MorfJV01002origin

8/3/2019 MorfJV01002origin

1/4

Technicians APPLY, Technologists ADAPT, Engineers ORIGINATE

Vol: 1

No: 2ETAMORPHS JOURNAL

http://users.senet.com.au/~metamorfmailto: [email protected] 03 August 2003

Metamorphs MorfJV01002.doc, [(17/08/03) 14:16] 1

FACTORY BUILT BUILDINGS

Steven CONRAD Harrison, B.Tech(Mfg & Mech.), MIIE, gradTIEAust

Welcome! Ok then, last issue I inferred that it should be possible to throw buildings of an assembly line fasterthan the car industry builds cars. So lets consider.

A car is a complex mechanical system broken up into sub-assemblies that are designed and manufacturedby specialised suppliers. Each supplier has its own team of specialised designers: engineers or otherwise.All of these components are brought together at a single assembly plant. Now there is no reason why any ofthese assembly plants should be dedicated towards a specific car supplier or rather brand name. At anypoint in time a vehicle assembly plant could be assembling cars for Ford, Toyota or GMC or any othermanufacturer. Thus a factory can be owned by the local population and it can seek contracts to supplyvehicles under any brand name. It should be noted for instance that a manufacturer or supplier builds itsreputation with its original factory, there after it cannot guarantee that workers in factories located closer tomarkets have the same dedication to quality. Thus the brand name can suffer a poor reputation in a

particular local market. Which is a strange situation when the local market, would rather import a vehicle thanpurchase the same brand built locally. In the extreme condition they are declaring that they personallyproduce rubbish. However, a factory should be capable of supplying those products required by the localmarket. Thus a car factory should be capable of supplying say: Fords, Holdens, Toyotas, or what ever thecommunity demands. Of course there are problems of production line efficiency and timing of production withdemand. Hence there will be need for factories that produce one brand and one model of car at any giventime. Consequently there will be importing into the market to meet local demand.

So back to buildings! For the most part, the components of buildings are made to fit rather than fullydesigned, specified and manufactured. If a detailed bill of materials (BOM) was generated for a building,there would probably be more components than in the average car. However, these components are mostlyvariations on a theme, rather than any significant variation in functional form. Thus there are beams andcolumns of varying lengths, thus indicating a separate item, but none the less fabricated from the same basic

structural section.

It should also be noted that the most common form of construction here in South Australia is the singlestorey brick veneer house. In this situation brick is little more than a decorative cladding, to an internalstructural framework. We can therefore take an extreme leap in perception: A prefabricated transportablebuilding is little more than the internal liner for a brick veneer dwelling. This infers that every brickveneer house can be built in a factory and transported to site, with the brick cladding and its support footingsonly, being constructed on site. More over the brick cladding can be installed at any future date, if thetransportable building is provided with some alternative lower cost cladding.

Now factory production provides several benefits:

1) Factory production is not dependent on the weather.2) A factory allows all day (24hour) operation throughout the year.3) Site preparations can occur at the same time as building fabrication.4) Trades dont waste time travelling between construction sites.5) Building Supervisors can actually supervise what is being done, rather than inspecting after the

matter.6) Design and manufacturing can be optimised.

There are also disadvantages:

1) Constraints on size of building modules that can be transported.2) Difficulty of matching and aligning building with site works.

However our main concern here is the optimisation of the building-design and manufacturing processes.Here I am referring to the design that is the building rather than the process of designing the building;however the optimisation of the one has an impact on the other. If buildings are rolling off an assembly line,


2/4


Vol: 1




whilst each building may be a custom and unique design, every building will have elements in common.These common elements can therefore be classified as sub-assemblies and otherwise manufacturedelsewhere. Common groups of elements can also be classified as an abstract orpseudo-sub-assembly ,

and otherwise supplied as an assembly kit. For example most houses would have a requirement for thesame number of electrical power points, light fittings and accompanying switches. These items can thereforebe bundled together as an electrical kit and supplied to the assembly line. Ordering is simplified to orderingone electrical assembly kit. Additional requirements for a custom design can be ordered individually,supplied as various extension kits, or supplied as specialised kits for particular house designs. (eg. A 3bedroom electrical kit, and a 4 bedroom electrical kit. Or each living space can have its own kit, loungekitchen, bedroom etc) The manufacturers of electrical components contributing to over all efficiency bysupplying such items bundled into such kits. Thus avoiding the need for some intermediate supplier, toassemble such kits. The electrical component manufacturers gain a benefit from having orders for the supplyof such kits, rather than for the individual items. That is they are gaining a clearer picture of where marketdemand is being generated. Is the greater demand from residential dwellings, from commercial buildings orsales of individual items. Having identified the greatest market, customised products can be developed. Forexample maybe the domestic market as extended to the point that wall plates with 4 GPOs are preferred

over the more common double GPO. Or maybe there is a high demand for kitchen renovations.

Factory built houses have the potential to incorporate more advanced technologies, without significantincrease in cost of supply. For example prefabricated buildings can incorporate technologies similar to thosebeing incorporated into cars. Prefabricated buildings have the greatest potential for being designed anddeveloped as intelligent-buildings. More items can be constructed into the depth of the walls, thus savingon floor space. Every room for example can have a flush mounted wall clock with each clock synchronised toa master clock. Every room can be provided with data access to a central computer. The central computercan control heating and cooling systems, as well as security. Thus a house can have central locking, just likea car. The opening and closing of windows can be automated, and linked to the central computer and itsenvironmental control system, to ensure adequate ventilation. Likewise the opening and closing of blinds canbe automated, to make the maximum use of natural lighting and otherwise minimise unwanted heating fromsunlight.

The development and adoption of such technologies for housing that is constructed on site will be long andslow. Houses constructed on site have little potential for incorporating the latest and greatest technologies,for the average builder is seldom up to date with their own area of expertise, let alone the potential fromother areas of activity. The average builder only has the capability of assembling typical materials in typicalconfigurations to build the typical house. Change the materials or the configuration, and they become lost.Despite our licensing systems, on observing the typical array of trades that construct buildings, one doeshave to conclude that most are only semi-skilled. This is not to say they cannot do the job they are doing, butthat they do not have the level of skill one would expect. In consequence what can be achieved in design asto be aimed at the lowest common denominator in fabrication and construction. But this does not have to bethe case. Those persons that do have the level of skill that tradition in their trade suggests we should expect,can be employed in a factory setting to pass their full set of skills onto the next generation. More importantlythese skills be put to work. It should be noted that I am not talking about a traditional assembly line, that

bores the participants to death.

I am talking about the production of a high quality product, that requires the involvement of people who careabout the quality of their own work. I am talking about a dedicated team of individuals with a high level ofenthusiasm and interest in what they are doing. Individuals who all contribute to the improvement of both theproduct design and its production. Carpenters for example get retrained as metal workers if metal framing isconsidered a better option than timber framing. Thus people work for the enterprise and are given work to dothat is compatible with their capabilities and interests. As the technology of the building develops, thetraditional division of labour may become irrelevant and therefore identification as carpenter, metal worker,electrician becomes irrelevant and unproductive. As the individuals acquire skills across all trades, they willsimply become building technicians. But the individual will become more important than the trade, if you wantthe job doing well, and now: ask Wilma, not Fred so to speak. This brings up the topic of the social-contractthat I mentioned at the beginning of the last issue, and will not pursue further at this point.

Back to the product and its production. If one car factory can produce around 100 thousand cars per yearwhilst operating 24 hours a day, how many buildings can a single factory produce? How many factories doesthe world need? So lets consider some wild hypotheticals. First lets take the maximum sustainable world


3/4


Vol: 1




population to be around 10 billion persons (10 x 109), it may not be, but it is a starting point and in excess of

the current world population . Here in South Australia, the population is around 1.5 million people occupyingaround 500 thousand dwellings, additional dwellings are constructed at the rate of around 10 thousand

dwellings per year. So on average there are about three people per dwelling, and a potential additional 250thousand couples demanding an additional 250 thousand dwellings. This demand will therefore take around25 years to fill. From this trend we can conclude that the typical dwelling needs to provide a living space fortwo people. From this we can therefore conclude that the typical 3 bedroom house, is an inappropriate use ofglobal resources. More over an industrial relations system that demands a single person should receive aminimum wage commensurate with building such, is contrary to the social-contract, more especially if theydo not support a family. Thus the product that our factory produces should be a two person dwelling, but withan internal space that is free to be adapted as required to suit a growing family. Hence we can now concludethat we require 5 billion dwellings to shelter the world population. If a building is considered to be durableenough to last 50 years before it needs replacing, but peoples life expectancy is heading towards 100 years,then every couple needs at least two dwellings during their lifetime. So can we calculate the number offactories that we need? To determine the number of factories required we first need to determine the rate ofproduction required to supply the world, and to identify where the production needs to take place. It should

be noted that at this point I am not giving consideration to competitive products either from a brand viewpointor a substitution viewpoint. Thus reduction in demand caused by people living in tents or caravans is notbeing considered. {Though personally I think being mobile, is far better than turning ourselves into plants.Which brings us back to our social contract again.}

So can we determine the rate of production required? Or do we need more information? I dont have moreinformation at this point in time, so can we estimate it? Well a first starting point isthe life expectancy of thebuilding. If we assume that the current world population has all the housing that it requires, irrespective of itsage, what we can decide is that in 50 years time all buildings will need to be replaced. So an initial estimateis to replace the dwellings at a constant rate over the next 50 years. That is supply 5 billion dwellings in 50years, and so produce at a rate of 100 million dwellings per year. Given that the factory is assumed capableof 100 thousand dwellings per year, that means that 1000 factories are required world wide. These factoriescan then be distributed in proportion to the current distribution of world population. So if 80% of the world

population is in China, India, Africa, South America, the southern hemisphere in general. Then the southernhemisphere requires 800 factories, whilst the industrialised North including North America and Europe onlyrequires 200 factories. So how long does it take to build one factory? And how much investment is requiredto build all the necessary factories?

A world population of 10 billion is a staggering number, but 1000 factories is not. Training millions of peopleto build houses on site, has been simplified to the task of a few thousand people and machines buildingdwellings in factories. Ok! We have the issue of the social-contract again, how do people earn their living tobuy these dwellings? Well only capitalism says they have to buy them. But thats a topic to discuss anotherday.

Here are some more numbers. The largest cities in the world have populations around 10 million people,with a maximum world population of 10 billion, that means only 1000 city-states are required in the world.

That implies one factory per city. The highest population densities in the world are around 4000 persons persquare kilometre. So if a city is considered to be 100 km in diameter, that means one hour to travel from thecity perimeter to the city centre, if travelling at a speed of 50 km/h. Less time required if travelling by train ataround 200km/h, however pick-up and set-down requirements would slow a train down. The area of a 100kmcircle is 7854 sq.km. The average population density would be approx. 1273 persons per square kilometre.But if the population is forced into the maximum density, then each person would have a block of landapproximately 16m x 16m. Thus a dwelling for two persons would be constructed on a block of land 32m x16m, and a four bedroom house on a block of land 32m x 32m. The total land used by the dwellings wouldbe around 2560 sq.km, thus only 32% of the available land would be used by dwellings, and the rest wouldbe consumed by infra-structure. So why do modern cities have apartment blocks and multistoreyresidences? Sure it reduces transportation distances, but does human activity really need to be soconcentrated? Weve hit that social-contract again.

So playing around with these numbers we can conclude that we can forget about producing dwellingssuitable for couples and produce a dwelling for an individual that is capable of being located on a block ofland 16m x 16m. If we further adopt a requirement for the dwelling to be 2m clear of all property boundaries,


4/4


Vol: 1




then the maximum size dwelling is 12m x 12m; and this is for one person. Thus every city has the potential tobuild one factory that is capable of manufacturing and supplying one dwelling to every person in the city.

We are now changing the social infra-structure and the nature of the building industry itself. Just as carshave now become a disposable fashion accessory, so now can housing become a fashion accessory. Dontlike the pile of rubble currently dumped on your property, then sell it for scrap and have it removed, thenplace the dwelling there that you do like.

Have a 3 bedroom house, a couple with two kids. The kids are growing up and need more space, butemployment is hard to come by. After all society erroneously set the parents salary to be commensurate withsupporting a family, but neglected to account for what happens when they no longer need to or wish tosupport a family. As far as society is concerned the money available to support the kids is already in thehands of the parents, so unless the kids can figure out how to earn the money from their parents, then thesystem doesnt work. This is not to say they cannot earn money elsewhere, after all it is not the absolutequantity of money that is important but the way it flows and the rate at which it flows. If one dollar could flowaround to everyone in a country in one day and meet their daily needs, then one dollar would be all that is

ever required. Unfortunately its not all that simple. {This social-contract of minimum wages only applies toemployees. A significant proportion of the population are self-employed with incomes that are typically wellbelow minimum incomes set for employees.}

So back to our three bedroom house, society has provided the family with the means of building such adwelling. Unfortunately this building is doomed to become unsuitable for both the original couple and alsotheir children. So why invest in a loser? From the above number crunching the block of land that a family of 4should be living on should have an area of 1024sq.m (4x256), and the house 576sq.m (4x144). However asa family, resources can be shared and therefore both the size of the dwelling and the land required can bereduced. More importantly it should be apparent that the 12m x 12m dwelling derived above for one personis more than adequate size for a couple {thus inferring that the city population can at least double to 20million}. So can a dwelling be designed that allows children to grow without out-growing the living space thatsociety has sanctioned and made available to them? Can a house be designed that provides a private

dwelling for the parents and semi-private to private dwellings for the growing children? Of course it can. Thesimplest solution is to compartmentalise the building.

Unless you happen to be rich enough to employ a nanny or governess then the babies nursery should be inthe parents bedroom. So in the beginning the baby shares the parents bedroom, as it gets older the childcan move into its own bedroom. As the childs independence grows their part of the house can be isolatedand provided with its own entrance. The simplest way of achieving this would be a linear series of dwellingsattached by a long entrance corridor.

So have we lost track of our prefabricated buildings? Not really! In the last issue I made reference to portalframes for industrial buildings. This structural form is adopted because it provides a relatively large span freefrom columns. A floor free from columns, enables the internal area of a building to be partitioned in differentways for different users. There is no reason why this concept should be restricted to commercial and

industrial buildings. In other words portal frames can be used for domestic dwellings and manyowner/builders do buy sheds and convert them into habitable dwellings.

Hence we now have a competition fuelled by alternative products. Site construction of brick veneer houseswith either timber or steel framing, versus prefabricated transportables, versus prefabricated portal frames.With decision criteria based on different perspectives as to what functions a dwelling can provide.

So tune into the next issue for expansion of the ideas presented here. But dont forget, I have no cleardestination nor objective, I am just on a journey of discovery and who knows what may turn up. As thejourney progresses, where we have been may become clearer, but the future will still be a mystery.

Documents

MorfJV01002origin