美國網友熱議：中國能用19天建成一棟摩天樓，為什麼美國不行？

近日有美國網友在該國論壇布了這麼一個帖子：中國能用19天建成一棟摩天樓，為什麼美國不行？

引髮網友紛紛評論，評論翻譯如下：（如有翻譯錯誤，純屬偶然）

（ps：以下外國網友評論，均不代表小編的看法。）

There is clearly major offsite prefabrication going on which presumably started long before the 19 day counter started ticking. In the US there is also work done in advance of construction but not to this scale. There is nothing wrong with prefabrication but it is little disingenuous to look only at the time spent on site if there were perhaps weeks or months spent working in large scale factories off site.

顯然主體元件的預製不包含在計時開始的19天內。在美國也有做過一些建設前的工作，但從未有過如此大的規模。預製沒有什麼錯，但是如果現場施工之前就已經提前在大型工廠里進行了幾周或者幾個月的預製，那如果再拿現場的時間來進行比較，那就有點虛偽了。

From the video it appears that the building is being built in a low density area which makes sense for China which has massive growth and need for new development. In the US most skyscrapers are built in areas of existing high density making the shipping staging and placement of these massive pre fabricated constructions potentially impractical or impossible.

在中國需要最新的發展和高速的增長的情況下這件事情就顯得很合理了。在美國大多數摩天大樓都建在現有的高密度建築區，使得這些大規模預製建築的分期運輸和布局顯得不切實際或幾乎不可能做到。

The building uses 7 simultaneous tower cranes. That is a massive investment of resources and unheard of in the US(buildings typically have 1 crane). I don't believe the US has ever found it necessary to provide construction this fast. Like many things if you throw enough resources at them you can do them faster but you may lose efficiency. This is a matter of priorities.

該建築採用了7座塔吊同時建設。在美國這是一個聞所未聞的巨大的資源投入（建築物通常只有1個塔吊）。我不相信美國有必要建設得如此之快。像許多這樣東西，也許你投入足夠的資源，你可以做得更快，但你可能會失去效率而得不到好的質量。質量才是應該優先的選項。

———————————————–

Engineering and construction are not Olympic events. They are business ventures. To frx this as some sort of US vs China contest is totally pointless.

工程建設不是奧運會項目。他們是商業冒險。把這個作為某種形式的美國vs中國比賽是毫無意義的。

As far as the question about incompetence that doesn't even deserve to be addressed.

至於關於是不是無能為力這個問題，這壓根不值得費心思去思考解決。

———————————————–

Matthew Lohden 30+ years working in the design and construction of buildings.

A US company once built a house in 8 hours.

曾經有一家美國公司在8小時內建造一幢房屋

US teams could build a skyscraper in the same fashion as the Chinese one given good enough reason. The reality though is that the building wasn't built in that time. It was only erected. There is also all the time spent preparing and assembling all the components so that the erection could be so quick. There are certainly advantages to modular construction but there are also trade offs which make it unsuitable in many cases and of limited use in others.

如果必要的的話，美國公司也可以用和中國一樣的方式建造一幢摩天大樓。但現實情況是建築不是當時建造的，只是當時樹立起來的而已。這個建築能如此快的建立起來是因為提前花費了大量的時間在準備和部件組裝上。可以肯定的是模塊化結構是有優勢的，但是也應該權衡模塊化結構在很多情況下不能使用或只能有限使用。

The Chinese are still developing their infrastructure and it makes sense to explore ways to do it faster and with economies of scale. In the US our problems are more about repairing updating and reorganizing an otherwise pretty fully developed built environment. The applications for such full on modularization are much more limited here.

中國目前還在發展基建，所以探索新的快的建造方式還是很有意義的。放在在美國的話，我們應更多的關注修復保養和重組目前的建築，因而對於模塊化結構的應用有更多的限制。

———————————————–

Jerry To lives in Hong Kong

Written Mar 19 2015

The US CAN do that if they invest into the prefab technologies and manufacturing facilities as much as the company behind this skyscraper did.

美國可以做到，如果他們像建造這個摩天大樓一樣投資組裝房屋技術和製造設備。

The US just didn't do it because there's no need to erect skyscrapers in 19 days.

美國不這麼做僅僅是因為根本沒有必要在19天豎起一座摩天大樓。

In fact China didn't need to erect skyscrapers in 19 days either. The vast majority of China's buildings were not completed this way.

實際上中國也不需要在19天之內建造一座摩天大樓。大部分中國的建築也不是這樣完成的。

Even for this particular project they still didn't HAVE to complete it in 19 days. I'm sure they can save a bit more construction cost by having a more relaxed schedule.

即使是這一棟大樓其實也並不必須要在19天內建完。我確信他們可以制定一個更輕鬆的計劃而且能省下更多的工程費用。

It's also worth noting that although construction speed was the single most eye-grabbing element in news like these it was not BSB's main selling point. Like I've mentioned earlier people rarely NEED to have skyscrapers built in a few weeks not even in China. BSB's main selling point was actually energy conservation emission reduction superior interior air quality and reducing building cost.

還有一點值得注意的是，雖然這些工程的建造速度成為了唯一最吸引眼球的元素，但是這並不是遠大可建科技有限公司的主要賣點。像我剛剛提到的一樣，人們並不需要在幾周內建成一棟摩天大廈，即使是在中國。他們的主要賣點實際上是節能減排，改善空氣質量以及減少工程費用。

Some questions remain unanswered from the video such as build quality (is everything plumb level and watertight?) fire compartmentalism (will a fire on level 2 be contained to level 2?) and worksite safety (how many workers were injured in that great rush?).

還有一些問題沒有得到回答，例如建築質量（一切都能保證垂直水平和水密嗎？）防火分隔（第2級的防火級別是否控制在第2級？）和工地安全（在這樣的極速活動中有多少工人受傷？ ）。

————————————————

Isaac Gaetz's answer covers all the bases. To add to his 4th point about resources labour and transport costs are much lower in China. Labourers get paid insanely little (often only 1 annual pay cheque) and construction companies aren't always required to cover healthcare and insurance costs. Bringing in several cranes and an army of people to put together a prefab building is a lot cheaper in China than in the US.

Isaac Gaetz的回答覆蓋了所有的點。我想對他的第四點進行補充，中國的資源，勞動力以及運輸成本低多了。工人工資非常低（通常一年支付一次），建築公司也沒必要給工人提供醫保和保險。所以中國的成本比美國低多了。

———————————————–

Alex Wong just like to learn about the USA

Written Nov 26

It』s difficult to compare something like this for a variety of reasons. Construction speed isn』t just about competence and capability it』s also about willpower.

由於各種各樣的不同的原因很難與之比較。建設速度不只是能力和性能，也需要毅力。

Most construction in the USA occurs in low population area where you』re building single detached homes. China』s more famous constructions are in tight urban spaces which require super high rises. When USA is as heavily populated as China then the comparison will be on equal grounds but for now USA can build loads of single detached homes and ignore skyscrapers which require a lot of the pre-fab techniques.

在美國你正在建造的獨棟別墅.的大部分都建築在人口稀少的地區。中國的更多著名的建築都位於緊張的城市空間所以需要造得非常的高。如果美國人口也像中國那麼多，那才有可比性，但如今的美國只能建設大量的獨棟別墅卻忽略了需要大量預製件技術的摩天大樓