INK MON LINK HOMES
RYAN
ryan moninger
INGER
LINKhomes RYAN MONINGER
Master of Architecture - 2015 Ball State Universty College of Architecture and Planning Major Advisor: Timothy Gray Minor Advisor: James Jones
LINKhomes
acknowledgements
I would like to thank the following people. Their level of time and support contributed to the level of success of project. The professionals in the prefabrication industry who were generous with their time and advice My advisors, who were incredible in sharing their knowledge and guiding me toward a thorough thesis My incredible parents, who taught me how to work hard. Kyle, as we journeyed together towards our master’s degrees. His brotherhood is unparalleled And finally, my beautiful wife. Our Skype dinners, morning phone calls and busy weekends of wedding planning and house hunting are an irreplaceable part of this thesis. Without her unconditional love and support, this project would not have been a success. She was always their for me and will continue to be so.
contents abstract 8 final project proposal 10 methodologies 14 case studies 16 design and deployment 46 testing sites 58 literature review 76 references 81 Ryan Moninger Major Advisor: Timothy Gray Minor Advisor: Jim Jones
“Housing should be seen as a process, not as a product” -Balkrishna Doshi
TEXT abstract The innovation of technology is transforming the way modern society functions and interacts. This innovation includes the design, production and delivery methods of automotive, aerospace, and building industries. These industries have transformed production methods to be leaner, more time and material efficient, and more cost-effective. Such transformations offer potential for greater design freedom and capability. However, innovation is never finished. Much more progress could be made in the building industry’s means and method of production to match its counterpart industries and much could be learned from them and applied to the building industry. /8/
The process of innovation in the building industry is evolutionary, not revolutionary. Solutions to problems can be actualized through referencing other industries and through implementation through experimentation. The project begins as an immersive study of the existing and trending means and methods that are currently being used within the building industry, particularly in residential mass production. The foundational information is then manifested in an innovative housing company, Link Homes. The goal of Link Homes is to innovate the design and delivery methods of housing in a way that
empowers the individual while addressing macro issues culture and infrastructure. The company focuses on empowering the individual, mass customization within the parameters of site and context, efficient use of space, densification and utilizing existing infrastructure. The summation of these strategies is intended to produce, not simply a better product, but a better process of design and delivery. By engaging new integration tools, manufacturing techniques, and professional design knowledge into the market of mass produced residential homes, Link Homes strive to elevate the house from ordinary to innovative.
/9/
final project proposal The objective of this project is to help change the perception and design intentions of home owners and builders toward prefabrication means and methods. I believe that the methods of offsite production and the quality, cost, and time savings that can come with such methods should not be limited to a select market or select style, but eventually simply be the way design and building is done. I hope that this investigation of current and innovative design and construction in the building industry will be able to communicate the potential in prefabrication and be a source of information to educate a general audience. As some forms of prefabrication have entered into the conventions of the building and design industry, the discussion about prefab architecture can be seen as either premature or delayed. For many, the thought of prefabricated architecture conjures images of trailer parks and all of the socioeconomic issues contained within this subculture. Others associate prefabrication with a style, whether they think it is a sleek modern Dwell Magazine house or a house /10/
that has a “modular look�. However, prefabrication is not a style or even a product; it is a process of fundamental concepts of standardization, systemization, and material and technical innovation all in support of social progress. Prefabrication as a business model and design method simply makes sense in light of modern economics, modern technology, and modern industries that are already utilizing such methods. In looking at several case studies, both current and historical, which have strived to mass produce a standard house for the mass market, there has been a vast array of concepts that strive to be the solution. Several points were identified through these case studies.
The first point, and the root of all other points, is that implementing prefabrication is not only a design or technological innovation; it is a cultural innovation. The fact that various prefabrication methods are labeled under different names such as modular home, manufactured home, panelized home, controlled environmental construction (cec), and even terms like ready to move (rtm) shows a general reluctance to even use the name Prefab. A change in the cultural perception is needed in order to develop prefabrication and that change starts with education, discussion, and examples of the potential of prefabrication. That is my intent for this project. Secondly, many prototypical designs are dependent upon the assumption that the industrialized housing industry in the U.S. will radically transform itself. Transformation is happening and will continue. 63% of all housing is panelized, manufactured homes, or modular. However, housing in America will not transform overnight, and
designs that are dependent upon radical style, a complete rethinking of the materials and the standard labor practices used today are more likely to remain marginal. Home building is a conservative industry, based on a clear proďŹ t motive. With this in mind, it is imperative to think in evolutionary terms not revolutionary terms. A third potential basis for a lack of acceptance of the prefabrication is perceived lack of customization. This perception is both correct and incorrect. Prefabrication does not function very well within the realm of
pure customization as some of its benefits stem from a control of material and speed of production, both of which come from a standardized mode of production involving the potential for repetition and familiarity. However comparison and transfer of innovation from the automotive industry can produce a potential for mass-customization in the housing industry. In manufacturing industries , there exists two levels of mass-customization. The delivery level, which is at the consumer level is customizable paint color, wheels, interior features, etc. This level of customization enables control for the consumer. The other level of customization is the production-level customization which increases repetition and simplifies the production of the car and benefits the producer. Car companies have created standard components of the car that could be translated to various models. In this way, they were able to reduce the number of different chassis, engines, suspensions and such to a minimal number of variations and at the same time, provide adequate selection of products. It
is through the variation of the various other components of the car as well as the combination of the foundational components that leads to this mass-customization and uniqueness of each vehicle. Both types of customization, productionlevel and delivery-level, are of interest to this project. These two different mass-customization concepts can be used in concept /11/
to develop a project from its inception as a system to the tailoring of that system to the individual design problem. Similar concepts could be applied to the prefabrication of houses without signiďŹ cant technological change. With these three points in mind, the project proposes a design system that can be have cultural value in the American house market, work within the standard methods of prefabrication instead of inventing a new method, and offer mass customization. The starting point is a the formation of LINK Homes, a mass production, mass customizable housing company, implementing the proposed design system. LINK Homes are meant to exemplify a new design system that addresses site specificity and mass customization. The business model of LINK Homes is one that could empower the individual and allow for adaptation and expansion over time. Therefore, the model of LINK Homes could become a sustainable model of development for residential solutions. Environmental strategy is key for a longterm affordability for the owner. Focus is made on initial investment of the house, particularly the skin, to maintain affordability throughout the building life. /12/
Mass-customization is essential for the system to be implemented on different sites, and accommodate different needs and styles. The intention is to develop a design system of options and accessories that serve as typologies for different contextual requirements. Considering this, the project uses mass-customization as a design and organizational strategy while avoiding development outside the commonly accepted production standards.
Defiance, Ohio will serve as a test market to deploy the design system, attempting to address issues of urban densification, unconventional infill, site specificity, and simple environment strategies within the chosen testing sites.
3 bedroom
2 bedroom
1 bedroom
Accessory Dwelling Unit
LINKhomes /13/
methodologies In developing this proposal, it was critical to begin by examining the current methods of prefabrication, both radical and conventional and see the type of product that is being offered. It was also important was to understand the marketing, branding, and business strategies that prefabrication builders and designers are employing. The concept of prefabrication is not new. History is filled with the rising and falling prefabrication concepts that either enjoyed success for limited market, a limited period or were never realized. However, in researching and understanding what hasn’t worked, it can help us to attain what will work. Thus it was imperative to understand the history of prefabrication, not so much the technical process but the cultural effects, especially in the American housing market. I interviewed prefabrication builders and toured modular manufacturing facilities in an effort to understand some of the challenges and benefits within the industry and /14/
their particular markets. These interviews and tours focused on the technical process of manufacturing, the business organization and economics of production, and what they felt the public perception was toward prefabricated houses. No matter how lean production methods are or how economical and organized the company is, if there isn’t a market for the product, there isn’t a process. I not only looked at the companies themselves and their means and methods of production but also the product itself. I analysed a series of case studies and compiled the data to help formulate my proposal. These case studies were diverse in typology, context, and material. Some case studies were very conventional in means and methods of construction as well as style, while others were radical in both construction technology and style. Still others fell somewhere in the middle of the extremes. This gave me the opportunity to evaluate as many strategies as possible and understand
their potentials how such strategies could approach issues typical in a Midwest town like Defiance, Ohio. In looking at the various case studies and the discussions with professionals about the quality of prefabrication and the cultural perception, I wanted to synthesize various aspects ideas into a design system that produces customizable, adaptable housing for the market of Defiance, Ohio.
/15/
TEXT TEXT
case studies
/16/
TEXT
/17/
Indy MOD Homes While some of my research was dedicated on the broad or cutting edge trends in Japan or California, I also felt it important to focus on this region’s ability and use of prefabrication. The Midwest is culturally different than Japan, the West coast, or the East coast. While certain means and methods, and the product that results, may be culturally accepted in Japan, it may not be in Indiana or Ohio. That is what led me to interview Ursula David, an award winning home builder based in Indianapolis. Though the means and methods of design and production for this case study are not technically radical, the social agenda, modern design, and the organization structure of the process is innovative for this region. PROJECT OVERVIEW Ursula David was intrigued with Dwell magazine and felt that prefabrication made sense. During the recession in 2008, her work became slow and she felt it was a good time to research into prefab. She recognized that because of northern Indiana already being experienced in prefabrication of RVs, boats, and other large complex products, she felt that Indiana could be a prime area for prefabricated homes. She began calling modular home building manufacturers in the area. Most were uninterested in doing something custom and non-traditional, but she found High Tech Housing in Bristol, Indiana who was open to working with her. She began a development called Indy MOD Homes, located on East 10th Street /18/
in Indianapolis. The goal is a series of prefabricated, high quality, custom and contemporary designed houses. Two Indy MOD Homes are completed and another will be built early 2015. MEANS, METHODS + MATERIALITY Axis Architects worked with Ursula to design the Indy MOD Homes. However, once the plans were finalized, they were sent to High Tech Housing. There, an on staff engineer generates shop drawings for fabrication.
Figure 9 - Image of modular unit being set
Figure 10 - Image of roof modular unit being set
The methods used for the Indy MOD Home are standard methods that most modular manufacturers use. The walls are constructed of 2 x 6 studs, they are built from the inside-out to expedite schedule, and the roofs are separate modules from the Figure 11 - Image of interior of modular unit once set Figure 12 -opposite page - Image of IndyMOD home entrance
TEXT
/19/
room modules. The modules had to be no more than 15’-9” wide, due to transportation regulations. The lengths vary upon the program. The house is transported to the site by High Tech Housing in 5 modules, including the roof components. High Tech Housing also supplies their own setting crew, however a crane must be subcontracted through Ursula. The Modules are place on top of the basement foundation and the exterior cladding is installed. At the seams of each module, the drywall seam needs to be finished. Luan board is installed behind drywall to ensure the drywall isn’t damaged during transportation. Ursula also chose to install flooring material after the house was onsite. This offered her more customized options and materials than what High Tech Housing offered. I asked Ursula what the greatest benefits for her as builder were during the process. She said time, money, and stress that is eliminated by integrating the building process and schedule is the greatest value for her. Also she said there is considerable savings in construction loan interest. In a typical home construction job that lasts 6 months, draws are made from the construction loan while interest is accruing. Due to the short construction time for the Indy MOD Home, construction interest was only around $600. /20/
Figure 13 - Image of IndyMOD back of home
Figure 13 - Image of IndyMOD home entrance
Figure 14 - Collage of IndyMOD materials and finishes
I asked Ursula what her experience was with the cultural perception of prefabrication in Indiana. She says it is still an uphill battle. The fact that she launched Indy Mod 2 years ago and has only sold 2 houses is a testament to that battle, she says. She told a story of a potential home buyer loved the design, look, and layout of the home but asked if it could be built on-site. Despite the
perception, there has been great interest in the project. She has received much press and media coverage from the development and there is growing interest. The building industry is evolutionary, not revolutionary, and that includes public perception of building industry means and methods. Indy MOD is a positive step in the evolution of that perception.
COST The final prices for each house was around $400,000 for an 1800 sf house with an unfinished basement of about 1000 sf. This equals around $222 per square foot of finished space or $111 per square foot including the basement.
/21/
All American Home Case Study COMPANY OVERVIEW In the continuation of research aimed at studying the local means and methods of the Midwest, I toured a manufacturing facility of All American Homes in Decatur, Indiana. All American Homes markets very traditional white picket fence house at an affordable house. They offer a standard catalog of MTS houses, which is the fastest timeline for clients. They offer the ability to customize one their models as well as fabricating a complete custom house. MEANS, METHODS + MATERIALITY As I pulled up into the parking lot of All American Homes for my tour, it was pouring rain. I was incited by the contrast of the rainy day, traditionally a “no work day” for construction, as I stepped into the clean, dry, and productive manufacturing facility. Tom Kimmel, the regional sales manager, was my tour guide. My tour began at the beginning of the assembly line, which is essentially three small assembly lines where the truss, wall, and flooring components are assembled. These components are fabricated by CNC saws and hydraulic presses and jigs. The 2 x 6 wall framing is /22/
laid out on a hydraulic jig that hold each stud 16” on center. The jig then compresses the members together while they are nailed and adhesives are applied. The compression jig ensures a high quality join and high accuracy of dimensions. The floor joist system assembly is very similar. It sits on a jig and compression is used while the joists are glued and nailed to the double band joist. The jig can also adjust the square of the floor module through the use of hydraulic compression, ensuring the highest accuracy. Ceiling drywall is adhered with foam adhesives, which is stronger and also minimizes screw or nail holes that need to be finished. The strategy is to minimize as many seams in the factory and focus on the main module seams. The floor modules are craned over to the main assembly line, followed by the wall panels and then the folded truss components. As the module moves down the line, the plumbing, electrical, and all the other interior finishes are done. Each trade is executed systematically, without any clash of other trades. The standard exterior cladding for an All American Home is vinyl siding, which is installed on the long sides of the
Figure 15 - Image of interior of modular unit under construction
Figure 16 - Image of multiple tradesmen working simultaneously
Figure 17 - Image of modular units in the main assembly line Figure 18 -opposite page - Image of finished modular home
TEXT
/23/
modules except for the last bottom row. This is because the last row extends below the sill plate and will be installed once the house is set. The process of the facility is not radically innovative; a majority of the construction, craning, and assembling is all manually done. Little automation is used. Besides the hydraulic jigs and cranes, which were not automated, the construction techniques are similar to a traditional construction site. However, it was in the organization of the activities that make it innovative. The All American Home material systems are very conventional too. All wooden stud walls, vinyl siding, architectural shingles are very conventional in the American home vernacular. SIPs, steel frames, or metal cladding are not found in the material palette. The facility believes and practices sustainability, in an evolutionary, not revolutionary, way. All American Home recycles all wood scrap and it is burned for heat and sawdust is collected and made available to farmers as livestock bedding. I was a bit surprised to learn that the design process is all done in AutoCAD as 2D line drawings rather than Building Information Modeling. BIM would stream line much of the process, supplychain organization, and customizing of the houses. /24/
I asked Kimmel what his experience was with the cultural perception of prefabrication. He was very positive and felt that the public perception is much more open to it now than 20 years ago. Part of this open reception to prefabrication in the wider culture may have to do with the traditional white picket fence house that All American
Homes produces. Whereas the IndyMOD project not only markets a new process of building but also a new and particular contemporary style.
Figure 19 - Image of modular units being set
Figure 20 - Image of the production floor
COST Kimmel, said the cost of an All American Home is generally less than a comparable on-site new build, yet are of far greater quality. Kimmel stated that the greatest cost savings All American Homes have is the labor structure. The assembly line and process is optimized to be very efficient, repetitive, and highly productive. The goal is to decrease the potential for delays and keep tasks as simple as possible at the factory level. For example, the wall framer takes the lumber, drywall, insulation and such and assembles them into a wall that will be inserted into the module. However, the framer did not decide how the wall is to be fashioned or even where to place each individual stud. This is determined in
advance by the design system employed by All American Homes. In essence, the system of production attempts to limit the need for problem solving by the worker. One could determine that the workers in the factory begin to be defined as a tool of the factory and designer. The potential negative consequence of this determination is the reduction of an autonomous individual manifested in the factory worker to the status of functional entity. This is unfortunate, but necessary within the goals of prefabrication and mass customization, especially in this case where automation is limited. Kimmel said that even daily mobilization is optimized so each trade can begin productive work as soon as possible in the morn-
Figure 21 - Image of multiple tradesmen working simultaneously
ing. Kimmel said, “They don’t have to put all their tools back in the job box, wrap up their extension cables every day. They don’t have to cover up any unfinished work with tarps in case it rains overnight.” (Kimmel, 2014). Another important cost saving technique that All American Home is able to use is high volume supplies. All American Homes have standard building products such as Anderson Windows and Merrillat Cabinets which are used in all 9 manufacturing facilities for all houses they build, unless requested otherwise by the owner. By procuring such high volumes from one supplier, All American Homes is able to procure products at a lower price point and then pass that savings along to the client. /25/
Watkinson School: Center for Science and Global Citizenship COMPANY OVERVIEW
Project Frog is a company focused on sustainable, high quality, yet affordable architecture. PF does not only focus on design, but also product development, manufacturing, and marketing. PF is a dealer, partnering with providers to manufacture semi customizable kits for onsite erection. PF does not manufacture its products, but has factory partners that work in an integrated fashion to better the product progressively. These factory partners may produce various components of the system and PF acts as the dealer, organizing the product, working with the client to deliver the project in quality, on time, and on budget. PF uses a three-tier manufacturer model of raw material, manufacture, and fabrication to manage their commodities. Their model is not unlike the automobile or aerospace industry which uses an outsourcing model to procure elements concurrently from many providers into a whole. The structure and infill system of PF is geared towards a mass—customized model because the base frame and modules are /26/
established; however, clients may customize the module relationships to one another and the materials within the infill panels. This variation of multiple relationships within the set systems allows for a great deal of flexibility without added cost for PF. Their focus has primarily been on education spaces, however, they plan to develop their kit of parts for the medical and retail markets as well.
Figure 22 - Image of finished Watkinson School project
PROJECT OVERVIEW
The Watkinson School addition is an example of the success of Project Frog’s business model, means and method of deliver and production, as well as good design. The Watkinson School addition was New England’s first energy neutral school. It is currently using 70% less energy than traditionally designed New England Schools. It was a 3,500 sf. Fast track facility. Achieving energy neutrality was the primary goal for the owner, believing that the building would serve as a model of innovation, as well as provide lifecycle cost savings. However, the owner was also looking for an innova-
Figure 23 - Image of interior of Watkinson School project
Figure 24 - Image of steel frame construction for Watkinson School project Figure 25 -opposite page - Image of finished Watkinson School project
TEXT
/27/
Watkinson School: Center for Science and Global Citizenship Figure 26 - Image of library of pre-designed components generated in SolidWorks
tive company with an innovative approach. Project Frog met all the criteria. FEATURES
The design of Watkinson School’s addition is a set elements that can conceptually be added or removed. The main space consists of a central high volume, which is called the spine, and wings that are placed on both sides of the spine. In Watkinson’s case the spine is three high-performance classrooms and the wings are administrative offices and two restrooms. The Watkinson School project was developed using SolidWorks, a manufacturing engineering software. Project Frog has developed a library of assembly components in SolidWorks that make up the kit for each project. This library of parts contains intelligent information that can be extracted for direct fabrication.
and supply chain. For example, their system has received California DSA precertification allowing for over-the—counter permits based on site planning. The system has been tested for speed of manufacture, delivery, and onsite assembly to as little as six weeks total onsite installation time. Inspections by the local jurisdiction occur primarily in the factory to expedite site inspection requirements. Like all PF projects, Watkinson School is not a modular system but a componentized
MEANS, METHODS + MATERIALITY
PF method continues to strive for greater efficiencies in the design process, working to flatten the complete process of workflow /28/
Figure 27 - Diagram showing the component process used by Project Frog
system of structural framing and infill panels. The componentized design allowed for a greater degree of customization by Watkinson School. Watkinson School used a finished structural steel frame powdercoated in the factory. Infill panels were prefinished as well with gypsum wallboard that was taped and sanded in the factory and painted in the field. Restrooms were not pre-plumbed, but electrical was installed in
Figure 29 - Diagram showing the component process used by Project Frog
the panels before installation onsite. The Watkinson School addition was oriented to allow for daylighting and clerestory windows maximize this strategy. The building envelope was optimized to reduce solar heat gain and thermal loss. The resulting envelope is an R-19 wall, R-33 roofs, low-e glazing and a cool membrane roof as well as a 14 kW rooftop solar array. The building envelope was designed for passive heating,
cooling, ventilation, and daylighting, but for times when active heating or cooling is required, the building features a ground source heat pump composed of three 400 foot geo-well. COST
Project Frog’s high performance solution for Watkinson School was 1/5th of the traditional school building estimate of $10 million through another architect. This comes out to about $571 per square foot. Figure 28 - Diagram comparing traditional systems to Project Frog’s systems
/29/
The Cantilever House PROJECT OVERVIEW The Cantilever House, by Anderson & Anderson Architects, is located in Granite Falls, Washington and is around 2,800 square feet. It is set uniquely on a rock and cantilevers 30 ft. out beyond its concrete foundation. It is certainly an exceptionally individual site yet the modular system that Anderson & Anderson used was a universal modular frame system that could be deploy on virtually any site. The small building foundation reduces the cost of this expensive construction work and allows the points of attachment to adapt to varying slope and soil conditions with minimal disruption of the natural topography. MEANS, METHODS + MATERIAL The project is innovative in its material system because it incorporates a combination of prefabrication methods to build a low-cost, high-quality, site and program adaptable building system. By combining multiple prefab systems, Cantilever House takes advantage of the best qualities of /30/
each system and overcomes the limitations associated with using any single system on its own. The Cantilever House uses an independent structural steel frame combined with SIPs panels for wall, floor, and roof systems. The Steel frame is 14’ x 86’ x 22’. It rests on a 14-by-31-foot concrete foundation bolted to an existing rock. The reliance on structural steel as a primary frame allows great flexibility in the relationship of the building to the site and its foundation, as well as in the configuration of the building enclosure relative to the frame. No exterior or interior load bearing walls are needed in the house. This allows for complete customization in window, door, and wall placement within the system.
Figure 30 - Image of steel frame set on foundation
The uses of SIPs offer high insulation values and the structural integrity of the floor panels make spanning beyond frame possible, allowing for customizable building widths without modifying frame. The capability to use the same system for roof, walls, and floor provides for simplification in ordering Figure 31 - Image of SIPs installed over steel frame Figure 32 -opposite page - Image of finished Cantilever House
TEXT
/31/
Figure 33 - Diagram showing relationship of steel frame to house
materials as well as in design and construction process, providing economies of scale and reduced coordination. “The system is designed to accommodate an array of plug-in auxiliary items such as exterior decks and stairs, Window boxes, sunscreens, daylighting shelves, and solar water heating or electrical generation panels. The intention is to have a basic building structure that allows for extensive customization over time, attaching accessory elements from many manufacturers without the need for custom attachment systems or costly modifications to the primary structure.” (Anderson & Anderson, 2007, p. 117) The concept the Cantilever House, creating site specific architecture through standard materials and systems, is a crucial factor in the success of prefab, especially cultural success. People today want specificity and affordability. The means and methods of using a compound material and structural system, enables the utilization of common /32/
off-the-shelf products available from multiple manufacturers. “By creatively merging a small number of manufactured systems into one compound system, there is reduced need to undertake the costly design of an entirely new system. Because the system components are adapted from readily available, multiple-manufacturer products, the buildings can tap into the economies of large scale that result from the research and production capacities of large manufacturers.” (Anderson & Anderson, 2007, p. 114). COST “We were hoping to get this place built for $150,000 to $200,000,” the owner says. “But that just didn’t happen. It came out to be much more. There are still so many unknowns and unforeseen difficulties that can occur (Wagner, 2009). The final cost of the Cantilever house is not reported. The steel frame was a large portion of the budget for the house, at $66,000. Figure 34 - Image of finished interior with exposed steel frame
/33/
Figure 36 - Image of second story module being set
The ecoMOD Project PROJECT OVERVIEW EcoMOD is a research and educational project at the University of Virginia. It was founded and directed by John Quale. EcoMOD strives to create modular housing units that are sustainable, affordable, and high-quality. What sets ecoMOD apart from other case studies is its focus on affordability while remaining within the conventions of today’s prefabrication methods. EcoMOD is a balance between visionary and practical, which is crucial mass adoption. EcoMOD challenges conventional “siteless” prefab and strives for innovative site specific designs. EcoMOD operates as a Design, Build, Evaluate System so the program and the projects continually improve by learning from the previous projects. MEANS + METHODS + MATERIAL EcoMOD argues that conventional prefabricated homes are sited without any consideration of solar or wind orientation, or local hydrology. The buildings themselves are aggressively siteless, seemingly adaptable to any environment, yet entirely separate from their surroundings. In contrast, the intent of the ecoMOD designs is to create site-specific homes. By considering site, /34/
ecoMOD homes iuse passive sustainable strategies such as use natural lighting and ventilation. Sustainability is key in every project such as using of nonhazardous materials, renewable energy, and energy-efficient systems. EcoMOD recognizes a need to critically examine potential impacts of sustainable decisions. An example is in their material selection. While some materials have negative environmental impacts in their production, over the life of the building, the environmental savings will more than make up for the damage. The methods of prefabrication used for ecoMOD projects vary from project to project. The methods are tested and evaluated after each project to understand its potential and ask how it could be innovatively improved. An example is using SIPs verses fabricated
Figure 35 - Image of module and student during construction
metal panels or traditional wood stud construction. Then evaluation is done to determine what were the benefits by using that particular method? What immediate or long-term cost savings were benefited from the method? COST Affordability is a priority in every EcoMOD project. EcoMOD main strategy for affordable housing is through design, not necessarily process. The goal is to create affordability through quality therefore reducing the overall operating costs. Such strategies are maximizing insulation and minimizing air infiltration coupled with energy efficient equipment and appliances. Furthermore, the use of passive heating, ventilation, and daylighting design strategies that allow the building to function without mechanical equipment is crucial. It is an inherent belief within every ecoMOD project that the sustainability and affordability are directly linked to one another.
Figure 37 -opposite page - Image of a finished EcoMOD
TEXT
/35/
The Alley Flat Initiative PROJECT OVERVIEW The Alley Flat Initiative is a movement in Austin, Texas that proposes a new sustainable, green affordable housing alternative for Austin. The Alley Flat Initiative views alleys as a solution to Austin’s lack of affordable housing. “Alley Flats” are small, detached residential units, accessed from Austin’s extensive network of underutilized alleyways. These Alley Flats are highly sustainable and are marketed for residents who earn 80 percent or less of the median family income. The Alley Flat Initiative is a collaboration between the University of Texas Center for Sustainable Development, the Guadalupe Neighborhood Development Corporation, the Austin Community Design and Development Center, and the BaSic Initiative. MEANS + METHODS + MATERIAL According to a report produced in 2008 09 by BBC Research & Consulting, Austin has an affordable housing shortage of close to 40,000 homes. AFI addresses this issue and increases urban density by creating affordable single-family housing in the middle of town, where residents have a quicker and lower-emission commute to work. Building /36/
more densely in the urban core also makes use of existing water, sewer and power lines, as well as roads and sidewalks. AFI is sustainable. With highly insulated walls, efficient air conditioning and passive cross-ventilation, alley flats reduce electricity use, which also saves residents money.
property values. The issue that could arise is that after retrofitting the alleys to be more attractive and environmentally sustainable, the residents who are helping save resources are overly burdened by the increased city and county taxes.
Secondary units in general promote a healthier economic ecosystem. While, in many cases, the main house will be owneroccupied, the backyard cottages will be inhabited by someone who needs inexpensive housing. This mix of income levels makes cities more vibrant COST The long-term goal of the AFI is to create a flexible and self-perpetuating delivery system for sustainable and affordable housing in Austin. This “delivery system” would include not only efficient housing designs, constructed with sustainable technologies, but also innovative methods of financing and home ownership that benefit all neighborhoods of Austin. A side effect of improving the alleys is rising
Figure 38 - Typical site plan for Alley Flat and existing home Figure 39 -opposite page - Image of a finished Alley Flat
TEXT
/37/
The Modern Modular PROJECT OVERVIEW New York City based architecture firm, Resolution: 4 Architecture, has developed a typology of housing modules the firm calls the Modern Modular. Rather than invent a new manufacturing process Res 4 chose to focus on design within the modular industry. The Modern Modular was conceived as a study in how modern home design can be transformed to take advantage of the economic, environmental, and structural benefits of standard, proven modular construction techniques. Res 4 focuses on implementing factory assembly-derived construction techniques into modern design. The Modern Modular design takes advantage of the possibilities of prefabrication and modular construction. Through a keen understanding of the central role that the American house plays in daily life, Modern Modular seeks to allow the home building industry to meet the needs and desires of homeowners of the 21st century. /38/
MEANS + METHODS + MATERIAL Modern Modular homes are designed with a focus on creating a wide range of living solutions capable of being adapted to meet the varying needs of a broad and diverse audience. Res 4 conducted extensive research and design to innovate the Modern Modular. Their typology provides a full line of houses to fit different uses, be it a solitary residence, weekend home, or fullfamily house. Through a focus on modular living units, houses are fully customizable to meet functional requirements of different locations and climates, and the specific needs of different households. Homes are easily expandable and transformed, allowing Modern Modular homes to grow and adapt to its residents. 80% of every Modern Modular is completed in a factory setting. Modern Modular houses are created customized for the individual based on a production line of modular units. Predefined typologies are formed from a series of standard modules, minimizing
cost of production and maximizing possible combinations available for the consumer. Using a similar customizable system that is available in purchasing personal computers,
Figure 40 - Image of module being set on foundation Figure 41 -opposite page - Image of a finished Modern Modular Home
TEXT
/39/
Modern Modular transforms the traditional relationship between architect and client in home construction. Homebuyers have limitless options of customization based on the predetermined line of homes, and additions to these standard types. The features of the Modern Modular are customizable but most focus on the kitchen as command center, and the kitchen/bath as a core volume. The house is used as a threshold to connect the exterior to the interior, and abundance of natural light is common. The Modern Modular seeks a clarity of public versus private space and believes in sustainable features such as high-efficiency HVAC systems, high-performance windows, and low-flow fixtures.
Figure 43 - Image of finished interior
/40/
Figure 42 - Image of finished interior
The SIngle Wide Series “By becoming intimately involved with not only the design, but also the production of homes that are attainable by a larger segment of the population than has typically been able to employ an architect, we can have a much greater impact on our built environment and the role of our profession in shaping it.�
The Standard Bar
Figure 44 - Diagram of the customization of unit typologies
The 2 Story Bar
The Lifted Bar
Here is an example of a series of iterative design typologies of the Modern Module. Res 4 claims there are an unlimited way of customizing the Modules.
/41/
Sekisui Heim Figure 45 - Diagram of the Sekisui Steel Unit
COMPANY OVERVIEW The innovation of the building industry in America is evolutionary, not revolutionary. Progress is made by pushing the limits of today’s means and methods simply one step farther, not ten steps. This does not nullify investigations and research of means and methods that, to American building industry, seem radical. Rather, through such investigations, we are able to better understand the potential of innovations, and direct us in how to achieve that potential. This belief led my research to Sekisui Heim. Sekisui Housing Company is a Japanese housing manufacturing company under the umbrella corporation of Sekisui Chemical and it is Japan’s leading homebuilder. Sekisui produces and sells over 13,000 homes each year (Furuse & Katano, 2006). However, housing is only part of this vast company that is changing Japan’s building industry for good. Sekisui develops and manufactures high performance plastic products, urban infrastructure and envi/42/
ronmental products, prefabricated building components and houses. Within the housing company, they not only produce and sell new houses, but they also sell real estate, and offer refurbishing services. MEANS + METHODS Sekisui’s housing products and the process in which they are manufactured is unprecedented in the building industry. The company has reached a level of automation, quality, environmental sustainability, and efficiency that is parallel to the automotive industry’s process. Sekisui holds the world record for the most solar powered houses built, totaling over 100,000 PV new homes between 1997 and 2011. That is a staggering amount compared to #1 solar building in America, Lennar, totaling 2,000 homes since 2006 (Movellan, 2013).
Figure 46 - Image of Unit being set on foundation
The Sekisui Heim houses are made from factory produced steel frame modules called “Units” which can be mass customizable. All Units that compose a house are Figure 47 -opposite page - Image of a finished Sekisui Home
TEXT
/043/
unique and have different parts in different combinations. Each house consists of about 30,000 parts out of about 300,000 catalog parts. Once the house design is finalized in a virtual setting, it is fractured down into groups of assembly parts that contain codes for assembly, production, and sequencing (Furuse & Katano, 2006). The coding system is quite similar to the coding system of automotive assembly.
houses (Movellan, 2013). Sekisui produces about 80% of the house in factories and implements practices such as fractional recovery, simple packing, turning cardboard boxes into containers and the shared use of members, This also means that they avoid any wastage of revenue from customers living in Heim Homes and future customers as compensation for the construction of Sekisui houses.
The Sekisui factories have achieved zero emissions as a building site; the first in the industry. Thus the Sekisui house emits no waste before it is manufactured, not only in the factory but also on-site, and they are able to naturally build environment friendly
MATERIALITY For Heim frame structure units, a 100mm square steel tube is used for the posts, a 200mm square steel tube for the beams and a 150mm steel tube for the floor beam. The steel is SS400 steel with strength and
1 2 ...... 7 8 9 10 .......15 1st digit: HAPPS Identifier 2nd digit: Part (Exterior Wall) . . . 7th digit: Wall Width 8th digit: Next part on top 9th digit: Next part on bottom 10th digit: Openings . . . 15th digit: Color
/044/
8th digit 10th digit
flexibility, usable for high-rise buildings (Furuse & Katano, 2006). The Heim frame members are spot welded using automated robot welders. Sekisui is able to produce 135 Units per day or 1 every 3 minutes (Furuse & Katano, 2006). Similar to the Cantilever House, the Heim box frame structure allows great floor plan customization. As the structure counterbalances external force with posts and beams, a spacious living space can be established without pillars and walls. In addition, the lack of bracing means a large opening can also be set up, while an open ceiling or other openings are also relatively easy to install due to the strong structure. All the processes involved in the cutting, welding and drilling of the steel used for the Heim steel frame structure are carried out using computerized automated machine tools. For example, the accuracy of drilling is kept within an error tolerance of
15th digit 9th digit
7th digit Figure 48 - Diagram of manufacturing coding used in Sekisui production
Figure 49 - Image of Unit connections used for Sekisui Homes
just 0.1mm (Sekisui Chemical, 2014). This accuracy is unattainable on a conventional building site. Flow of the “Reuse system house”
TEXT
Old house: All Heim homes can be accepted a trade-ins to build a new house
Ecological Demolition Work: The demolished house is transported to the factory unit by unit.
Transporting to Factory: The transportation system used to haul the units is similar to that of new products to maintain the quality and integrity of the house.
Inspection and Renewal: Strict quality inspection is applied to units for reuse.
New Members: Inspected units are refurbished, such as interior and exterior finishes.
Export from factory: Renewal units are inspected again to ensure quality.
Transportation to site: Renewal units are used to a “Reuse System House” on a new foundation at a different site.
New House
Figure 50 - Diagram of the reuse feature of Sekisui Homes
A total of 16 portions of welded and finished box units in various sizes instantly have their horizontal and vertical accuracy measured with a laser measurement device and undergo tensile tests to ensure accuracy and quality have been maintained or not (Sekisui Chemical, 2014). Again, such quality control is very difficult to implement at building sites. A unique and innovative feature that Sekisui has is reuse of their products. Demolished frame structure units that have fulfilled their roles as customers’ residences, can be returned on a trade-in basis. Such practice is not unlike trading in your vehicle to a dealership for a newer model. Units returned to the factory are restored after inspection and corrosion processing and become new Heim reuse system houses (Sekisui Chemical, 2014). This process reduces the emission of significant waste accompanying the reconstruction of house and minimizes the environmental impact, hence can truly be considered earth friendly housing.
/045/
TEXT TEXT
design + deployment
/046/
our mission
LINKhomes
TO CREATE HOMES THAT LINK TOGETHER PEOPLE, NEIGHBORHOODS, AND COMMUNITY INTERACTION WHILE MAKING MODERN LIFE MORE ACCESSIBLE, AFFORDABLE AND SUSTAINABLE - ALL IN WAYS THAT RESPECT AND ENHANCE THE ENVIRONMENTS WE LIVE IN.
ESTABLISH RELATIONSHIP
FEASABILITY ANALYSIS
PLAN
4 Weeks
CLIENT
ESTABLISH BUDGET & SCOPE
DESIGN BUILD CONTRACT PERMITS CHOOSE PACKAGE LINK COMBINING
DESIGN 5 Weeks
SUSTAINABILITY AND SITE ADJUSTMENTS REVIEW FINISHES AND DETAILS CODE REVIEW FOR LOCATION
FINE TUNE
ESTABLISH SUB CONTRACTS
2 Weeks
SUBCONTRACTORS
LOGISTICS & COORDINATION FACTORY PRODUCTION
BUILD
FIELD CONSTRUCTION
3 Weeks
FACTORY/ SITE INSPECTIONS
FINISH
SETTING & FINISHING
2 Weeks
WELCOME HOME wk 4
wk 9
wk 11
wk 14
wk 16
/047/
the link system PRODUCTION LEVEL CUSTOMIZATION SERVICES STRUCTURE DELIVERY LEVEL CUSTOMIZATION SPACE SKIN SITE
SPACE SERVICES SKIN STRUCTURE
LINK
SITE
MATE
SHIFT
/048/
TURN
COURT
STACK
VOID
SHIFT
TURN
COURT
LINK HOMES procurement and tier supplying
LINKhomes
co-POD
/049/
STEEL LINK FRAME
• HIGH STRENGTH AND QUALITY HOME
LINK FRAME $9,000 - $13,000
• ALLOWS FOR SIMPLE FOUNDATION
LINK PRICES INCLUDE AVG. FOUNDATION COST
• FRAME CAN BE REFURBISHED AND REUSED
/050/
BASE COMMUNAL LINK $36,000.00
BASE PRIVATE LINK $28,000.00
Interior openings between Links
• CUSTOMIZABLE PLANS WITHOUT INTERIOR LOAD BEARING SUPPORT 8’-0” TYP.
LOOPED CABLE LIFTING PIN
COLUMN EXTENSION
• SIMPLE TRANSPORTATION AND RIGGING WITHOUT TEMPORARY REINFORCING
Clear span openings require • Increased beam depth
STEEL BEARING PLATE
• Bolt frames across mate lines
/051/
12
13 24' - 0"
11 14' - 0"
65
10 4' - 0"
39 67
40
66
5 1/2"
3 5/8" 5 1/2"
31' - 2 7/8"
3' - 6 1/2"
5 1/2"
5 1/2"
92
15' - 1" 11' - 1"
13' - 1"
14' - 0"
2' - 0" 2' - 0"
5 1/2"
38 93
94
2x6 STUDS @ 2’ O.C.
FOUNDATION $20,000 - $30,000
LINK FRAME $9,000 - $13,000
FACADE CLADDING TBD 6”X 6” TUBE STEEL COLUMN MOISTURE/VAPOR MEMBRANE 1/2” SHEATHING BOLTED CONNECTION FOR DISASSEMBLY SPRAY FOAM INSULATION
1/2” GYP. BD.
/052/
BASE COMMUNAL LINK $36,000.00
BASE PRIVATE LINK $28,000.00
standard link strategies
LINK HOMES
More insulation, less infiltration, smaller HVAC system, lower energy bills
Spray foam insulation for high insulation, air barrier, and tight envelope
Efficient and compact designs that are exible and have multiple functions.
Design to reduce operating costs $
$$$ $$$ $$$
$$$
site specific strategies
orient home to maximize passive heating and ventilation
maximize natural light to offset artificial light
Typical: Less insulation, more infiltration, larger HVAC system, Higher energy bills
$ consider topography in design
use renewable energy when warranted or desired
$$$
$$$ $$$ $$$
/053/
THE COMPACT HOUSE 369 SF
/054/
387 SF
705 SF
649 SF
961 SF
1,211 SF
UTILITY CONNECTIONS $12,500
MEP CONNECTIONS $3,000
BASIC SITEWORK $3,500
+ 1 CAR GARAGE LINK $18,000
+
1 CAR GARAGE LINK $18,000
CRANE RENTAL $7,000
TOTAL $31,000
SITE SUPERVISION $5,000
BEDROOM LINK $26,000 TOTAL $132,500
BASE MODEL $44,500
= FOUNDATION $22,000
THE COMPACT HOUSE 1 BEDROOM 1 BATH $44,500
369 SF
2 BEDROOM 2 BATH 2 CAR $180,300
+
TRANSPORT = $16,800 $9.00 PER MILE + $300 PERMIT PER STATE ESTIMATE BASED ON 400 MILE TRAVEL ACROSS TWO STATES
BASE LINK AND MODPOD $4,200
THE COMPACT HOUSE
+
1,165 SF
PORCH LINK $4,000
1 CAR GARAGE PANELS $4,200
BEDROOM LINK $4,200
1 CAR GARAGE PANELS $4,200
/055/
THE NARROW HOUSE 369 SF
/056/
705 SF
1,867 SF
1,950 SF
2,072 SF
2 CAR GARAGE LINK $23,000
THE NARROW HOUSE
3 BEDROOM 2 BATH 2 CAR 1,867 SF $217,700
PRIVATE LINK $22,000
TOTAL $156,700
PRIVATE LINK $28,000
CoPOD $3,000 PORCH LINKS $6,000
MODPOD $12,000 STAIR $6,200
EXTENSION LINK $5,000
COMMUNIAL LINK $35000 FOUNDATION $16,500
UTILITY CONNECTIONS $12,500
TRANSPORT= $21,000 $9.00 PER MILE + $300 PERMIT PER STATE ESTIMATE BASED ON 400 MILE TRAVEL ACROSS TWO STATES
2ND LEVEL PRIVATE LINK $4,200
BASIC SITEWORK $4,500
ROOF LINK $4,200
CRANE RENTAL $12,000
MEP CONNECTIONS $3,000
COMMUNAL LINKS $4,200
2ND LEVEL PRIVATE LINK AND ROOF $4,200
SITE SUPERVISION $8,000
TOTAL $40,000
GARAGE PANELS AND STAIR LINK $4,200
/057/
TEXT TEXT
testing sites
/058/
/059/
testing sites The site chosen as a testing ground for the design system is Defiance, Ohio. Defiance is an excellent model of the Midwest deindustrialized town. Therefore Defiance offers the opportunity for this design system to address issues that plague towns of the Midwest. Defiance is home of several abandoned manufacturing facilities with run-down neighborhoods surrounding them. In tandem with the decay of the city core, sprawling subdivisions have risen up on the outskirts of town. The design system addresses:
Toledo, Ohio
Defiance, Ohio US24
Fort Wayne, Indiana
I69
Figure 51 - Context map of Defiance, Ohio in relation to Fort Wayne and Toledo
• URBAN DENSIFICATION • UNCONVENTIONAL INFILL LOTS • EMPOWERMENT TO THE INDIVIDUAL • USE OF EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE
SR18 1 US24
• SUSTAINABLE MODEL OF DEVELOPMENT • ENCOURAGE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND
3 2
BIKE RIDING
/060/
Figure 52 - Map of Defiance, Ohio and location of three test sites
Site 1 conditions: • Under-utilized alleyways • Conventional urban neighborhood • Close proximity to Defiance College • Abundant Southern exposure • Neighborhood home values = $100k-$140k
Site 1
Possible development of density
THE COMPACT HOUSE 369 SF
/061/
TEXT TEXT
/062/
Compact House response: • Densifies neighborhood in a creative way • Utilizes alleyways • Promotes use of public transportation and biking • Utilizes natural daylighting through roof design and window placement • Compact Home price=$78k
/063/
DENSIFIES NEIGHBORHOOD IN A CREATIVE WAY - ACCESSORY DWELLINGS ON OCCUPIED LOTS BENEFITS OF DENSIFICATION: SUPPORTS CITY SERVICES UTILIZES EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE OPTIMIZES ALLEYWAY USE PROMOTES USE OF PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND BIKING
ADDED OUTDOOR SPACES MAKE HOUSE FEEL LARGER THAN IT IS
/064/
UTILIZES NATURAL DAYLIGHT THROUGH ROOF DESIGN AND WINDOW PLACEMENT
PRIVATE DECK SEPERATE FROM MAIN PORCH
/065/
THE NARROW HOUSE
369 SF
Site 2 conditions: • Narrow lot for conventional housing • Underutilized alleyways • Conventional urban neighborhood • Close proximity to Defiance High School and Middle School • Abundant Southern exposure and natural ventilation opportunity • Neighborhood home values = $120k-$160k
/066/
705 SF
1,867 SF
Site 1
1,950 SF
Possible development of density
2,072 SF
/067/
TEXT
/068/
Narrow House response: • Infills a limited and unconventional lot type • Utilizes alleyways • Promotes use of public transportation and biking to schools • Utilizes natural daylighting through window placement • Harnesses natural ventilation through window orientation and living room design • Compact Home price=$217k
INFILLS A LIMITED AND UNCONVENTIONAL LOT TYPE
22’ - 0”
UTILIZES ALLEYWAYS
5’ - 0”
LINK HOMES ARE RAISED FROM STREET FOR BETTER PRIVACY
/069/
ROOF OVERHANG SHADES DIRECT SUMMER SUN
WINTER SOLSTICE
SUMMER SOLSTICE
VENT SF RATIO 2:1
WINTER SUN ILLUMINATES AND HEATS LIVING SPACE WINDOWS OPEN TO VENT LIVING SPACE
TILE ON GROUT BED FOR THERMAL MASS
SUMMER SOLSTICE
/070/
WINTER SOLSTICE
Site 3 Conditions: • Large expansive lot • Low income neighborhood • Opportunity for expansion • Opportunity for natural daylighting and passive heating
THE ADAPTABLE HOUSE 369 SF
387 SF
705 SF
649 SF
/071/
expandable design
x2
x2 /072/
SKYLIGHTS ALLOW NATURAL LIGHT AND VENT HOUSE IN SUMMER
EXPANDABLE DESIGN OVER TIME
INCREASE DENSITY PER LOT
Adaptable House response
/073/
TEXT TEXT
/074/
/075/
literature review Keywords: Architecture, Design, Housing, Prefabrication, Mass Customization Prefabrication is not a new concept in our modern day world and it is not a new concept in the building industry. Nearly every building that is being built today is using at least some form of prefabrication as a means and method. An example is prefabricated components that come to the site ready to install, such as doors, complete with all necessary sub-components, such as hinges, frames, and hardware. However, what is new and trending is the degree of prefabrication and the quality that is attainable now through the means of innovative technology. With the innovation of Building Information Modeling, automation, and robotics, high quality, mass customizable building manufacturing has never been more possible (Kieran & Timberlake, 2004). This possibility is clear if one looks at other sister industries such as aerospace and automotive manufacturing and how these industries have given the building industry a clear idea of the potential of prefabrication. With this in mind, it is clear that the technology is present for high quality building manufacturing to become mainstream. The organization and process could be realized. Perhaps one of the greatest challenges in prefabrication in America today is the cultural factors. The history of prefabrication in American has impacted the cultural perceptions of it and have been a challenge for the innovation of it (Mullin, 2006). The history of the technology, organization, and cultural factors of prefabrication will be reviewed. The means and methods employed today in the prefabrication industry will be analyzed and the potential and challenges of tomorrow’s prefabrication industry. Prefabrication Yesterday While prefabrication and modularity are commonly considered in concert with technological and material innovations, the origins of prefabricated building involve neither factory nor mass-produced materials. The process of sending complete, ready-cut building components to be assembled has been part of the construction process in America since the 17th century. Arieff discusses
/076/
early American mass production from Sears, Roebuck & Company. In the early 20th century, American families could order a catalog home from Sears, Roebuck & Co. and wait for an assembly kit to arrive. Such an approach to home building was very progressive. The ability to mass-produce the materials used in Sears’s homes lessened manufacturing costs, which lowered purchase costs for customers. These kit homes included precut and numbered lumber, nails, shingles, windows, doors, hardware, and even paint (Arieff & Burkhart, 2002). From 1908–1940, Sears, Roebuck and Co. sold about 70,000 - 75,000 homes through their mail-order Modern Homes program. While the home designs and the technology employed to fabricate these homes were conventional means and methods of the time, the organizational structure of the business model was quite innovative (Knaack, Chung-Klatte, & Hasselbach, 2012). While industrial designs and methods were being explored in Europe by architects such as Le Corbusier, Gropius, and Mies van der Rohe, these experiments did not infiltrate America until the 1930’s and even then did not impact home building greatly (Friedman, 2013). During the 1920’s and 30’s many radically innovative concepts were conceived such as the Crystal House, Motohome, Wichita House, and House of Tomorrow. These houses, not only pushed the means and methods of production, but also of style. While Universities, art museums, and rare clients were ready to accept such concepts, the ordinary American consumer was not ready to welcome such radical styles and methods of production. The housing industry in that time period was to simply make homes more simple and practical, therefore, less expensive (Arieff & Burkhart, 2002). By the end of World War II, government intervention and new legislations, such as Veterans Administration mortgage program, were being implemented in America. These financial legislations facilitated great expansion in the prefabrication industry. It is from this expansion that much of today’s negative
cultural perception of prefabrication comes from (Knaack, Chung-Klatte, & Hasselbach, 2012). It is not surprising that design innovation was not a major concern at a time when housing of any sort was desperately required. The mobile home is a product of such a time. Smith explains that after World War II, manufacturers such as Spartan Aircraft Company transferred their means and methods of aircraft production to affordable housing. Spartan incarnated its structural technology of the airplane into manufactured house trailers, which were constructed from aluminum sheets riveted to a steel frame. The dire need of housing after the war generated vast trailer parks. Units were initially marketed primarily to people whose lifestyle required mobility. However, beginning in the 1950s, these homes began to be marketed primarily as an inexpensive form of housing. “Unfortunately, prefabricated mobile housing focused on mass production as quickly as possible because of the great need for housing after the war. Unfortunately, these houses typically lacked quality design, construction, or customization.” (Albern, 1997, p. 11). Arieff explains that “As the market for housing stabilized, buyers were less desperate and could demand more freedom of choice and better quality. Prefab homebuilders suffered from those increased customer expectations as a result.” (Arieff & Burkhart, 2002, p. 29)The rapid-fire construction that had taken place after the war resulted in many homes of substandard quality and now the prefab industry has to answer for it. While the prefabrication industry has grown with the building practice itself, America’s tendency to still associate prefabrication with trailer housing has led to its public perception as unsightly and unstable. Quale explains that many of today’s prefabrication home builders don’t market themselves as such, instead they market similar to conventional homebuilders (Quale D, 2012). The industry has looked for ways to enhance its maligned product. By developing new techniques, even new descriptive terms for their products, many companies market under different names such as modular home, panelized home, controlled environmental construction (cec), and even terms like ready to move (rtm) which show a general reluctance to even use the name Prefab. (Mullin, 2006).
Prefabrication Today Today, the building industry has innovatively grown since the explosion of mobile homes. The industry has utilized technology, new business models, and the economy of scale to become leaner and more profitable. “A decade ago the top 10 home builders nationally were doing 8 percent of the work. Today, the same 10 companies are doing 25% of the work” (Smith, 2010, p. 222). Transformation is happening and will continue. In 2012 63% of all new housing was being built by dealers. 56% is panelized, 33% production is onsite building, 7% is modular, and 4% is HUD-code mobile (FMI Corporation, 2013). Most prefab homes today look like conventional constructed homes. Quale believes that American home building will likely continue to migrate toward prefab and eventually the cultural connotations associated with the word prefab- both positive and negative will drop away. Prefab will simply become the way we build homes (Quale D, 2012, p. 23). Prefabrication is happening now. There are different degrees of prefabrication that are being used today. The processes fall into four basic tiers. At the most basic level of prefabrication is materials. Nearly modern building projects use employ this degree of using prefabricated materials such as lumber, rather than cutting trees down themselves. The second level is prefabricated components, which offers the greatest degree of customization and flexibility. This level of prefabrication is essentially considered conventional to most modern day projects. “During the past thirty years in particular, building components have increasingly transitioned toward standardized, manufactured sub-assemblies ready to be deployed on the job site as complete modular components.“ (Anderson & Anderson, 2007, p. 11). Prefabricated components such as doors and windows which are brought to site and installed are hardly considered as a method of prefabrication to the general public. The third level of prefabrication is panelization. Panels of the building are prefabricated offsite and transported and installed onsite. The fourth degree of prefabrication is modularization. Modules are complete, or almost complete, entire portions of a building. Modular fabrication includes complete bathroom pods or portions of houses, complete with plumbing, electrical and cladding. Smith states that, “Moving toward greater degrees of prefabrication from components to panels to modules, flexibility in the systems progressively diminishes. From size
/077/
limitations due to transport to restrictions in utility distribution, a balance must be struck between design intent and production method. In the end, a hybrid mix of systems may be appropriate taking elements that offer the capacity to increase productivity, but leaving those that sacrifice design freedom behind. In order for this to occur, design and building teams must work together.” (Smith, 2010, p. 180). Integrating prefabrication into the building industry as a new process of how not only how products are built integrates benefits and challenges that are associated with such processes. Technical issues and challenges that arise with these new methods are transportation, setting, joining, and mass customization. Organizational challenges include reorganizing business structures, the control over the coordination, hidden costs of prefab such as overheads, profits, transportation fees, and design fees. However, the benefits that are sure to come are substantial sustainability, significant time savings, leaner methods, and higher quality at a lower cost. Transportation presents a major consideration in prefabrication design and distinguishes it from other construction methods. Transportation parameters are governed by physical dimensions of a system of roadways and hauling equipment. This system is consequently governed by regulatory bodies of government, which determines the safe transport of such products (Mullin, 2006). Tanney and Luntz recognize that the parameters of transportation limits size of the individual panels, modules, or components but also the final building form aesthetic by determining joints, reveals, and element dimensions (2014, p. 7). With this in mind, it is clear that cost of transportation becomes a major factor in prefab (Smith, 2010, p. 205). The emerging standard for modular transportation is 125 miles (Knaack, Chung-Klatte, & Hasselbach, 2012). As movements toward larger subassemblies are providing schedule savings, transportation may be just as important in determining the feasibility of fabrication for onsite construction by virtue of project cost. A hybrid approach to using not only modules but also panels and components when needed can be a wise solution for achieving a cost-to-benefit strategy for a given project (Friedman, 2013). Setting is another new factor that is a result from offsite fabrication. . Although weight is usually not as much of a concern, craning a prefabricated element
/78/
can require a dedicated crew to set the elements. It can become a significant cost factor due to high rates for cranes (Knaack, Chung-Klatte, & Hasselbach, 2012). The design of prefabricated modules are greatly influenced by transportation and setting. The modules must have the structural integrity to withstand the unique forces of being craned into place (Anderson & Anderson, 2007). As prefabrication requires more coordination with construction and fabrication teams, architects and engineers may charge higher rates for the investment of time. In Kaufman’s experience, the cost of prefab architecture varies significantly from traditional costs. Soft costs in prefabrication are higher than in traditional delivery. This seems counterintuitive. If design is already established, then why must the price of design be higher? Kaufmann explains that the collaboration and coordination that must occur between the factory and the designer require increased design fees. This investment saves on the hard costs in the lifecycle, however. Often owners have difficulty investing in what may initially seem to be a more expensive process (Kaufman & Remick, 2009, pp. 11-13). Other expenses included for prefabrication are manufacturing overheads. Manufacturing facilities employ full-time staff and have facility costs such as equipment purchase and maintenance, renting space, and monthly utilities. The profit of business must also be recognized in this industry. Offsite fabricators, as a business enterprise, must make a profit and therefore to cover these overhead expenses may charge as much or more than a general contractor for the same scope and any savings due to efficiencies in time and labor may not be passed on to the customer (Smith, 2010). These extra costs that are not seen in conventional building production can be minimized through economy of scale. Economy of scale is identified as a critical component to successful prefabrication in the building industry. Without economy of scale the benefits of cost savings, sustainability of resources, and lean methods are difficult to achieve in any industry (Albern, 1997). Marmol and Radziner state that “It is difficult to build custom houses one at a time and drive price points down. In order to run a factory as a prefabrication architect, volume is essential” (Smith, 2010, p. 268).
“Green is now mainstream”, says Koones, “and prefab is intrinsically green.” (Koones, 2010). Sustainability is one of the most popular benefits to using prefabrication methods. Construction of the average 2,000 square-foot house generates 4 tons of waste (Drexler & El khouli, 2012). You pay for everything that goes into your house, including what’s thrown away. On top of that, you pay for the dumpster that holds the waste, you pay for it to be hauled away (Koones, 2010). Smith elaborates this point by imagining a clean 4 x 8 foot sheet of brand new drywall. Approximately 2 feet square of each and every sheet brought to the site ends up in a dumpster and headed to a landfill (2010). Prefabrication is able to side step such excessive waste due to the controlled environment it uses. Sustainability is not limited to environmental factors only. A holistic sustainability should be the goal in housing (Drexler & El khouli, 2012). Sustainability in economic, social, and cultural considerations are crucial as well. Michelle Kaufman believes that some of the greatest potentials of prefab and sustainability are with regard to the economic benefits of productivity gains, remove material and labor waste, safer conditions for the workers and a more consistent daily schedule for a healthier lifestyle (Kaufman & Remick, 2009). Other important benefits of using prefabrication include quality of construction and simplification and expediting construction process are major benefits in prefab (Mullin, 2006). In fact according to a recent survey done by FMI Corporation found that the majority of contractors using prefabrication claim the driving factoring is to improve construction schedules. Over half of all the contractors surveyed believed that the greatest benefit of using prefabrication is to reduce the time of project completion (FMI Corporation, 2013). Throughout the literature that discusses prefabrication, the example of the production of the automobile or airplane are used as a comparison and potential for prefabrication of buildings. In fact, it is not uncommon today for the building industry to be criticized at its rate of innovation when it is compared to the automotive or aerospace manufacturing process. Kieran and Timberlake argue that the scale of these products on average also exceeds the complexity and scale of almost anything produced in architecture. Arguably, a ship, plane, or car, all of which have to move and carry occupants and products safely, day
in and day out, are more complex overall than many of the buildings the construction industry produces (2004). While this is true, Smith points out several difficulties that arise when comparing the construction industry to manufacturing. First, the construction industry produces a one-of-kind product at least to some degree. This is valid simply due to the fact that no two building sites are exactly the same. Secondly, design and construction of buildings must take into account the context and site parameters, whereas automobiles, airplanes, etc. are more or less independent of site restrictions. A third difference is the process and organization of the building industry today involves forming a temporary organization for each project. This temporary organization consists of the design team, owner, and contractor and these entities have subgroups that are temporary as well. The contractor will likely be working with a different design team on its next project and must adapt to the new organizational structure (Smith, 2010). This inconsistent organizational structure contrasts the sole proprietor of a manufacturing company who designs, produces, and sells (Tanney & Robert, 2014). Prefab Tomorrow With that in mind, it seems that integrating Prefabrication into the building industry has more to do with a business plan and organization than with a product and technology. The technology is present but the missing factors that still need to be addressed include are what Daas terms as the external factors of the “Design Onion” (Daas, 2013). These external factors include government regulations, how to reorganize the industry structure, and the cultural perception. While much attention is spent on simplifying and streamlining process and practice, very little attention is spent on the relationship of prefabrication and governments, financial factors, or capital, goods, and labor markets. Senegala states, “Innovation requires knowledge of markets, commercialization process, entrepreneurship, finance, and management” (2012, p. 140). The majority of the experts in the industry of prefabrication are in agreement with this fact. Anderson & Anderson, as they practice the implementation of prefab in their firm, realize that the challenge is not technological. Even any widespread social or economic resistance to the simple logic of rationalized production is not seen as the greatest challenge to Anderson & Anderson. “Pre-
/79/
fabrication is simple to understand conceptually and not so difficult to achieve technically. It is primarily an issue of investment and organization, which is a disappointing recognition for most architects, who most typically lack capacity for either, and are more interested in pursuing the concept, the space, the form, the innovative details” (Anderson & Anderson, 2007, p. 9). With that in mind, perhaps more focus on a change in culture of the profession, rather than the culture of the general public, should be addressed.
The approach to prefabrication must begin with the fundamental concepts and imperatives in modern thought and theory. Kieran and Timberlake manifest that, “standardization, systemization, rationalization, material honesty, realism, and technical innovation in support of social progress are all central concepts of the modern period, and they are vital to the development of contemporary production processes and distribution networks as much as to particular architectural developments in space and form” (Kieran & Timberlake, 2004, p. 9).
How can a holistic integration be attained? Anderson & Anderson believe that, “the most effective path to achieving the benefits of prefabrication comes from an incremental transition item site-based craft and assembly to offsite componentization of building elements. Accompanied by a deeper analysis and understanding of existing social and economic forces outside of design and mechanics”. (Anderson & Anderson, 2007, p. 11). The concept of incremental transition is also expounded from Quale. He believes that many prefab prototypical designs are dependent upon the assumption that the industrialized housing industry in the U.S. will radically transform itself. “Housing in America will not transform overnight, and designs that are dependent upon a complete rethinking of the materials and the standard labor practices used today are more likely to remain marginal.” (Quale D, 2012, p. 41). Quale believes in an incremental transition, not just of design, but of labor practice and material use. “Home building is a conservative industry, based on a clear profit motive. Most on-site builders and prefab manufacturers see little benefit in changing materials or construction methods if it requires them to retrain their employees, or face the challenges of using an unfamiliar material.” (Quale D, 2012, p. 41).
In reviewing the historically factors of prefabrication, it is clear that the notion of offsite production has been a focus of innovation for years. While many attempts at innovation in this field have been radical and other endeavors have been profit driven at the cost of quality, prefab has garnered a lot of disrespect, earning a reputation for being either sub-par or too radical for the general public. However, the continuous innovation of the industry continues to press on today. The use and degree of prefabrication is continuing to increase. While it creates new challenges of design, cost, and transportation, architects, contractors, and owners are beginning to see the benefits of prefabrication. Such benefits of quality of construction, waste reduction, energy efficiency, simplification and expediting construction process are being realized through prefabrication. It is clear that much work is still to be done to integrate prefabrication into the industry. More focus is needed on the external factors beyond the design process and the product. An emphasis of the relationship of prefabrication and governments, financial factors, or capital, goods, and labor markets is required in order for prefabrication to be successful on a mass scale. Through incremental transitioning, American home building will likely continue to migrate toward prefab and eventually the cultural connotations associated with the word prefab- both positive and negative will drop away. Prefab will simply become the way we build homes.
It is important not to disregard the effort of technical innovation in this industry. The fact that the technology is present does not mean that it is being integrated and optimized for successful prefabrication. In fact, in FMI Corporation’s survey to general contractors and construction managers, 45% of them have not used BIM for prefab yet and are unclear how critical it could be to prefabricate assemblies (2013). This is a startling statistic and reveals the need for a continuous effort to approach the prefabrication industry holistically, considering all levels of the “design onion” (Daas, 2013).
/80/
“Housing should be seen as a process, not as a product” -Balkrishna Doshi
references Albern, W. F. (1997). Factory-Constructed Housing Developments: Planning, Design, and Construction. New York: CRC Press. Anderson, M., & Anderson, P. (2007). Prefab Prototypes: Site-Specific Design For Offsite Construction. New York: Princeton Architectural. Arieff, A., & Burkhart, B. (2002). Prefab. Layton, Utah: Gibbs Smith. Daas, M. (2013). Peeling the Design Onion: A Theoretcal and Systems Framework for Adaptive Architecture. Unconventional computing: Design methods for adaptive architecture, 140-147. Drexler, H., & El khouli, S. (2012). Holistic Housing: Concepts, Design Strategies and Processes (Detail ed.). (S. R. Lenzen, Ed.) Munich, Germany: Kessler Druck + Medien. FMI Corporation. (2013). Prefabrication and Modularization in Construction: 2013 Survey Results. Raleigh: FMI. Friedman, A. (2013). Innovative Houses: Concepts for Sustainable Living. London: Laurence King Publishing . Furuse, J., & Katano, M. (2006). Structuring of Sekisui Heim: automated parts pickup system (HAPPS) to process individual floor plans. Japan, ISARC 2006 International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction. Kaufman, M., & Remick, C. (2009). Prefab Green. Layton, Utah: Gibbs Smith. Kieran, S., & Timberlake, J. (2004). Refabricating Architecture: How Manufacturing Methodologies Are Poised To Transform Building Construction. New York: McGraw Hill. Knaack, U., Chung-Klatte, S., & Hasselbach, R. (2012). Prefabricated Systems: Principles of Construction. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhauser Basel. Kolarevic, B. (2003). Introduction. In Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing (pp. 1-10). New York: Spon Press. Koones, S. (2010). PreFabulous + Sustainable: Building and Customizing an Affordable, Energy-Efficient Home. New York: Abrams.
/81/
Kullman Buildings Corporation & Garrison Architects. (2008). Modular. Lebanon, New Jersey: Kullman Buildings Corporation. Michael, M. (2010). Sustainble House. Sydney: University of New South Wales Press. MIT Design Lab. (2008, September 14). yourHOUSE. Retrieved from yourHouse.com: http://web.mit.edu/yourhouse/ Moe, K. (2008). Integrated Design in Contemporary Architecture. New York: Princeton Architectural Press. Mortenson. (2014). Benefits & Drivers for Successful Implementation. Mortenson. Quale D, J. (2012). Sustainable Affordable Prefab: The EcoMOD Project. Charlotesville: University of Virginia Press. Rockhill and Associates. (2014). Designing and Building. Canada: Tuns Press. Retrieved from http://www.studio804.com/index.html Senegala, M. (2012). Anachronisms of Digital Fabrication: Some Questions of Relevance. Sociedad Ibero Americana Grafica Digital (SIGRADI). Bogata, Columbia. Smith, R. E. (2010). Prefab Architecture. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Tanney, J., & Robert, L. (2014). Modern Modular: The Prefab Houses of Resolution: 4 Architecture. New York, New York: Princeton Architectural Press. Wagner, A. (2009, May 1). On a Rock in a Hard Place. Retrieved from Dwell: http://www.dwell.com/house-tours/article/rock-hard-place
/82/
LINKhomes
/83/
LINK HOMES
MON M
ryan moninger
INGER I
INK
OMES
RYAN R