C.I.T.A MODERN METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION SERIES - 2020 Cogent Associates
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
C.I.T.A MODERN
METHODS OF
CONSTRUCTION SERIES
2020
Cogent Associates
4 February 2020
AGENDA
• Cogent Associates – Who we
are
• Modern Methods of Central Bank HQ Google HQ
Construction
• Definition
• History
• Latest Developments
• Some comparisons Google, Bolands Mill Shelbourne Hotel
• Decisions Factors For
Developers & Designers
• Conclusion
Adamstown SDZ SIG
INTRODUCTION TO COGENT • Founded in 1999 in Dublin • MBO in Q2 2016 • Currently employ c.50 staff • Construction consultancy services for all types of clients and organisations • Services delivered in Ireland and throughout EMEA
RECENT DCC – 2 D Panelised
EXPERIENCE
• 2 D Panelised D&B for DCC
• Students Accommodation Bathroom
pods Montpellier Hill – Precast and
DCC 2 D Panelised Bathroom pods
Google HQ
• True 3 D Volumetric for Hotel Project
Cardiff Lane-
• Timber Frame Construction (several Techrete and
unitized glazing
housing schemes) facade
• Insulated Concrete Forms (Housing
Scheme)
• Techrete Façade Panels
Cluid Sruthan Google,
Na Saili-Bolands
Killarney
Mill- Shelbourne Hotel
ICF
• Precast Structures
• Traditional Cavity Wall Construction
• In-situ Reinforced Concrete
• Steel and Composite Floors
• Modular 3 D Housing
Cluid Fortfield- Tralee- Timber Aldi – Precast walls
AdamstownFrame
SDZ SIG
Modern Methods of
Construction
In-Situ Reinforced MODERN METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION - DEFINITIONS
concrete 3 D Modular – Volumetric
2 D Panelised
Precast
Steel and Precast Slab
Steel and Composite Floor
ICF
Steel and composite
Twin Wall
floor
In-Situ Reinforced Concrete
In-Situ Post –Tensioned Reinforced Concrete
In-Situ Columns and Beams and Pre-cast Slabs
Timber Frame
Cross Laminated Timber Buildings
Insulated Concrete Form (ICF)
3D Printing
Steel and Precast
3D Volumetric
Precast Twin Wall CLT
NOT SO NEW…
3 D Modular over 100 years old–
The House that Came in the Mail
1908
In-situ reinforced concrete since
1853
Precast Concrete Since 1900’s
Steel and concrete composite since
late 1880’s
Timber frame – Since the beginning
of time
Habitat 67 Montreal
ICF – Evolve from 1940 to 1960
HISTORY from timber based forms to foam
blocks
3D Printing – Only a few years old,
not yet mature, in development
1910 Woolworth
Middle Ages Building - Building
Britany
REST OF THE WORLD
Most countries looking at improving construction methodology and
attempting to replicate a “Fordism” approach with assembly line
productivity and quality
APPEARANCE
Increased Flexibility from previous solutions
MATERIAL TECHNOLOGY
Components available now for example unitised façade panel.
RECENT DESIGN TECHNOLOGY
Modular houses factory -
DEVELOPMENT 3D and BIM Japan
S DESIGN STANDARDISATION
BIM
Regulation
Value
UK – 44 Storey high 101 Singpore – 40 Storey high
George Street Croydon
PROGRAMME COMPARISON FROM GREEN FIELD START ON SITE TO OCCUPATION –
INCLUDES ALL SITE WORKS
Timber Frame: Three scheme completed recently or completing in the next 3 months:
• Redwood Tralee: 17 Houses – 47 weeks – Equates to one house every 14
working days
• Pairceanna na Glas - Dingle: 20 Houses – 54 weeks – Equates to one
house every 14 working days
• Fortfield Tralee: 15 units – 52 weeks – Equates to one house every 17
working days – Irish Water delays
Traditional Cavity Wall – 2 Schemes Housing completed
• Sleaty Street Carlow: 26 units – 58 weeks – Equates to one house every 11
working days
SOME • Friary Walk Callan: 15 Units – 67 weeks – Equates to one house every 22
working days – developer prioritised other works in the development
PROGRAMME
ICF: One Scheme – almost complete
EXAMPLES • Sruthan na Saili – Killarney – 83 units – 78 weeks- Equates to one house
every 5 working days.
Timber Cavity Wall–
Frame– 14-20 10-22 Days
Days
ICF – 5 Days
Decision Factors
Site
Material
Design
s
Perform
Labour
ance
ALL FACTORS ARE
INTERLINKED Decision
Risk Consent
Value Cost
Procure TimeTHE SITE :
Location (historic areas etc.)
Shape,
Orientation,
Adjacent Sites,
Infrastructure
Venacular/Context
LOGISTICS
Opportunity to bring artic trucks
SITE
Cranes and lifting equipment space
Critical to offsite construction
Accessibility – route to the siteMASSING
Set Backs
Balconies
Recesses
Cantilevers
Transfer Structures
GRIDS
Structural Constraints
DESIGN & Slab Span and Wall Height will dictate structural options available
CONSENT PERFORMANCE
Longevity – DOE/DCC looking for 60 years life cycle/ warranties
Flexibility – possible change to design or use
Quality Performance –Factory environment higher quality
Where is it manufactured? BcAR & Certification-
Façade Treatment and Statutory Consent requirements
STATUTORY AUTHORITIES
Perception associated with some solutions – High Rise modular or
timber structure- fire risk, behaviour under fire conditions etc..COST
Capital Cost sensibility– End User- Social& Affordable/ PRS/Hotel/
Build to Sell different priorities (Cost and Density/ etc.)
Operational Cost
Life Cycle Cost
Developer’s cost and time to market – programme
ASSET VALUE
Asset Value- Perceptions- Is higher quality leading to a premium
price, is it recognised as a higher quality product?
PROGRAMME
COST & TIME Solution needs to be identified at concept stage
Is modular faster?
• On site? Yes
• Overall? Potentially not –still needs design time –
Procurement would take longer – overlap between design
and construction not entirely feasible
Other factors can influence the programme more significantly (type
of planning process)
OVERALL – THE COST/PROGRAMME/ PERFORMANCE OPTIMUM
SOLUTION IS PROJECT DEPENDENTPROCUREMENT:
Some solutions require part or full Design and Build
contracts
Direct to manufacturers or through a Main Contractor?
• Site works capability
Competition (In Ireland approximately 8-9 firms currently
offering 3D volumetric or a mixture of 2D and 3D
solution)
PROCUREMENT Usually leads to a 2 Stage Tender
& RISK Will the resources and materials be available at
reasonable prices
RISK TRANSFER
If D&B- Risk transfer- Risk premium-
more information for tender is better
Main factors should be defined (Statutory consent etc.)
If Employer’s Design or part design – Some Risk
remains with employer.Other Factors for Off Site
ConstructionWORKPLACE CONSIDERATIONS
Factory Vs Site- Accommodation – Opportunity
Transport
Shift work possible
TRADES & WORKFORCE CONSIDERATIONS
WORKING Consistent work
ENVIRONMENT & Local Community Employment
WORKPLACE Factory specific labour
CONSIDERATION Ethics and corporate governance
SHEALTH & SAFETY
Better controlled in Factory setting
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
Carbon Footprint – Holistic approach needed including trades travel
to their place of work.
Reduce Waste
HEALTH AND Less Temporary Infrastructure
SAFETY & Where is it manufactured should be taken into consideration
ENVIRONMENTMATERIALS
Local Availability of material
• Brick
• Concrete
• Timber
CERTIFICATION
Ancillary Certificates
Insurances & Warranties
MATERIALS,
CERTIFICATION ROBOTICS
AND ROBOTICS Factory process offers the opportunity for increased use of roboticsConclusion
CHOSING THE RIGHT SOLUTION
No one-size fits all solution.
Case by Case – location and project scope.
OFF SITE MANUFACTURING
Embracing of Standardisation
• efficiencies,
• higher quality and
• decreased costs
Increase R&D around the world on developing solutions
Increase opportunity for BIM/3D modeling, integrated 3D models to
CONCLUSION to be used for factory bespoke production (i.e. each building is
unique but can be made of a set of individual standard components
assembled in a unique way in the factory and brought to site)
Raw Materials Available DomesticallyTHANK YOU
RICS Sept 2018 report 99percentinvisible.org The house that came in the post Huf Haus german modular manufactuer https://mhi.ie/ McKinsey & Company Report Modular Construction Autodesk Robotics in Construction
You can also read
