A UK demolition journalist poses a provactive challenge to US demo contractors: "Since the UK and Europe adopted high reach excavators, recycling rates have gone up and accident levels have gone down. And the only major First World nation that has failed to adopt these machines – and which still has a laughable recycling record and a lamentable safety record – is the mighty US of A." Why? Click to go to the DemolitionNews.com blog and reply.
i would say equipment and transportation costs have a lot to do with it as well...too many guys willing to risk it so other, safer companies, can't justify the added costs of one of these machines
Uhhhhhhhh ointhead What's with picture of that guy in that article? He looks like he's straight off the corner of Haight and Ashbury... (I would love to go into more detail, but I would get yelled at )
While the topic was the old school wrecking ball, there are pictures in this thread of Testa using a high reach machine in Lowell MA, which goes to prove that they're not totally unheard of on this side of the pond. Are they as rare here as the article would insinuate? Uhh, yeah. It's best we stay on topic...
I don't think high reach demo machines are as uncommon as that article makes them out to be. I have personally seen a few of them demoing high rise buildings. As Dirtdigger pointed out above, moving and setting up a machine like that that needs to be disassembled to move is more expensive. They're not necessary unless higher reach is needed.
Don't we tend to do a bunch more of explosive demolition here? If we tend to do more of that style then we really don't need a high reach cause it's all in a pile already.
I have to agree with 95V on the explosive demo. We do have a few of them in my area but the buildings really are not that old on the West Coast. Anything really old is wood frame and not real tall. I have worked on a couple Hitachi 60 foot plus and I know Rhine has a fleet of Kobelcos.
I find, at least in Michigan, that HRD machines just dont cut it. Most of the demolition around here is heavy industrial. Most of these buildings are heavy steel structures. Most HRD machines are not able to carry a big enough tool to cut this heavy steel. Making them slow, and inefficent. Its quicker to cut everything loose that you can with a 3rd member shear, then pull the legs out from underneath the upper structure.
Well , the abbreviated thread title drew my eye . l thought , Cheech and Chong were Americans .
Hi Guys, I am Mark Anthony, the author of the original article upon which this thread is based, and I would just like to thank you for all your thoughts and contributions. Let me start by apologising for the photo - I have no idea what the corner of Haight and Ashbury looks like but I now have a pretty good idea...and I won't be visiting any time soon! Getting to the more serious matter under discussion, I do have a couple of comments. Firstly, as several of you have rightly said, high reach machines are not unheard of in the US. However, there are two key differences between the current US population of HRD machines, and those in Europe: number per company; and size. I am based just outside London and I can tell you that even some of the smaller contractors who work purely in a section of the capital might have 5, 10 or even more high reach machines of varying sizes. In addition, while a few years ago a 30 metre (100 feet) machine was considered large, these are now commonplace with many UK and European contractors having exceeded 40 and 50 metres. Indeed, here in the UK, there are several machines that top the 60 metre (200 feet) mark, and there are more to come. Turning to the point made by Turbo21835, it's interesting that while there HAS been an increase inthe height of these machines, there is now a side growth in machines capable to handling a far bigger tool. The UK-based excavator modifier Kocurek ( www.kocurek.com ) is currently working on a series of machines that can carry tools of 5 tonnes plus. Meanwhile, the attachments manufacturers are developing ever bigger, more powerful tools to match these machines (like this one for example: http://************/lpjwv9 ). Another point that has been raised is that the US seems to prefer the use of explosives. Having spent the past 20+ years watching US implosions on the TV, I would certainly support that argument, and I believe that a major contributory factor is the sheer amount of space that you guys have to operate in, a luxury that we in the UK and Europe are rarely afforded. However, I also believe that suggesting that explosives do the same job as a high reach machine is missing a key point. One of the key reasons that UK and European contractors achieve such high recycling and reuse rates is because materials are sorted and segregated as part of the controlled deconstruction process. I am sure that even the most dedicated explosives man will agree that sorting and separating materials is easier with the structure standing up than it is with it reduced to a pile of rubble. What I find fascinating here is that the world of demolition speaks a universal language. Regardless of mother tongue, demolition contractors have a common bond that unites them. And yet, when it comes to the selection of methods, the US and Europe are (at least partly) separated by more than just language and an expanse of water. Just one quick, and final point. I was one of the co-authors on a set of guidance notes for the safe use of high reach machines. If anyone would like a copy, just to see what all the fuss is about, please let me know. And thanks once again for all your input and contributions.
Time is money. The quickest safest way to get a building down and out of the way wins. Implode it then sort and load seems to be the winner. Another thing to put in the calculation is materials used to construct the building. Implosions seem to rule the concrete type buildings. But i saw awhile back an all steel explosive demolition http://gizmodo.com/387522/nasa-launch-complex-gets-demolished-bounces-back it was interesting to watch.
Fair comment - I am currently trying to get a UK or European contractor to enter the fray here as I am sure they would have far more insight than a mere journalist! I think, however, that one of the differences here is that UK and European/Scandinavian contractors are increasingly required to prove their environmental credentials BEFORE work commences. That means minimum noise, dust, vibration and, of course, maximum recycling and reuse of materials.
First, demolitionnews, welcome to Heavy Equipment Forums. My sense of the situation is that recycling practices are not driven so much by the savings realized from re-use of materials, as they are by the cost of disposal of waste materials. Here, we simply haven't reached the point where it's profitable to recycle 90+ % of demolition materials. Once it becomes so, either through market forces or legislation, we'll jump on the bandwagon too. In other words, in the UK and Europe, contractors can make a more money through high rates of recycling, than by the old fashioned way of squashing it up and taking it to the landfill. Here, it remains the other way around.
the waste cost drives the sorting rate and thus the way of demolition. Using oilquick makes us change from eg grapple to shear quite rapid and therefore reduce the need for manual work. We always emphasize using machine force in stead of manual work due to HSE demands. implosions are much cooler tho :usa
Nice photo; where's that from?
i think its from a demo project in oslo, large industry facility
From A UK Point of veiw I think its lazynes and Cost. There Are HRD Machines Out there in america, CAT Build them out of their factorys and I Know theres companys that are the US equivulent of Kocurek like Jewell but contractors would rather buy a bog standard 20 tonner with a thumb to knock a building down. But there are companys out there that are not using Specialised equipment or cab gaurds that are'nt Required by law like in the UK which i think is appualing, We have all seen pictures of how they have saved lives and some companys in america work with out glass in the cab let alone a gaurd, Only the other day on mega structures an old CAT With no cab Glass was pulverisng an old building with concrete flying everywhere. But tjose companys are getting the Job done with out millions of pounds worth of High reach excavator. my 50p's worth
and getting workers killed in the process.
Oh, Believe me, I wasnt enouraging this, I was stating the facts.
I'm assuming you're saying that demolition work in the US is measurably more fatal than elsewhere. Do you have a source that says that? The reason I ask is that I just went googling around for any sort of statistical comparison, and statistics on demolition-specific fatalities are kind of hard to find. It at least doesn't seem to stand out from the rate of fatalities in the construction industry in general...
Unfortunately, here in the UK (and in most European countries) the accident statistics for demolition and construction are combined to it is difficult to compile firm figures. What I can tell you is that members of the UK's National Federation of Demolition Contractors (who are responsible for around 90% of all the UK's demolition work) have seen a steady decline in serious accidents and fatalities that has been almost continuous for the past 10-15 years. Interestingly, however, the growth in recycling and sustainability has been mirrored by a growth in minor (but resportable) accidents. But that is a new article in itself!
and so has the profit... (before the financial crisis tho)
I can't provide statistics but anecdotally I can say from the news reports I see in my area we have far more accidents in construction than in demolition. After rereading all the posts in this thread it occurs to me that we are trying to compare apples to oranges. Europe and the British Isles have history going back a couple of thousand years. The US goes back maybe three hundred. The land is different, the people are different and many if not most of the construction methods are different. The initial impression I got from the question was that somehow the writer thinks or puts forth that the demolition methods employed in Europe were better than used here. Increased use of high reach machines and greater percentage of salvage and recycling were seen as a better way of accomplishing that type of work and a back hand slap at how we do things here. What I didn't see were numbers making actual comparisons of the cost of demolition. Is it possible that government mandates proscribe those methods? Already mentioned was safety records. Reviewing photos of extremely long reach machines reminds me of crane disasters. Just how are those long reach machines rated when it comes to loading. Can they let go of a bite on a building fast enough to prevent a rollover? The method of construction or demolition is an engineering function. All the inherent characteristics of the project have to be considered and costs calculated. All the methods considered for all the variables and the most cost effective one chosen for the desired outcome of the project. In other words what works on the continent is not necessarily going to work in the states to the same degree. What works in the states also may not work in other parts of the world. Apples and Oranges
death of the high rise as previous mentioned, the skills of the operator is important. This video is one the worst I've seen, cause this show total lack of understanding on how weaking of structures work... But you cant blame the UHD for the accident. the best reason for UHD being more safe is that, the method enable the machine being longer away from the demo object, as the picture below shows, and thus falling debris is no problem.
That's simply an example of a "not quite high enough reach" demolition machine. You could get the same results trying to bring down a 4 story building with a regular excavator. The machine has to be capable of doing the job...
HRDs are not the rule around here, but they are not uncommon. But there are also other ways to wreck a building. The last photo shows the result of an HRD machine not having the tool carrying capability for heavy steel structures. The cat 385UHD carries a tool that is also carried by a cat 320. That shows you capability in cutting steel. The 385 operator was chewing away at the column trying to cut it. The column and truss collapsed, pinching the shear, and damaging it. So with help with a torch man, and 375 with a third member shear, this section was removed. The following post will show how the rest of the structure was dealt with
The remaining portion of this structure was dealt with in an old school way. Since the HRD did not have the ability to cut the heavy steel, it was used to remove any remaining sheet metal, and loose items. Then, a 375 with 3rd member shear removed everything that could be reached. Then the rest of the structure was set up by a torch man. Reason this was done this way was due to the structure being close to an active railroad, and high tension power lines
I think it has alot to do with the population density around the structure to be demolished. maybe?
Just one quick point; can anyone tell me indicative US landfill costs, ie, the cost per tonne to dump unwanted, inert materials (excluding transport).
yes, of course... but my point was for the first having an UHD machine not necassary include safe demo. Second the importance of having an understanding of how weaken structures behave (I ment that machine is placed in the worst position, e.g. he could have pushed or pulled the remaining part down... ). Rural areas comment: In Norway we have at least 20 high reach machines (as I know about) and we have approximately 5 million inhabitans, compared to the US it should be like 1200 high reach machines over there Still HRD is special equipement and should just be bought of demolition contractors which is working over a larger area.
... and many thanks for the great photos of one of your jobs. To illustrate the difference in thinking on either side of the pond, I don’t think that any Western-European demolition contractor would have attempted to deconstruct such a structure with something as small as a Cat 385. At 90-tonnes (200,000 lbs) as the base weight for the excavator it is just not man enough to carry a decent-sized tool to anywhere like the required height. I have a sneaking suspicion that one of the reasons why high reach demolition rigs are not used that often in America is Caterpillar’s weakness at the top end of the hydraulic excavator market, with a 90-tonner being their current largest model (the old Cat 5100 series excavators make a great base for such machines). Without the mighty Caterpillar active in this sector of the market, it is to be expected that American businesses will be reluctant to go down this route.
Just so you know, this debate continues to gather pace over at Demolition News with the D&Ri magazine and JCB now offering their take: http://www.demolitionnews.com/2009/08/14/why-dont-americans-get-high-reach/#comment-1658
About the possibility of heavy equipment not being able to be put on a HRD I must disagree. The Rusch TUHD can take up a 5Ttool to 90 meter and a 10T tool upto 76 meter. The Rusch Triple 34-25 will take a 25T tool upto 34 meter. (See picture). And I think there is more to come.
As someone that has literally documented the History of Demolition in the States for the last 15 years I have seen almost every conceivable method to take down a structure. The High Reach Attachment is used for a variety of reasons, but first and foremost to deconstruct a structure in the safest way possible. In 1990 while living in Italy my camera became trained on local construction sites that caught my eye. Standing in the middle of every construction site of every country I visited was a piece of machinery I had never seen before. It was a tower crane. In the US, at that time, the use of tower cranes was few and far between. Now they are everywhere. While shooting Boston’s Big Dig from 1998-2005 there were multiple technologies used that were invented, refined as improved on that were used to help construct the $14.8 billion Central Artery Tunnel Project. These were mostly construction technologies that were not from the US. Advanced Slurry Wall technologies came from Italy and Germany. Soil Mixing, Grout Injecting and Saline Soil Freezing Methods came from Japan. Mechanically every manufacturer worldwide had one state-of-the-art piece of heavy equipment somewhere on the Big Dig. In fact, even the massive 475 foot long walking gantry for placing viaduct road segments came from Sweden and Italy. Having traveled extensively in the UK and Europe in the last 25 years there is only one thing to say. Everything we do in the States is totally different from the way ‘you’ do things over there. Not to say that our way or your way is the right or wrong way. It’s just different. There are so many vastly different factors to consider. For everything from the time you get up in the morning to the time you go to sleep. Speech, language, automobile sizes and uses, truck weights and models, food on our tables, the way we school our children, our sports heroes, our life heroes, rules and regulations of towns, local and civil governments, rules on the job site, expectations, training, EVERYTHING is different. I was asked early on, from Mark Anthony of Demolition News, to join this debate and knew it would stir up a lot of emotional responses so I decided to see how things would play out before voicing my observation. It is unfortunate that we, as people, are drawn to the entertainment of the suffering of others. It seems the videos that get the most attention on YouTube are those that are failures, loss of human life and injuries caused by reckless behavior. It is human nature. It is even more unfortunate that most of the ‘demolition gone wrong’ videos have originated from the USA thus lumping every demolition contractor into the ugly American category. I once posted a video of ‘textbook’ method for pulling down a water tower from the top of a 5-story building. The comments were unbelievable. Most felt it would have been better if it were cut up piece-by-piece and systematically dismantled. Others felt that a HRD would have been better attacking it from various sides to tear it apart. But the comment that really took the prize came from the UK, from someone I used to have a lot of respect for. He stated that the location of this demolition was obviously from the REDNECK area of the United States and that HSE in the UK would have shut–down the site. Needless to say that comment started a whirlwind fury of back and forth comments, opinions, gossip, accusations. Much like what is going on in this thread. We as American’s have our way of doing things, some of it is good, some of it great and some not so great. Perhaps and better way to title this topic, that obviously was meant as a jab in the kidney’s, would have been ‘How have High Reach Excavators Helped your Company?’ My answer to this question would have been. One of my biggest clients, Testa Corp, uses a Jewell High Reach Attachment that is mounted to a Komastu 1250 PC platform with a reach of 100 feet as a base machine and 120 feet when used with the extension member and weighs in at 200 tons. They make use of the high reach attachment when certain factors apply to safely and accurately dismantle a project. They have 1 high reach attachment that is easily transported and can be quickly assembled. Additionally, they have a single highly trained professional operator that travels with the high reach attachment wherever it is deployed. To end my contribution to this debate I have one question for you. A friend of mine, a Scotsman (born and raised) is visiting me here in the States this week. While he has been here many times before he asked quite a peculiar question that I found rather odd. He wanted to know why everywhere he went he saw American flags flying. He’s seen them on cars, on trucks, flying from flagpoles in people’s yards, on the front the front of houses, everywhere. He said that in the UK it is illegal to fly the Union Jack and he wanted to know why it isn’t illegal to fly our flag here in the states? Just curious. Seems ridiculous that you can’t fly the flag of your own country whenever you want…
Wow! - I did not know that. Is this true? I wonder if you are allowed to fly the French flag in England then?? Just kidding, don't get your knickers in a twist.:tong
I will put my 2 cents worth in as well. I think it has a lot to do with population density where the work is happening. We here in the US have what Europe does not, which is a lot of space to live and work in. Look at the amount of space around the structure being pulled down in Turbo's post. No reason to do it any other way. For the cost of just one of the extremely specialized machines the European companies would bring to do this, the US contractor can buy the whole fleet employed on that site. In Europe, and other congested areas, there probably would not be that much space around the structure being torn down. That brings the need to be more controlled in the process. It also will take longer with one large machine than the fleet of smaller ones working together. Most demo here has room to work, and the buildings being razed are typically not as tall. If they are, BOOM, and down they come. If there was more work that required HRD machines, there would be more in use, but the standard size machines serve us well, and they are easy to deploy to the numerous smaller projects. I am not saying one way is better or worse, just that there are many factors in why we use the machines we do, just like there are many reasons for more HRD machines in Europe. We have our share of less qualified people causing accidents, but I am sure it happens elsewhere as well. I do not know what it takes in Europe to be a demolition contractor. Here in the US, like any other business, it is not that hard to get into. Because it is easy to become a contractor, and some owners will always go for the cheapest price instead of the most qualified company, there will always be less qualified companies getting started. Some will succeed, as this is the American way, and some will fail. On the way there, some will have accidents that make the rest look bad. Maybe another good question is what it takes to be in the business in other countries?
I had to laugh out loud...How is it you view the countries in the UK and Europe? As densely packed cities with no green earth? When ever I travel to the UK people always ask me where I am staying in London. I say, London? I have never been to London. There is so much more to the UK and Europe than the few major cities. What I see when I go there is hundreds of square miles of rolling fields, mountain ranges, dense forests, incredible seaside cliffs and wide open spaces, everywhere. Demolition sites and construction sites are no different from here. It's just the little differences that make them 'foreign' to us.
I did not mean it that way. I know they also have open country. I was referring to the cities, and it has been my impression that they are built up more dense than here. It is also my impression of narrower streets and tight access in many cities because they have been built up already hundreds of years before roads had to be wide enough for cars and trucks. I know the whole area is not that developed, but it would seem to me those areas that are would drive the use of machines capable of working in them. I have never been there, and do not want to sound like a know it all. Sorry if it came out that way. That is one reason I like it here on the forum is to learn about the ways things are done in other parts of the world.
OK. I understand. You are right about there being narrower streets and such in localized towns, designed years ago for horse and carriage and not cars. What is quite amazing to me is their huge semi trucks with multiple steering axles to get around those tight corners. However, most truck and trailer combos are MUCH taller than what we are used to and their super highways (motorways) are built much better than our interstates. Thus, their payload are greater too, surprisingly. I have seen fully dressed excavators and loaders on 8-10 axle lowboys where all axles steer. Blows my mind everytime I see it... The internet is a great place to learn about the rest of the world, but the only real way to see it is to go there....
I think it was our member Geert-yke, from the Netherlands, who has posted a lot or really good pics of high reach machines, that pointed out that explosive demolition is totally prohibited in his country, and perhaps elsewhere in Europe. I know here in the states, we implode buildings even in some pretty tight quarters. I'm sure the same could be done over there, if it were legal. With implosions not being an option, it only makes sense that the high reach machines would find wider penetration into the market than here.
Testa's Jewel High Reach on the Komatsu 1250 PC Platform
Ive been holding back this photo of how it's done down under because I didn't want to show you guys up but I can't any longer . This is a high spec 9G Chamberlain tractor with a Ned Kelly front loader , one good owner and 14 real mongrels . It's equipped with a Safety approved scaffold and Chep pallet platform and a 12' length of 12X2" through the guts for a plank . I was able to step straight off of the plank and onto the ridge pole with it's safety railing but the safety leak down device lowered the "unit" by itself and I may have to jump from here . If you look real close you can see the Occupational Health and Safety numbers stamped into the the very robust framework . It's all about getting the job done , right ? That's a welding helmet on my head before OCR says something . Hows that Squizzy ?:drinkup
You just can't beat Aussie ingenuity, Well done Iron Horse.:falldownlaugh:falldownlaugh Rn'R.
:roll That's gold man, beautiful. I guess we'll need 3 engineers, 2 safety inspectors and a partridge in a pear tree to run a rig like that in the UK.
No No No No...thats where you went wrong IH...the rig may have been certified but you've gone an used a Chamberlain in a manlift application:cool2 AS 2601-1991 has been superseded...its now AS 2601-2001; which states you could have used a Allis Chalmers or a Massey Harris Australia...leading the way in Ultra High Reach Operations
where is the pic reg ??
i tried to post some pics however cant get them tp upload,will try again tomorrow.
Well, the picture made its way back. That is good, because it is priceless.
Funny you should say that , here's my 194? Massey Harris crane just back from it's ten year inspection . :tong Pete , the photos went AWOL for a day when the new WEB page uploaded .
Most of the guys I deal with give a couple reasons, both of which have been mentioned of "sort of" mentioned. The cost of moving is quite a bit higher. The cost itself of the boom option, and they don't like the fact that you loose so much "power" of the machine. The longer the boom, etc. the less lifting/breaking capacity/strength it has.
building high i recently completed a high reach project,built a shed at home , all out of used materials, we used state of the art lifting equipment, a fork and an old volvo loader.
some more pics
Sure you all have seen this one before
Nice job australian pete, I like it! It's hard to tell because it's a pic, but those bolts/nuts in those angle clips look like 1/2" coarse thread bolts. I know Oz/New Z use metric standards of measure, but are Aussies as stubborn as Americans resisting changing to international standards of things, like fasteners and such?
It's a real dogs breakfast as far as measurements are concerned. Did a job the other day and the customer wanted a hole dug, 3 x 7m x 5 inches. Sort of like tire measurements. Ahh well at least Whitworth is dead and buried unless you like really old British stuff.
Looks like the weekend toys are getting a new home
i cant remember atco, i built the shed over a year ago, while most bolts etc sold are metric non metric are freely available , trucks, earthmoving equipment etc from the US is not metric, we have to kepp 2 complete sets of tools, metric and US. the short answer is they may be either.
Then the manufacturers must be shipping the equipment to the wrong places. Here in the states we must keep metric and SAE tools because the machines keep coming with those darned metric nuts and bolts..:lmao:laugh
Yep...bet them High Reach Excavators are Metric too....
:lmao :falldownlaugh And you probably looked at him like he had ten heads! Yep, pretty much the same here. Have to keep standard and metric in the boxes. :drinkup
and what about the bsw and Whit
He did this in a residential area YouTube - Footage of a building blowing up in China so they did this
Nah I reckon she was just going by what the concreter had told her after much thought I worked out that 5 inches is 12.5cm or thereabouts. Funny thing was I dug it out in a couple of hours with the dingo and she got a quote from another dingo pilot and he reckoned half a day and would have to pull out 9 tonne, I guesstimated that 4 tonne come out. And I am a very average dingo operator. Either this fella was trying it on (you know, female looking to get some work done, lets rip her off) or he didn't have a clue. Far as the metric v imperial thing goes, I have all metric machines so only have to carry metric tools but still have a pile of imperial tools as well.
I'd like to set a few things straight. In any event, there are a lot of high reach machines in the US. Mazzochi has some big ones, Rhine has 7 of them, longest is 163 feet without the attachment. They are simple to set up, most come on the lowboy assembled. Others have boom trailers with quick-couples which makes erection simple and fast. A lot faster than a crane. Separation and salvaging of materials is simplified . Recycling rates are vastly increased. Personnel safety is increased as there are less people in the demolition zone, water is controlled from the cab on a lot of machines, no hose person in demo area. I will say that Europe does have guidelines on the use of HRD machines to insure personnel safety, the US doesn't but does need to get on board quickly.
if you guys would swap to metric that would solve the problem, i dont suppose that will happen so we will have to keep both lots of tools.
There are more HRD machines in North America than one might think. A trade magazine once considered assembling a population list of HRD machines in the world and tracking it. I guess it never happened but that would take the guesswork out of this. In the mining world a company made a very successful business of compiling and maintaining lists and details of giant trucks, shovels, and so forth around the world. As for HRD guidance, the NDA has drafted a guidance document for high reach machines and I would hope it gets approval and "goes to print" in the very near future.
...163 feet (50m) is nothing to get too excited about, it's not really pushing the boundaries of technology is it?
HRD safety guidelines Having met with Mike Taylor of the National Demolition Association a few weeks ago, I can confirm that the NDA is planning to adopt the high reach guidance notes created in the UK by the National Federation of Demolition Contractors (I was lucky enough to be one of the co-authors). I don't know what timescale the NDA is working to, so if anyone would like a copy of the original UK/NFDC version, please just drop me a line with your postal address and I'll fire you one over.
is this guidance available on the internet?
Hopefully not off-topic here, but here in Kansas there's more areas where a high-reach excavator would not be of any use. In the rural areas, the largest obstacle is called a tree. In the far western part of the state, trees are also known as tumbleweeds..:laugh So would this High-Reach be a mandatory thing for anyone involved in demolition? I've seen in some metro areas where they use controlled implosion to bring down skyscrapers, and also in some rural areas here, to bring down bridges. This is done by the experts, not just some whizz-bang that likes to see things go boom.
Credit to Earthmovers here is picture from the Earthmovers mag
The guidance notes are not currently available online, although if you'd like to drop me a line wiht your email address, I'll gladly send send you one. You can get me at [email protected]
stock: what is the axle-load on that transport ? dont see to be more than 7 axles??? In that case you need pretty good roads...
I would think 30 tons would pull that section of boom up , that truck and trailer should be fine with that load .
This is what she looks like assembled ,the counter weight is reputed to be 30 ton..
Technology? Let's not get carried away. We are all just knuckleheads who move sticks....we don't need to use that word like we are going to Jupiter or trying to pass Mika Hakkinen.... This whole thread stems from some writer's knowledge that he'll get press by insinuating that AMERICANS (God forbid) don't own the BIGGEST of something....its always news - and you all know it.
Well here in Canada there are a few HRD machines but we're much like in the U.S. we have more room (Canada is still the second largest country in the world) and those demo machines still have to serve they're original purpose which is moving earth. Plus machines like Testa's PC1250 are extremely expensive to buy and extremely costly to transport around. And here in Western Canada there aren't enough of these very large industrial demolitions to justify the purchase of such specialized equipment. Here machines like that are used in mines, quarries, highway construction, and gravel pits where it does pay to have something that big. And I think we do actually perform a lot of recycling here, concrete is recycled into gravel, steel gets cut up and goes to steel mills, brick gets salvaged for new homes or buildings and if it isn't salvageable it's used for fill or crushed like concrete. Currently I'm working on a project where the building is built out of large wooden beams and they'll be salvaged too. Even though this is an old thread I had to take a stab at it too and I didn't like how somebody who doesn't even operate equipment, manage or run a construction or demolition company tries to portray us (Canadians and Americans) as if we live in some third world country with no safety standards.
US Guidance is available now Just so you know, the NDA's version of the high reach guidance is available now. Please see here for details. As for the suggestion that I only wrote the original article to gain notoriety, all I can say is that this is a story that has been the source of ongoing discussion for almost a year now. Either I am very good at manipulating the zeitgeist or this is a subject of serious industry interest. Personally, I believe it's the latter.
Are those HRD's equipped with a boom mounted camera ? Apparently boom mounted cameras are getting popular by the day ? Does anyone has some good experiences with boom mounted cameras ? In which way are they best to be positionned ? Any pictures of boom mounted cameras available ?
I was reading this thread and the next day down came the local power plant.I no the company's involved and this is a classic U.S. demo job. 1.fast 2.lots of trucks 3.six to ten excavators with shears, grapples,hammers,and crushers. 4.lots of explosives.5 all concrete, metal and valuable components recycled. 6.No high reach excavators.7.Major hazardous obstacles. YouTube - Port St. John Power Plant
There's a company here in Indy (Denney Excavation & Demolition) that has a Cat 345 hi-reach. The first time I saw it used was after a 3 story apartment bldg burnt. They just recently finished up a vacant hospital demo with it.
Even if i'm from tiny Finland, i have to stand up and fight for the yanks! Mark, no offence, you probably already heard alot... But recycling and working safety has nothing to do with HRD excavators, it's all about choosing the right equipment for the job! So why do they use to small or hazardous metods with ridiculous recycling % at demolition jobs? Price, money, cash, there is no difference if you are in Japan, UK, Finland or USA, if there is no €/£ or $ involved in the job, then the job will be done without skills and the waste will probably just "dissapere" somewhere... As long as there is no limitations on who can offer and do demolition jobs, then this business will be a "playground" for big boys, with big enough tools or to small ones. Also when you say that implosion demolition is bad recycling, so how does it make a difference if all plaster, plastic, wood etc is removed before the blast? Then you have a pile of pulverized concrete ready for the recycling crusher. In the end everything has to do about money, if you get paid for taking a brick building apart with a hammer and chisel, then you can resell the bricks. In most cases the guy paying for the job just cares about how much it costs and that the trash is taken away. i think Mr. London should go outside Youtube to the real world and see how things are done, then after that start writing again
during the first Gulf War my eldest son was posted there. I put up a flagpole in my front garden with a big Union Jack.I was told by phone from the Local Council that I was not allowed to do this, so I said "please come round and talk to me and the local Press", I never heard another thing about it. The flag was still flying long after the war had finished
I feel same with the thread author. High-end excavators of course are better to the opertor and the environment. But the high prices have set many people back. While the low-end products are flooding in the market.
demolition is easy to get into? not from what I've heard
https://youtu.be/CS9OO0S5w2k
In the U.K. and Europe the Demolition Co's work to a very high standard with the removal of a building taking on at some points an "Art Form" with top rigs nipping away at the Doomed structure, this is often in very tight quarters with Lorry movements and dust being strictly controlled, lots of the building material is used on site again within the new build program saving on Lorry movements, the age of the buildings is not really an issue as the old buildings are often of Heritage importance leaving the newer builds the common target being replaced with fancy shaped Icons of our time, the Marvel to me is how Demolition is done in the USA on high rise by it would seem people who hire a self drive? the video of the excavator stood under a massive lump up in the air is untrue, the other people on Site should have stopped this Lunatic Driver instantly?? other Video's of walls falling the wrong way just missing lines of cars on the road is reckless beyond words, the Lampson Big Blue Fiasco was a stunner of "Idiots on Board" that make the Gene Pool for brains look thin, things happen fast in dealing with machinery and Construction up or down as we do still suffer very nasty Dramas that sadly cost Human Life but as long as we have people doing "Demo" like in the Video on page 2? of this thread (That cannot Happen in the UK.) the industry will look a Joke. tctractors p.s. Thumbs are starting to catch on slowly in the U.K. so we are Onward and Upwards
In the past I have been involved with High Rise Demo' that due to location was topped down using small excavators and skid steer machines that fed all the rubble down to the ground level via the lift shafts, the ground level of these shafts being floored out with heavy steel plate, Track Shovels like 951's being used to dig out the shaft bottoms, often the floor levels needed Acrow Props placed in vertical lines to add extra support to the floor loadings, these being removed as the downward level progressed so you always had them under the floor you stood on, at about the 4th or 5th floor level larger excavators would smash into the building using the rubble to climb up into the top of the now much lower building and soon reduce these last few levels to something you can step off. To see redundant Bridge decks hacked down and removed off site in super fast time in the U.K. is a not un-common sight, there is plenty of Video footage of this type of work being done showing clearly that someone know's what they are about, this is just Hoisting the Flag on the U.K. tctractors p.s. its the "Flag Pole" that usually needs a Planning Permit not the Flag itself, although an I.S. Flag might be pushing your luck some.