Been doing some research on the pros and cons of Pre Fab. Here's what I've come up with in about 20 mins.
Pro
Quality Control
5 month turnaround (or quicker)
Minimize Waste (Except for the fact structure has to be enlarged to survive transport which mean smore materials - see cons)
Price? Supposedly pre fab is to be much cheaper than custom built - haven't seen any solid pricing much below custom home building.
Environmentally friendly - order materials with economies of scale - minimal site disturbance - doesn'tseem like a big impact to me.
So really I have QC and speed.
Con
Sitgma of cheapness, poor quality (mobile home, manufacturered home)
design can be limiting
Extra material required for sturdiness for transport
Need to transport
Doesn't respond to specific site orientation
Price
Any other ideas? What am I missing here? What is the point of pre fab? I'm talking about Dwell House here and not the mobile home park. I think Dwell House was attempting to provide a high design solution to the mobile home concept. I see no success here.
A major barrier I think is investment capitol/business partner. I took a tour of a prefab (for crappy double wides) and the infrastructure to crank these things out efficiently is pretty amazing. Literally a factory for houses. Huge labor force as all trades are on one site at the same time. Where they are framing floors with air nailers it sounds like a war zone. Some Arch firms have successfully partnered with these types of operations, essentially contracting them to build the archi design in the factory. Not sure if any "architecture" firms have their own operation (maybe RE4A or Blu?). Sometimes I see a 1 off that claims to be "prefab", but it is more like it was built in a warehouse through traditional methods then shipped to the site w/o taking benefits that a true factory setting gives.
As for price. In theory a factory setting certainly reduces price. Be careful to compare apples to apples however, as the moblie home park double wides are built very poorly. The salesman giving our studio tour suggested that more nails = better construction. Sounds great to someone who has no idea that there is a little more to it than that.
Site orientation: I would argue that an "architectural" manufactured house could respond to site better than a traditional stick built builder home doesn't.
Not sure if this helps, something to think about. Curious to know what you are working on.
"minimal site disturbance - doesn't seem like a big impact to me."
It depends on where you at, the site conditions and a few other things.
Specifically, many prefab homes (including your dirt cheap mobile home) are designed for various types of wall/pier foundations. Pier foundations technically cause the least amount of impact to a site when dealing with matters of hydrology and run off. They also have the bonus of not requiring regrading.
In places like Florida, new homes for flood reasons (mostly insurance reasons I believe) have to built up on 4 or 5 foot tall mounds with slab foundations.
This can change the hydrology of an area significantly-- a change in runoff can lead to an increase of sediments the destination area (canal, holding pond, ditch) that can cause direct physical blockage or can cause indirect blockage by accelerating plant growth.
There's also the hazard of localized flooding where you have an older house sandwich between two new homes leading to significant run off in the adjacent property.
In all events, the builder is typically liable for these problems and must provide some variety of mitigation-- short-term or long-term-- to solve these issues.
Can be difficult to regulate - potential exists to exploit labor at remote fab location.
Traditional construction industries are organized - usually ensures fair compensation.
Both pros both cons.
Like http://www.zetacommunities.com/
Costs are pretty inline with a comparable custom. Michelle Kaufmann's Glidehouse was starting at about $225/Ft. Blu bought her designs (and perhaps the factory she owned/built).
Pros:
Speed
Quality Control
Little weather limitations
Price decrease for quantity (presumably)
Cons:
Little, if any, cost savings (for small developments or single homes)
Labor is cheap these days
Transport
Size (transport limitations)
The largest advantages I see are Quality Control and Speed. Speed could be a large issue, depending on the project, location, etc.
On the "minimial site disturbance" I would comment that prefab generally refers to detached single-fam homes. IE suburbia. Whatever sustainable aspects you gain from prefab posibilities, you are likely offsetting by a greater degree in that you are inherently contributing to suburban sprawl.
There are applications of modular/prefab to denser building types however.
Please god, not another shipping container project.
Thanks for all the input. A friend is developing vacation homes in Puerto Rico. He, the developer, is also the GC and it has been taxing on him and the turn around for construction time has been from 12-16months. He has been talking about what if's for doing it again and doing it better. Pre-Fab in his estimate would allow him to get more quality over the product and a quicker construction time.
We are working on our own prefab startup. A panel system, not modular, which is the way to go [as Holz mentions above]. We have built 3 prototypes so far, and we are currently constructing a 50m2 building.
5 years in the making... Keep a look out for us in Melbourne in July.
Does anyone know of a good book on prefab? I'm not talking coffee table picture books. I want cad details, process and assebly info, cost, materials, energy etc.. I've been to some great bookstores in Madrid (where I live) but can't seem to find an in-depth book on the subject.
vatoloco - good luck finding a prefab company, or any company for that matter, who will turn over IP, costings etc to the general public. You dont go seriously into creating your own prefab system to then give it away.
On the other hand, architects/designers who do 'one-off' prefab buildings may be interested in havng that published.
We feature in a book coming up shortly, but it is coffeetablesque.
I am working on a prefab idea that has limited use that I am thinking about selling under a Creative Commons licence. This licence will aloow the end user to make use of and adapt the idea for personal use. i will retain commercial use.
"You dont go seriously into creating your own prefab system to then give it away."
Why not diabase? If I construct a well designed pre-fab home with exceptional cost savings and assembly technique.. yeah, I'd publish it. And I'd publish it in detail, because I think students, academics and working professionals would be interested in learning from it as case study. And that benefits me and the profession, and the client.
All that aside, you have to admit that most books on the subject are filled with nice pictures and short descriptions.. not very informative.
Ok. But why not publish after you get your system licenced or pattented? There's no timeline. But people have being doing pre-fab for years and like I said, there seems to be little in-depth published work on the matter. What I'm driving at is the sharing of information in detail. And it seems we may have targetted a void in what is available in print on the subject. Could be a money maker...
Pre-Fab has turned into another buzzword, just like Green. But that's old news. Yet I think the buzzword superficiality has dominated the majorty of published work in the form of the coffee table picture book.
I say all this because the cost of owning/constructing remains very high and I think pre-fab presents the possibility of driving down cost and putting much of the construction method in the hands of the architect, which is very empowering. I think the Glidehouse, as nice as it is, forms a bad example because it was still expensive to build. Perhaps the foundation uped the cost a bit, not to mention the nice materials and detailing.
Right, nice materials and nice detailing will add to the cost, that's the point.
I've still not seen an example of prefab that really makes economic sense. We've discussed various projects with a few local companies and the cost is never an advantage.
Why would diabase give away work? That's like saying "we've got a great business model to make money in architecture, here it is for everyone so they can do the same thing". Business is business.
Publicity is the advantage of large efforts of prefab - it is, or was, a buzz word.
There's just not a market for mid/high end modern designs. There is a market for prefab, obviously, or their wouldn't be companies, but it is the ugly McMansions and generic designs that sell.
Until we see more large scale developers taking risks with more modern design things will remain the same (there are a few good examples, but only a handful).
Anyone in architecture can do what we have done. To try and then shortcut that whole process by asking for IP and ideas and processes is not good. Its not about greed and money, its about respect.
Vataloco, I don't think there are as many advantages as you think. Particularly in terms of your client. Having a client pay for a design that then gets wholesale or unrestricted distribution is not in their interests. But it does depend on where you are coming from - are you a generalist or a specialist? Its only going to be a money maker if you can control what it is you are selling.
I encourage anyone to work on ideas at the intersection of architecture business - get involved with creating things instead of constantly adapting things created by others. I have been espousing this for years on this board at least.
Prefab, or Offsite as it is being rebranded in Britain, has many advantages and disadvantages. We have chosen quite deliberately to create a system that will never be used to make a mcmansion. Its not an answer for everyone. In doing so we immediately define our clientele - which will be people who appreciate a sustainable, beautiful, high-performance system.
Anyway, enough of the sales pitch. I will actually start directly referring to the system, but we have a big milestone we are working towards in July, so I want to leave it till then.
diabase - I'd love to hear how things progress and any info you feel like sharing would be welcomed with enthusiasm.
One of these years, Paul P. should really get a party together for all the ancient Archinecter's that have been lingering here for ages! It'd be a lot of fun to meet and discuss business (and drink, of course!)
Question: not sure if this is its own thread-- but what if I propose a modular home system that utilizes concrete forms (albeit repetitiously), i.e. 4 different kinds of buildings use 2 footprints (concrete pier, T-beam).
I know this is modular but could you also consider a house prefab (assuming 85% of it comes pre-made but needing concrete)?
I was just wondering about this with my investigation of insulating concrete forms. It seems from a standpoint (rebar, the forms themselves, windows and doors all have to be pre-ordered and assembled in advanced) that this would definitely be modular. But wondering where the exact line is between pre-fab and modular.
Sorry to interupt, but if all you nice guy's just realised that each and every trouble even those prone to come, come with the sort it is. pre-fab still operate within the known technikes and the boring limitations, but this is all controled with how andwhy each building part is going to be made, transported, put up, --- you reached the limits only a brand new idea, can make the change. Make everything a different way, this is the solution.
3dh explain a lot of the basics of this, and is flexible enough to realy make a challance, the day you are only forced to realise that there are other way's to make things, but what you been doing, in fact havn't changed that much the many recent years, it perhaps even are worse craftsmanship today than then, 3dh is not a smart project some arogant architect try fool you by -- I Per Corell who develobed it, give it our allmost for free, so if it work and you start make wonders with it, you are not fooled into buying it. So how can you be fooled. If it can make a concrete form, to build a building structure aswell as delivering a cheap 3D section honeycomb made from sheets or sheet box frames,
This is not about 3dh in fact, 3dh only image what new production and digital controlled production maneage to yield, It explain this image of what can change compleatly, by something as simple as a building method that offer the trick, to translate the eddited 3D volumes, into real building structure. Becaurse on top a multible compleatly new options will show, --- to be able to produce the most efficient most material undependable structures will allway's spark creativity. Nothing make a heavier impac on anything, than a compleatly new way to put things together.
I was sure it was going to show up in Haiti after the Earth Quake, then again in Chile.....Hey maybe you could give the idea to BP and they could build safe platforms for drilling oil. They are going to be needing all the help they can get.
Thats the thing with prefabriactred systems - no system is universal, and no system is final.
3DH might be a whole lot of things, but it isnt the silver bullet.
Unislaugh - in terms of where the line is drawn. I think. as Per quite rightly points out, we are limited by technology.
I also think that Modular units are the wrong way to go, because you run into a number of problems. That is why we went down the panel route - more flexiblity which does not preclude the possibility of modules, but does not make it mandatory. Start with the smallest parts and build up. Unless of course you are targeting a very specific and discrete building type with little or no flexiblity required.
Of course, in any situation, the ground is always the variable factor and until someone invents a system of attaching a building to the ground in a multitude of situations, that will always be a challenge.
Our prefab philosophy is pretty rational - whatever can be done in the factory, should be done in the factory. So the end building may be 90% manufactured, and 10% onsite.
A one off modular is always as much if not more expensive than sitebuilt. Cars are made millions per design. Those Levittown houses got kicked out eventually at one a day or less - because they were all the exactly the same. The factory essentially moved outside. I've done developments of stick built and panel built, full on pre-fab has never worked out in the end, and not for lack of trying. It is an attractive concept to get well built buildings for less money, but what really saves you money is repetition. The reason that at the turn of the last century is that many of the builders at that time is because their techniques were very similar from building to building - if you're ever lucky enough to look through a 100 year old drawing set pay attention to what the architect thought he didn't need to include. If the methods he thought should be used, those details would be in there, wouldn't they?
To go back to the question of is it right for your developer in PR. Weather isn't a huge issue (although I am guessing rain will slow it down) but everything needs to be imported - and if there is a way to move a whole panel or module from the port to your site, then it might just make sense to build it in a place with lower labor costs and easy access to a port conveinient to the carribian.
good luck, i'm interested to hear what method gets selected.
No offcaurse 3dh is not fully develobed, -- if it was it would be as stiffened as all our other attitudes. And if each and any of our goods or new technologies had been met with the same attitude as 3dh, we would newer see assembly lines, we would be without most of what we take for gurantied ; --- if a taste about a thing, if unjust claims has to be fullfilled first, no new thinking or step forwerds will ever occour.
See to get a step further, I think a few participan has to pay the credit due ; 3dh has been used and you know it. But this discussion is like a religious discussion --- I has plentu of answers to what has been asked, but with both the industry and your mind ; are you realy willing to open your minds, becaurse that is the only way, and all those worn out arguments about 3dh, please realise they are not fasion and realy uncover the actural barriers. Arguments dealing with bad spelling and social skills has very little use, figuring out where the barriers are.
There are very little sense saying " I can win over this guy by my mastery of english and my ability to grow a crowd" and repeeting the same arguments even they are answered again and again, do not deal with finding out where the real barriers are. --
Sorry I do not want to shiver this very nessery discussion , -- but when someone ask directly or use an argument that deal very little with the real caurse. --- How do you expect I can react ?
"show me where 3dh has been used " -- well if you can't see what is wrong with this question how can we continue in the direction that state that the assembly line, was also a very alian thing back when interduced. But if you can not see the simularity and realise how a different aproach realy are possible, then offcaurse you will even close your eyes even 3dh "is nothing new" and later "will newer work" --- my argument is that when these two arguments can be used by the same person in the same answer, then it do point to the real barriers. That the discussions about 3dh newer had to do with what a different aproach to putting things together, can realy do about things, That all those discussions was about taste.
We all should know that where the barrier first show is in logistics. But do we realise that the logistic problem is sort of build into this. That our one string way to solve the problems will newer meet a solution when we use a thousand things to build one item. -- Did you realy realise why 3dh was so different there ; that when a thousand building parts and compoments are replaced by something fabricated on site in form to fit where projected, then logistic will be very different.
It will not be a barrier but a framework, It will use today's projecting tools in a much more transparant way, and you can forget about today's logistic problems this is basicly and by core idea different.
There will be no "item number xxxx" and assembly fitting number yyyy" Offcaurse not when everything is literaly fabricated in form on site, then the only logistic will deal with trivial things such as where in the structure, with weight and gross cost of cut parts. Everything will be so differnet it need to be, to cross that barrier -- and please ; let us come further than all the funny social nip-pick and arguing that misspelled words is what this is about, arguments like ; "well, -- build me a moon base, then I will belive you". Are realy paralell to what the craftsmen asked of the assembly line before they could even accept it -- and also back then arguments turned into personal attacks rather than real arguments, have we learned so little there ? Is the battle won over the crafts realy the only victory. Was nothing learned by the victorious in the process ?
You can blame me that I make this into an issue about 3dh, but I did what I could to use 3dh to point to the real barriers. All those problems about nose close to the barrier, about that the more refined the settled way's become, the fewer new directions will offer thmself is also build into this narrow lead. When everything has to be build ontop something allready there, the new options become rare. When it ontop become an allmost religious issue, and followers of the 3dh idea become followers of the wrong religion, then arguments very simular to what was spoken against the Automobile become very paralell to what is spoken against 3dh as how it represent a compleatly new aproach : " do you realy expect this contry to be cross patched with allyway's for thousands of these Automobiles ? What will you do with all those horses". 3dh newer was a religious issue, and newer a social thing, newer a question about spelling words wrong or right. It is everything elst than that, and I dare say a very rare and workable answer to serious problems you should address. Becaurse basicly, this is in your minds. That is where you will find the reson for the barriers and not before these barriers are turned upside down, progress will install.
Neat allready U.S. -- colors remind me of Rhino but I guess it can be a number of programs. Guess you assembled it with Solids and then added texture and rendered, but did you think about how to bring it into reality, how to manufactor forms and what wall thickness, be happy if you did not ;))
It is a very worthy case, and I been trying to add my contributions to, but if you want to visualise I can gurantie, that if you first maneage to generate -- or bore yourself thru the repeted srctioning and multible doing the same few stupid rutines, on a n allway's to big number of cross sections, and you try that out in a rendering program, by the end of that you could have figured an extra gain by generating the structure 3dh vise, to make it acturaly buildable. You see, the only material nessery with 3dh is sheet material, such can even be "build" to the prefered lenght. it can be sandwiched longer just with a double overlap, moving the offset and sandwich will make a sheet material out of tossed sheets, and you know it will hold when it is possible 3D. Belive me, 3dh hide multible expandable.
May 31, 10 4:10 pm ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
Pre Fab A Rama
Been doing some research on the pros and cons of Pre Fab. Here's what I've come up with in about 20 mins.
Pro
Quality Control
5 month turnaround (or quicker)
Minimize Waste (Except for the fact structure has to be enlarged to survive transport which mean smore materials - see cons)
Price? Supposedly pre fab is to be much cheaper than custom built - haven't seen any solid pricing much below custom home building.
Environmentally friendly - order materials with economies of scale - minimal site disturbance - doesn'tseem like a big impact to me.
So really I have QC and speed.
Con
Sitgma of cheapness, poor quality (mobile home, manufacturered home)
design can be limiting
Extra material required for sturdiness for transport
Need to transport
Doesn't respond to specific site orientation
Price
Any other ideas? What am I missing here? What is the point of pre fab? I'm talking about Dwell House here and not the mobile home park. I think Dwell House was attempting to provide a high design solution to the mobile home concept. I see no success here.
A major barrier I think is investment capitol/business partner. I took a tour of a prefab (for crappy double wides) and the infrastructure to crank these things out efficiently is pretty amazing. Literally a factory for houses. Huge labor force as all trades are on one site at the same time. Where they are framing floors with air nailers it sounds like a war zone. Some Arch firms have successfully partnered with these types of operations, essentially contracting them to build the archi design in the factory. Not sure if any "architecture" firms have their own operation (maybe RE4A or Blu?). Sometimes I see a 1 off that claims to be "prefab", but it is more like it was built in a warehouse through traditional methods then shipped to the site w/o taking benefits that a true factory setting gives.
As for price. In theory a factory setting certainly reduces price. Be careful to compare apples to apples however, as the moblie home park double wides are built very poorly. The salesman giving our studio tour suggested that more nails = better construction. Sounds great to someone who has no idea that there is a little more to it than that.
Site orientation: I would argue that an "architectural" manufactured house could respond to site better than a traditional stick built builder home doesn't.
Not sure if this helps, something to think about. Curious to know what you are working on.
"minimal site disturbance - doesn't seem like a big impact to me."
It depends on where you at, the site conditions and a few other things.
Specifically, many prefab homes (including your dirt cheap mobile home) are designed for various types of wall/pier foundations. Pier foundations technically cause the least amount of impact to a site when dealing with matters of hydrology and run off. They also have the bonus of not requiring regrading.
In places like Florida, new homes for flood reasons (mostly insurance reasons I believe) have to built up on 4 or 5 foot tall mounds with slab foundations.
This can change the hydrology of an area significantly-- a change in runoff can lead to an increase of sediments the destination area (canal, holding pond, ditch) that can cause direct physical blockage or can cause indirect blockage by accelerating plant growth.
There's also the hazard of localized flooding where you have an older house sandwich between two new homes leading to significant run off in the adjacent property.
In all events, the builder is typically liable for these problems and must provide some variety of mitigation-- short-term or long-term-- to solve these issues.
if you think about pre fab in terms of panels instead of modules, i think it becomes a lot more palatable. think SIPS or cross laminated timber
learn to flat pack a home
Can be difficult to regulate - potential exists to exploit labor at remote fab location.
Traditional construction industries are organized - usually ensures fair compensation.
Both pros both cons.
Like http://www.zetacommunities.com/
Costs are pretty inline with a comparable custom. Michelle Kaufmann's Glidehouse was starting at about $225/Ft. Blu bought her designs (and perhaps the factory she owned/built).
Pros:
Speed
Quality Control
Little weather limitations
Price decrease for quantity (presumably)
Cons:
Little, if any, cost savings (for small developments or single homes)
Labor is cheap these days
Transport
Size (transport limitations)
The largest advantages I see are Quality Control and Speed. Speed could be a large issue, depending on the project, location, etc.
On the "minimial site disturbance" I would comment that prefab generally refers to detached single-fam homes. IE suburbia. Whatever sustainable aspects you gain from prefab posibilities, you are likely offsetting by a greater degree in that you are inherently contributing to suburban sprawl.
There are applications of modular/prefab to denser building types however.
Please god, not another shipping container project.
Only 3 or 4 shipping container projects have truly "wowed" me.
what holz said... I have seen some beautiful SIP (not in person) projects...
Thanks for all the input. A friend is developing vacation homes in Puerto Rico. He, the developer, is also the GC and it has been taxing on him and the turn around for construction time has been from 12-16months. He has been talking about what if's for doing it again and doing it better. Pre-Fab in his estimate would allow him to get more quality over the product and a quicker construction time.
I thought the accepted terminology was
Manufactured = delivered to site whole
Prefab, modular = delivered in pieces
We are working on our own prefab startup. A panel system, not modular, which is the way to go [as Holz mentions above]. We have built 3 prototypes so far, and we are currently constructing a 50m2 building.
5 years in the making... Keep a look out for us in Melbourne in July.
ps. When I say prototypes, I mean buildings.
Well. . .I wasn't thinking full-scale canvas-and-wood mockups, a la Mies. . .!
Seriously, congrats, and let's see 'em when ready.
Does anyone know of a good book on prefab? I'm not talking coffee table picture books. I want cad details, process and assebly info, cost, materials, energy etc.. I've been to some great bookstores in Madrid (where I live) but can't seem to find an in-depth book on the subject.
I'm actually researching something similar and insulating concrete forms seem to be the cat's meow as far as modular building systems go.
Anyone have any direct experience with ICF?
vatoloco - good luck finding a prefab company, or any company for that matter, who will turn over IP, costings etc to the general public. You dont go seriously into creating your own prefab system to then give it away.
On the other hand, architects/designers who do 'one-off' prefab buildings may be interested in havng that published.
We feature in a book coming up shortly, but it is coffeetablesque.
On another note,
I am working on a prefab idea that has limited use that I am thinking about selling under a Creative Commons licence. This licence will aloow the end user to make use of and adapt the idea for personal use. i will retain commercial use.
"You dont go seriously into creating your own prefab system to then give it away."
Why not diabase? If I construct a well designed pre-fab home with exceptional cost savings and assembly technique.. yeah, I'd publish it. And I'd publish it in detail, because I think students, academics and working professionals would be interested in learning from it as case study. And that benefits me and the profession, and the client.
All that aside, you have to admit that most books on the subject are filled with nice pictures and short descriptions.. not very informative.
Fair enough,
But what I want to make a distinction between is a one-off prefab project, and a wider prefab system that you can then licence or sell.
Architects, in my opinion, do very little to contribute to building IP and systems.
Ok. But why not publish after you get your system licenced or pattented? There's no timeline. But people have being doing pre-fab for years and like I said, there seems to be little in-depth published work on the matter. What I'm driving at is the sharing of information in detail. And it seems we may have targetted a void in what is available in print on the subject. Could be a money maker...
Pre-Fab has turned into another buzzword, just like Green. But that's old news. Yet I think the buzzword superficiality has dominated the majorty of published work in the form of the coffee table picture book.
I say all this because the cost of owning/constructing remains very high and I think pre-fab presents the possibility of driving down cost and putting much of the construction method in the hands of the architect, which is very empowering. I think the Glidehouse, as nice as it is, forms a bad example because it was still expensive to build. Perhaps the foundation uped the cost a bit, not to mention the nice materials and detailing.
Right, nice materials and nice detailing will add to the cost, that's the point.
I've still not seen an example of prefab that really makes economic sense. We've discussed various projects with a few local companies and the cost is never an advantage.
Why would diabase give away work? That's like saying "we've got a great business model to make money in architecture, here it is for everyone so they can do the same thing". Business is business.
Publicity is the advantage of large efforts of prefab - it is, or was, a buzz word.
There's just not a market for mid/high end modern designs. There is a market for prefab, obviously, or their wouldn't be companies, but it is the ugly McMansions and generic designs that sell.
Until we see more large scale developers taking risks with more modern design things will remain the same (there are a few good examples, but only a handful).
I wholeheartedly agree Trace,
Business is business.
Anyone in architecture can do what we have done. To try and then shortcut that whole process by asking for IP and ideas and processes is not good. Its not about greed and money, its about respect.
Vataloco, I don't think there are as many advantages as you think. Particularly in terms of your client. Having a client pay for a design that then gets wholesale or unrestricted distribution is not in their interests. But it does depend on where you are coming from - are you a generalist or a specialist? Its only going to be a money maker if you can control what it is you are selling.
I encourage anyone to work on ideas at the intersection of architecture business - get involved with creating things instead of constantly adapting things created by others. I have been espousing this for years on this board at least.
Prefab, or Offsite as it is being rebranded in Britain, has many advantages and disadvantages. We have chosen quite deliberately to create a system that will never be used to make a mcmansion. Its not an answer for everyone. In doing so we immediately define our clientele - which will be people who appreciate a sustainable, beautiful, high-performance system.
Anyway, enough of the sales pitch. I will actually start directly referring to the system, but we have a big milestone we are working towards in July, so I want to leave it till then.
diabase - I'd love to hear how things progress and any info you feel like sharing would be welcomed with enthusiasm.
One of these years, Paul P. should really get a party together for all the ancient Archinecter's that have been lingering here for ages! It'd be a lot of fun to meet and discuss business (and drink, of course!)
It would be good. Just need to get to LA!
All will be revealed a bit later on - hopefully on Archinect too.
Question: not sure if this is its own thread-- but what if I propose a modular home system that utilizes concrete forms (albeit repetitiously), i.e. 4 different kinds of buildings use 2 footprints (concrete pier, T-beam).
I know this is modular but could you also consider a house prefab (assuming 85% of it comes pre-made but needing concrete)?
I was just wondering about this with my investigation of insulating concrete forms. It seems from a standpoint (rebar, the forms themselves, windows and doors all have to be pre-ordered and assembled in advanced) that this would definitely be modular. But wondering where the exact line is between pre-fab and modular.
I'd go to LA, probably going this summer as a matter of fact ;-)
Sorry to interupt, but if all you nice guy's just realised that each and every trouble even those prone to come, come with the sort it is. pre-fab still operate within the known technikes and the boring limitations, but this is all controled with how andwhy each building part is going to be made, transported, put up, --- you reached the limits only a brand new idea, can make the change. Make everything a different way, this is the solution.
3dh explain a lot of the basics of this, and is flexible enough to realy make a challance, the day you are only forced to realise that there are other way's to make things, but what you been doing, in fact havn't changed that much the many recent years, it perhaps even are worse craftsmanship today than then, 3dh is not a smart project some arogant architect try fool you by -- I Per Corell who develobed it, give it our allmost for free, so if it work and you start make wonders with it, you are not fooled into buying it. So how can you be fooled. If it can make a concrete form, to build a building structure aswell as delivering a cheap 3D section honeycomb made from sheets or sheet box frames,
This is not about 3dh in fact, 3dh only image what new production and digital controlled production maneage to yield, It explain this image of what can change compleatly, by something as simple as a building method that offer the trick, to translate the eddited 3D volumes, into real building structure. Becaurse on top a multible compleatly new options will show, --- to be able to produce the most efficient most material undependable structures will allway's spark creativity. Nothing make a heavier impac on anything, than a compleatly new way to put things together.
3DH isn't perfected yet??! I thought by now, with this miraculous building solution, that it would be all over the world!!
Per, please post examples of this wonderful solution and the numbers that back it!!
I was sure it was going to show up in Haiti after the Earth Quake, then again in Chile.....Hey maybe you could give the idea to BP and they could build safe platforms for drilling oil. They are going to be needing all the help they can get.
Thats the thing with prefabriactred systems - no system is universal, and no system is final.
3DH might be a whole lot of things, but it isnt the silver bullet.
Unislaugh - in terms of where the line is drawn. I think. as Per quite rightly points out, we are limited by technology.
I also think that Modular units are the wrong way to go, because you run into a number of problems. That is why we went down the panel route - more flexiblity which does not preclude the possibility of modules, but does not make it mandatory. Start with the smallest parts and build up. Unless of course you are targeting a very specific and discrete building type with little or no flexiblity required.
Of course, in any situation, the ground is always the variable factor and until someone invents a system of attaching a building to the ground in a multitude of situations, that will always be a challenge.
Our prefab philosophy is pretty rational - whatever can be done in the factory, should be done in the factory. So the end building may be 90% manufactured, and 10% onsite.
A one off modular is always as much if not more expensive than sitebuilt. Cars are made millions per design. Those Levittown houses got kicked out eventually at one a day or less - because they were all the exactly the same. The factory essentially moved outside. I've done developments of stick built and panel built, full on pre-fab has never worked out in the end, and not for lack of trying. It is an attractive concept to get well built buildings for less money, but what really saves you money is repetition. The reason that at the turn of the last century is that many of the builders at that time is because their techniques were very similar from building to building - if you're ever lucky enough to look through a 100 year old drawing set pay attention to what the architect thought he didn't need to include. If the methods he thought should be used, those details would be in there, wouldn't they?
To go back to the question of is it right for your developer in PR. Weather isn't a huge issue (although I am guessing rain will slow it down) but everything needs to be imported - and if there is a way to move a whole panel or module from the port to your site, then it might just make sense to build it in a place with lower labor costs and easy access to a port conveinient to the carribian.
good luck, i'm interested to hear what method gets selected.
That is "if techniques the architect thought should be used were atypical he would've included the details."
No offcaurse 3dh is not fully develobed, -- if it was it would be as stiffened as all our other attitudes. And if each and any of our goods or new technologies had been met with the same attitude as 3dh, we would newer see assembly lines, we would be without most of what we take for gurantied ; --- if a taste about a thing, if unjust claims has to be fullfilled first, no new thinking or step forwerds will ever occour.
See to get a step further, I think a few participan has to pay the credit due ; 3dh has been used and you know it. But this discussion is like a religious discussion --- I has plentu of answers to what has been asked, but with both the industry and your mind ; are you realy willing to open your minds, becaurse that is the only way, and all those worn out arguments about 3dh, please realise they are not fasion and realy uncover the actural barriers. Arguments dealing with bad spelling and social skills has very little use, figuring out where the barriers are.
There are very little sense saying " I can win over this guy by my mastery of english and my ability to grow a crowd" and repeeting the same arguments even they are answered again and again, do not deal with finding out where the real barriers are. --
Sorry I do not want to shiver this very nessery discussion , -- but when someone ask directly or use an argument that deal very little with the real caurse. --- How do you expect I can react ?
"show me where 3dh has been used " -- well if you can't see what is wrong with this question how can we continue in the direction that state that the assembly line, was also a very alian thing back when interduced. But if you can not see the simularity and realise how a different aproach realy are possible, then offcaurse you will even close your eyes even 3dh "is nothing new" and later "will newer work" --- my argument is that when these two arguments can be used by the same person in the same answer, then it do point to the real barriers. That the discussions about 3dh newer had to do with what a different aproach to putting things together, can realy do about things, That all those discussions was about taste.
My less that $500 a month (just barely!) concrete cottage for 1.
We all should know that where the barrier first show is in logistics. But do we realise that the logistic problem is sort of build into this. That our one string way to solve the problems will newer meet a solution when we use a thousand things to build one item. -- Did you realy realise why 3dh was so different there ; that when a thousand building parts and compoments are replaced by something fabricated on site in form to fit where projected, then logistic will be very different.
It will not be a barrier but a framework, It will use today's projecting tools in a much more transparant way, and you can forget about today's logistic problems this is basicly and by core idea different.
There will be no "item number xxxx" and assembly fitting number yyyy" Offcaurse not when everything is literaly fabricated in form on site, then the only logistic will deal with trivial things such as where in the structure, with weight and gross cost of cut parts. Everything will be so differnet it need to be, to cross that barrier -- and please ; let us come further than all the funny social nip-pick and arguing that misspelled words is what this is about, arguments like ; "well, -- build me a moon base, then I will belive you". Are realy paralell to what the craftsmen asked of the assembly line before they could even accept it -- and also back then arguments turned into personal attacks rather than real arguments, have we learned so little there ? Is the battle won over the crafts realy the only victory. Was nothing learned by the victorious in the process ?
You can blame me that I make this into an issue about 3dh, but I did what I could to use 3dh to point to the real barriers. All those problems about nose close to the barrier, about that the more refined the settled way's become, the fewer new directions will offer thmself is also build into this narrow lead. When everything has to be build ontop something allready there, the new options become rare. When it ontop become an allmost religious issue, and followers of the 3dh idea become followers of the wrong religion, then arguments very simular to what was spoken against the Automobile become very paralell to what is spoken against 3dh as how it represent a compleatly new aproach : " do you realy expect this contry to be cross patched with allyway's for thousands of these Automobiles ? What will you do with all those horses". 3dh newer was a religious issue, and newer a social thing, newer a question about spelling words wrong or right. It is everything elst than that, and I dare say a very rare and workable answer to serious problems you should address. Becaurse basicly, this is in your minds. That is where you will find the reson for the barriers and not before these barriers are turned upside down, progress will install.
More to come when I put down some rendering skills.
Neat allready U.S. -- colors remind me of Rhino but I guess it can be a number of programs. Guess you assembled it with Solids and then added texture and rendered, but did you think about how to bring it into reality, how to manufactor forms and what wall thickness, be happy if you did not ;))
"but did you think about how to bring it into reality, how to manufactor forms and what wall thickness, be happy if you did not ;)"
No, I did. The goal is affordable housing for an income bracket that typically doesn't get this kind of welfare treatment.
The majority of this project follows the specifications of working with ICF per manufacturer instruction.
Don't make me pull out my 5DH.
It is a very worthy case, and I been trying to add my contributions to, but if you want to visualise I can gurantie, that if you first maneage to generate -- or bore yourself thru the repeted srctioning and multible doing the same few stupid rutines, on a n allway's to big number of cross sections, and you try that out in a rendering program, by the end of that you could have figured an extra gain by generating the structure 3dh vise, to make it acturaly buildable. You see, the only material nessery with 3dh is sheet material, such can even be "build" to the prefered lenght. it can be sandwiched longer just with a double overlap, moving the offset and sandwich will make a sheet material out of tossed sheets, and you know it will hold when it is possible 3D. Belive me, 3dh hide multible expandable.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.