Reminds me of the Rinsdorf-Talbrücke in Germany, which got finished last month.
In order to renovate/rebuild the bridge they first built a new half (full lanes) next to the old bridge, collapsed the old bridge, then built the other half where the external half of the old bridge used to be, and finally moved the previously newly built half to join that latter new half, so that the new bridge can take the place of the old one, all of this while parts of it could still be used for traffic.
It is the kind of "German Engineering" which people used to talk about, but sadly our government didn't feel that this was an opportunity to do some proper PR. The Chinese have become experts at this kind of PR.
If anyone is ever in Shanghai and interested in seeing this, it's in a very cool area called Fengshengli, where you can see these old preserved style warehouse buildings. The area is filled with hip breweries, coffee shops, bike shops, art galleries, and clothing boutiques, and it's actually not that crowded or busy compared to other touristy spots. It's also nicer compared to Xintiandi imo, where it feels more produced and fake, like a reconstruction as opposed to actual heritage buildings.
A few years ago they moved a (historic) train station where I lived. It needed to be moved for some underground tube construction, but also a few meters to make the new buildings fit. I witnessed, it was awesome.
This title is misleading. It makes it seem like the robots did this autonomously, when in reality hundreds if workers were involved. The “robots” were “smart jacks” I would say. Humans couldn’t have done this without hydraulic jacks, they used fancy hydraulic jacks.
I was not really lead to believe they did this autonomously. It seemed to me like either (a) they were doing the lockstep in a pre-programmed way that required timing of the equipment working together or (b) the same but with humans operating the timing. In either case I find the use of robots impressive.
I was expecting to see a few hundred humanoid robots picking up things and moving them. Appreciate the comment here as it informed me and saved from the click and drain of youtube things.
I think it's more the general advancement in the tech. We used to do this by jacking up onto large sets of wheeled trucks or along rails. The many independent "walking" hydraulic jacks walking in unison is the cool part.
We've been moving buildings for 100s of years, its cool to see the advances in it.
That's a nice approach. Here's a similar move back in 2020, again from the SCMP.[1] This one turned a corner.
The robotic part is that all the lifters have load measurement, probably in at least 3 axes, and report stresses to the controller. Other ways of moving big structures require getting big rigid steel beams underneath to make the building strong enough to move. Like these US building moves.[2]
I dont understand this. I always thought houses/buildings have underground supports on which the structure is erected. Doesn't have to be tall towers, all small buildings have underground support too.
How come these buildings don't have any of that? Or is the support in form of metal rods which these structures are freely screwed to?
From the video, it seems like the houses were cut from the original foundation and a huge blocks
of concrete was formed underneath the houses. Before pouring the concrete, they dug under the houses and inserted metal framework for the move, that was likely how they lifted the whole thing to insert the jacks later on. The process of doing this seems way more interesting to me than the final move with these synchronized jacks. I'd love more details about that
Search youtube for "crawl space underpinning" for some videos of a residential process.
I'm sure they're doing something more elaborate there, but in residential you do this underpinning technique if you want to replace or extend your foundation (in my case, putting a basement where there is a crawl space), where you mark the foundation into 2' segments and label them A, B, C. Then you go through and dig/cut out all the "A"s, and pour footings and foundations in place, then repeat for the Bs and Cs. I'm thinking about doing this for my crawl space just to have some more space for storage.
It looks like the building was constructed on a concrete slab foundation. The slab is poured in the ground, but not anchored into it. When it's time to move it, you dig under the slab to put in jacks to raise it off of the ground underneath the slab. These jacks also can move it a bit at a time.
For smaller buildings, you might jack it up, and put wheels under it to move it. For smaller buildings on perimeter foundation, you might unbolt it from the foundation to move it, and attach it to a newly poured foundation at the new location.
Repairing a sinking foundation is similar... Dig under, lift up as needed, fill in under the sinking areas, hopefully with something more stable.
Much taller buildings need deeper anchoring. Small buildings on sites with difficult soil conditions need deeper anchoring too.
And how did they get the robotic legs under there in the first place? Once they're in place the walking is cool, but that seems like the less impressive part.
This, and the few other famous photos and videos of similar operations, confuse me, because it violates my mental model of how buildings work. My mental model is that a modern building has a large, concrete foundation that extends significantly below the ground, and that the foundation is attached to the structural frame of the rest of the above-ground building. Then, how can jacks, whether manual or robotic, raise a building up off of its foundation?
Also, how can they scoot some, but not all, jacks over on any given step, and alternate? I understand that rigidity isn't fully binary, but I figured that buildings were on the more rigid side.
These aren't modern buildings, and they aren't skyscrapers that would need significant foundations. The details of the foundations would still be interesting. I suppose they got the process started by finding or clearing spaces underneath, inserting support beams, and jacking them up.
Hah, people sometimes wonder "This isn't where I parked my car, and it's pointing in a different direction", imagine returning to a building and its pointing a different direction
This is a tremendous engineering, coordination and public works feat.
Using words like "robots" and "AI" shows how much hype has taken over the latter two fields, with actual achievements being modest in comparison to the hype.
Check out the raising of Chicago (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raising_of_Chicago). From buildings up to entire city blocks were raised, moved on rollers, or both, usually while businesses and residents stayed in them for normal day-to-day life.
They also rebuilt much of the city because it was wiped out during the Great Chicago Fire of 1871, and now the grid system is one of the most commonsensical ones in any major American city.
Chicago is an example of a (more or less) clean-slate engineered large city -- one that arose as a result of tragedy (fire) and failure (cholera).
The technology in this video appears to be computer control of the many pistons underneath the raised block. I would estimate that could be done with roughly 1970s-level of technology.
The town of Kiruna in Sweden is currently being relocated because it is sinking into the iron mine that originally led to the founding of the town. Some buildings are being relocated on tracks in a similar way to that Shanghai video.
Structure relocation is 19th century tech, still as fascinating as back then. This was done all over the world, on a much bigger scale than a single block. In some US cities in particular, and in Moscow they moved entire streets like that, with people inside.
It's just expensive and there's no reason to do that unless the city is being actively developed, which Shanghai still is, and older structures are in the way.
I think the real question is whether we can do it today.
e.g. When NYC expanded its subway system for the first time in 50 years in 2017, it cost $2.5 billion per mile. 8-12x more expensive than similar projects in foreign cities.
There might be too much regulation and too much cost and too many meetings and too many contractors and too much political conflict to do many of the feats we did in the 19th and 20th century.
Back in 1991 a church built in the 1500s was moved on rails at Kifissia, Greece. Sure, not the same scale but taking into consideration the time it was built, it was a great achievement
Here is the Kaisersaal in Berlin being moved on air cushions in 1996 [1]. And wasn't a better part of Chicago jacked up building by building some time in the 19th century to make room for a sewage system?
Yes, it has been common enough, no "robots" required. The Indiana Bell Building is a famous one from a century ago, which gets videos posted about it on social media ever so often.
Something similar but different was back in the early 1900s, several city blocks in Seattle were moved or relocated when large chunks of the city were blasted away with water to flatten it. Although most old buildings were simply demolished.
As for your actual question, I'm pretty sure we (US, Europe, humans in general) could do quite a bit more than we do now if we had a reason to do so. (or were 100% sure about the results)
Wikipedia says building were being moved since 19th century. We also had a large-scale building relocation during Stalin's Moscow Reconstruction (basically, destroying beautiful historical houses to expand ancient curvy streets into straight wide roads) - some buildings were moved without cutting water supply, electricity and even with residents inside [1]. This probably was intended to showcase the achievements of Soviet engineering but judging by the comments here (and by English Wikipedia article on the topic) nobody even remembers this.
Personally I think that there should be no new construction in historical areas and there is no need to move anything.
In the first episode of Kyoryū Sentai Jūranger, the inspiration for the first bit of Mighty Morphin Power Rangers, the witch Bandora (Rita Repulsa) appears on Earth riding a flying penny-farthing bicycle, and terrorizes the people by shifting a bunch of Tokyo skyscrapers around to form her palace.
Seeing the time lapse of that whole city block being moved in one lump made me think of that. Very cool.
Reminds me of the Rinsdorf-Talbrücke in Germany, which got finished last month.
In order to renovate/rebuild the bridge they first built a new half (full lanes) next to the old bridge, collapsed the old bridge, then built the other half where the external half of the old bridge used to be, and finally moved the previously newly built half to join that latter new half, so that the new bridge can take the place of the old one, all of this while parts of it could still be used for traffic.
It is the kind of "German Engineering" which people used to talk about, but sadly our government didn't feel that this was an opportunity to do some proper PR. The Chinese have become experts at this kind of PR.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iseMMVEEojk&t=23s
If anyone is ever in Shanghai and interested in seeing this, it's in a very cool area called Fengshengli, where you can see these old preserved style warehouse buildings. The area is filled with hip breweries, coffee shops, bike shops, art galleries, and clothing boutiques, and it's actually not that crowded or busy compared to other touristy spots. It's also nicer compared to Xintiandi imo, where it feels more produced and fake, like a reconstruction as opposed to actual heritage buildings.
Great snapshot of classic Shanghai architecture, blended with new, like this really cool coffee spot: https://www.archdaily.com/973430/birdie-cup-coffee-fog-archi...
A few years ago they moved a (historic) train station where I lived. It needed to be moved for some underground tube construction, but also a few meters to make the new buildings fit. I witnessed, it was awesome.
https://www.e-architect.com/images/jpgs/leipzig/bayerischer_... / https://www.e-architect.com/leipzig/bayerischer-bahnhof-buil...
This title is misleading. It makes it seem like the robots did this autonomously, when in reality hundreds if workers were involved. The “robots” were “smart jacks” I would say. Humans couldn’t have done this without hydraulic jacks, they used fancy hydraulic jacks.
I was not really lead to believe they did this autonomously. It seemed to me like either (a) they were doing the lockstep in a pre-programmed way that required timing of the equipment working together or (b) the same but with humans operating the timing. In either case I find the use of robots impressive.
Calling these robots is like calling a wrench a robot
[dead]
I was expecting to see a few hundred humanoid robots picking up things and moving them. Appreciate the comment here as it informed me and saved from the click and drain of youtube things.
Pretty sure it's been done in the past without "AI".
Earliest example on wikipedia seems to be from 1930:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AT%26T_Building_(Indianapolis)
More here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_relocation
The Indianapolis AT&T building is particularly interesting because it was a telephone exchange AND they did the move while keeping the exchange in operation. https://www.archdaily.com/973183/the-building-that-moved-how...
I don't think they used AI nor claimed to have used AI. The interviewee just said "We monitor abnormal deformation of the buildings in real time."
It is still a very impressive feat of engineering.
Oh, absolutely.
I think it's more the general advancement in the tech. We used to do this by jacking up onto large sets of wheeled trucks or along rails. The many independent "walking" hydraulic jacks walking in unison is the cool part.
We've been moving buildings for 100s of years, its cool to see the advances in it.
That's a nice approach. Here's a similar move back in 2020, again from the SCMP.[1] This one turned a corner.
The robotic part is that all the lifters have load measurement, probably in at least 3 axes, and report stresses to the controller. Other ways of moving big structures require getting big rigid steel beams underneath to make the building strong enough to move. Like these US building moves.[2]
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gwu4ovaSiQY
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htdVWM42mRg
I dont understand this. I always thought houses/buildings have underground supports on which the structure is erected. Doesn't have to be tall towers, all small buildings have underground support too.
How come these buildings don't have any of that? Or is the support in form of metal rods which these structures are freely screwed to?
From the video, it seems like the houses were cut from the original foundation and a huge blocks of concrete was formed underneath the houses. Before pouring the concrete, they dug under the houses and inserted metal framework for the move, that was likely how they lifted the whole thing to insert the jacks later on. The process of doing this seems way more interesting to me than the final move with these synchronized jacks. I'd love more details about that
I wish that they showed that part too, the synchronized robo-jacks are interesting but the first part seems more challenging.
I just walked passed, it seems they cut the foundation and somehow poured a new one underneath? Here are some pics: https://ibb.co/yttQQhJ https://ibb.co/KxbM6cnY
Search youtube for "crawl space underpinning" for some videos of a residential process.
I'm sure they're doing something more elaborate there, but in residential you do this underpinning technique if you want to replace or extend your foundation (in my case, putting a basement where there is a crawl space), where you mark the foundation into 2' segments and label them A, B, C. Then you go through and dig/cut out all the "A"s, and pour footings and foundations in place, then repeat for the Bs and Cs. I'm thinking about doing this for my crawl space just to have some more space for storage.
It looks like the building was constructed on a concrete slab foundation. The slab is poured in the ground, but not anchored into it. When it's time to move it, you dig under the slab to put in jacks to raise it off of the ground underneath the slab. These jacks also can move it a bit at a time.
For smaller buildings, you might jack it up, and put wheels under it to move it. For smaller buildings on perimeter foundation, you might unbolt it from the foundation to move it, and attach it to a newly poured foundation at the new location.
Repairing a sinking foundation is similar... Dig under, lift up as needed, fill in under the sinking areas, hopefully with something more stable.
Much taller buildings need deeper anchoring. Small buildings on sites with difficult soil conditions need deeper anchoring too.
I found this because I had a similar question, I think it might be hard to gauge how much prep work was done from the video.
https://parametric-architecture.com/shanghai-relocates-7500-...
The houses: https://shanghaistreetstories.com/?page_id=1288
And how did they get the robotic legs under there in the first place? Once they're in place the walking is cool, but that seems like the less impressive part.
There's a great video of the Amish doing this by hand: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tc6IT5L3ZSk
This, and the few other famous photos and videos of similar operations, confuse me, because it violates my mental model of how buildings work. My mental model is that a modern building has a large, concrete foundation that extends significantly below the ground, and that the foundation is attached to the structural frame of the rest of the above-ground building. Then, how can jacks, whether manual or robotic, raise a building up off of its foundation?
Also, how can they scoot some, but not all, jacks over on any given step, and alternate? I understand that rigidity isn't fully binary, but I figured that buildings were on the more rigid side.
These aren't modern buildings, and they aren't skyscrapers that would need significant foundations. The details of the foundations would still be interesting. I suppose they got the process started by finding or clearing spaces underneath, inserting support beams, and jacking them up.
Nothing new, a lot of landmark buildings larger than this were moved like this in the 1940s in Warsaw, during post-war reconstructions. 80 years ago.
Changing the view of the Bellevue: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=I52IwcC3a3c&pp=ygUaTW92aW5nIGJ...
I wonder if humanity in the future will make this a typical part of every house so that they can slowly move towards or away from water.
Hah, people sometimes wonder "This isn't where I parked my car, and it's pointing in a different direction", imagine returning to a building and its pointing a different direction
Here is an article that seems to be the primary source for the time-lapses: https://english.shanghai.gov.cn/en-Latest-WhatsNew/20250605/...
This is a tremendous engineering, coordination and public works feat.
Using words like "robots" and "AI" shows how much hype has taken over the latter two fields, with actual achievements being modest in comparison to the hype.
This reminded me of that classic SpongeBob clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iyn-0af_hlI
This is incredible -- serious question -- has anything of this scale been done in the US or Europe? Do we even have the technology?
Check out the raising of Chicago (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raising_of_Chicago). From buildings up to entire city blocks were raised, moved on rollers, or both, usually while businesses and residents stayed in them for normal day-to-day life.
Chicago also reversed the flow of the Chicago River.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_River#Reversing_the_fl...
They also rebuilt much of the city because it was wiped out during the Great Chicago Fire of 1871, and now the grid system is one of the most commonsensical ones in any major American city.
Chicago is an example of a (more or less) clean-slate engineered large city -- one that arose as a result of tragedy (fire) and failure (cholera).
In five days the entire assembly was elevated 4 feet 8 inches
At a constant rate that's approximately 1.3 tenths (3.3um) per second, definitely far below the threshold for people noticing.
In 1930 they moved an entire telephone exchange in Indianapolis without even taking it offline: https://indianahistory.org/blog/instead-of-moving-mountains-...
The technology in this video appears to be computer control of the many pistons underneath the raised block. I would estimate that could be done with roughly 1970s-level of technology.
So the impressive thing is really the social coordination, the project management, which was doubtless challenging but is hardly unique.
It's still kind of a wonderful, imo. And it's awesome to be able to see it on video like this.
The town of Kiruna in Sweden is currently being relocated because it is sinking into the iron mine that originally led to the founding of the town. Some buildings are being relocated on tracks in a similar way to that Shanghai video.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/05/why-a-swedish-...
Structure relocation is 19th century tech, still as fascinating as back then. This was done all over the world, on a much bigger scale than a single block. In some US cities in particular, and in Moscow they moved entire streets like that, with people inside.
It's just expensive and there's no reason to do that unless the city is being actively developed, which Shanghai still is, and older structures are in the way.
I think the real question is whether we can do it today.
e.g. When NYC expanded its subway system for the first time in 50 years in 2017, it cost $2.5 billion per mile. 8-12x more expensive than similar projects in foreign cities.
There might be too much regulation and too much cost and too many meetings and too many contractors and too much political conflict to do many of the feats we did in the 19th and 20th century.
Back in 1991 a church built in the 1500s was moved on rails at Kifissia, Greece. Sure, not the same scale but taking into consideration the time it was built, it was a great achievement
Sorry, could only find reference in Greek language but the pictures and diagrams are universal :) plus translation options are always available https://www.mixanitouxronou.gr/to-ekklisaki-pou-xethemelioth...
Here is the Kaisersaal in Berlin being moved on air cushions in 1996 [1]. And wasn't a better part of Chicago jacked up building by building some time in the 19th century to make room for a sewage system?
[1] https://www.bz-berlin.de/archiv-artikel/hier-schwebt-ein-den...
The Sonic Youth Gig there was awesome ;)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Simbel#Relocation
In the 60s a massive stone monument was moved 200m up in elevation to avoid being flooded by a dam.
Yes, it has been common enough, no "robots" required. The Indiana Bell Building is a famous one from a century ago, which gets videos posted about it on social media ever so often.
Not the same scale but the 4-story concrete building The Museum Hotel in New Zealand was moved on rails in the 1990's https://www.rejigit.co.nz/database/redactor_images/large/689...
Maybe the scale of these other moves were limited by not having the adaptable height jacks to keep everything straight.
Something similar but different was back in the early 1900s, several city blocks in Seattle were moved or relocated when large chunks of the city were blasted away with water to flatten it. Although most old buildings were simply demolished.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regrading_in_Seattle
Moving single buildings is pretty common
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_relocation
not quite the same scale area wise, but interesting nonetheless https://www.archdaily.com/973183/the-building-that-moved-how...
As for your actual question, I'm pretty sure we (US, Europe, humans in general) could do quite a bit more than we do now if we had a reason to do so. (or were 100% sure about the results)
lower tech/scale but in Chile (in the island of Chiloe) they have been doing this for centuries for individual houses: https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/moving-houses-of-chilo... - although no smart jacks, only bulls and people.
In Romania in the 80s, a number of churches were moved to make space for new building projects. https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/dec/14/bucharest-mov...
Wikipedia says building were being moved since 19th century. We also had a large-scale building relocation during Stalin's Moscow Reconstruction (basically, destroying beautiful historical houses to expand ancient curvy streets into straight wide roads) - some buildings were moved without cutting water supply, electricity and even with residents inside [1]. This probably was intended to showcase the achievements of Soviet engineering but judging by the comments here (and by English Wikipedia article on the topic) nobody even remembers this.
Personally I think that there should be no new construction in historical areas and there is no need to move anything.
[1] https://www.mos.ru/en/news/item/13744073/
In the first episode of Kyoryū Sentai Jūranger, the inspiration for the first bit of Mighty Morphin Power Rangers, the witch Bandora (Rita Repulsa) appears on Earth riding a flying penny-farthing bicycle, and terrorizes the people by shifting a bunch of Tokyo skyscrapers around to form her palace.
Seeing the time lapse of that whole city block being moved in one lump made me think of that. Very cool.