out with a crane. Excavators are not disposable.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 2:53 PM on October 12, 2014 [3 favorites]
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 2:53 PM on October 12, 2014 [3 favorites]
Best answer: Every square foot excavated costs big bucks plus has to be endineered. Parking a big piece of expensive equipment either at the bottom (or even more wasteful of expensive space) is, difficult to encase, unregulated, and unlikey.
While the hole is dug down, the parking and building is built up so it's easy enough to crane out something from an empty hole.
posted by mightshould at 3:54 PM on October 12, 2014
While the hole is dug down, the parking and building is built up so it's easy enough to crane out something from an empty hole.
posted by mightshould at 3:54 PM on October 12, 2014
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by curious zoe at 2:49 AM on October 12, 2014 [3 favorites]