Prefabrication, for people in a hurry

P

R E F A B R I C A T I O N

for people in a hurry.

Richard Mohammed

ARCH 548 (Gradiate Project Part I) December 2022

Prefabrication for people in a hurry.

Richard Mohammed

To the architects, designers, engineers, and contractors who are leading the way.

[fig. 1] Kuka Robot, Author, 2022.

A Kuka Robot fabricating a sheet of 4’ x 8’ plywood with its 6-axis drilling head. The movement of the robot is completely automated , cutting and drilling with absolute precision.

This thesis was inspired by my fascination with the robotic prefabrication workshop held in collaboration by UBC School of Architecture, UBC Forestry, and the University of Waterloo. I couldn’t describe what was more surprising – the precision of the state-of-the-art 6-axis drilling robot capable of lifting 1,300 kg or the fact the school had this resource in the first place! This was shared reaction when the workshop invited people within the industry to actively learn, collaborate, and ultimately fabricate and assemble a structure using the robot’s innovative capabilities.

This workshop was the beginning of a course that encouraged students to explore wood fabrication methods through robotic manufacturing. The workshop provided students with a solid foundation of the current prefabrication technologies along with the necessary professionals involved. I spent the workshop listening and learning from fellow students, architects, designers, contractors, engineers, and professors about their experience in construction and design within the realm of prefabrication. Not only was it was inspiring to hear their personal experiences within the field but the fact that they believed they need to learn more. They needed to question what they already knew. They needed to collaborate with their colleagues to further their own understanding. Every day I saw their desire to develop their skills through continuous learning.

Following the workshop I realized the value and empowerment that is generated through increasing the construction industry’s access to learning and collaboration of prefabrication techniques and technologies. I asked myself, how can I begin to engage the spirit of learning with the development of prefabrication construction? In what ways can I illicit excitement and desire that challenges the industry’s hesitancy to adopt prefabrication techniques?

[fig. 2] EcoMod, Smith, 2011.

Students invited at EcoMod at the University of Virgnia to participate in the process of designing and fabricating a modular low-income house. The education of architects must encourage the collaborative skills necessary such that students become experts and facilitators in the process of

If prefabrication technologies have demonstrated innovations within the construction industry, why are they so reluctant to adopt it? This thesis asks the questions: how can we reduce the hesitancy of prefabrication to illicit excitement and desire, and what can we learn from its ability to combine the knowledge of designers, architects, engineers, and contractors?

Much of the construction industry works in traditional on-site construction. For the last one hundred years as the economy has grown sophisticated and global, the industry has been governed by four variables: quality, time, scope, and cost1. One of these variables would be paramount in every project at a cost to the others. The industrialization of prefabrication was seen to address this inequality of production; however, this was not the case. Prefab, in its early form, contributed to an era of commodification, mass-production, and homogenized housing typologies. While this adoption of Fordism techniques allowed for the scalability of off-site fabrication to meet the need for a booming housing market, it failed to realize the integration between the people involved in the systems, materials, and production of innovative technologies.

Avenues for learning and collaborative design have been demonstrated in contemporary prefabrication companies through the development of automated robotic manufacturing, shared expertise between real-estate industry, and agency and carpentry expertise of contractors within the realm of prefab. This thesis seeks to harness the spirt of learning and collaboration within the prefabrication process as a strategy to not only reduce the hesitancy of adoption but also illicit desire and excitement among the construction industry.

The outcome of this thesis is an architecture, not as a formal commodity, but as school of prefabrication that facilitates a learning and collaborative environment between stakeholders of the AEC industry.

1. Smith, Ryan E. Prefab Architecture: A Guide to Modular Design and Construction. John Wiley & Sons, 2010.

The power of the network of techniques in new construction methods necessitates an opportunity for a place of learning and collaboration about innovative prefabrication practices.

Prefabrication

The collaboration within the architecture, engineering, and construction professions that maximizes the integration of tools and technologies for the off-site construction of building components, panelized solutions, and volumetric components.

Automated Manufacturing

The process in which human labour is completely absent from the manufacturing process, allowing for a higher level of precision through an integrated digital means of production.

Mass Timber

Mass timber uses state-of-the-art technology to glue, nail, or dowel wood products together in layers. The results are large structural panels, posts, and beams.

On-site Construction

The process in which the construction of buildings is executed in-situ, on-site by trained and skilled contractors.

Off-site Construction

The process in which the construction of buildings is executed off-site, usually in a controlled and safe environment of a factory.

Embodied Carbon

This is a measure of a building’s total carbon footprint and an overlooked source of emissions generated by the construction sector. Before a building becomes operational, carbon dioxide from materials and processes used in construction is released.

The AEC industry consists of the joint collaboration between professionals within the Architecture, Engineers, and Contractors that work within the construction sector.

The AHJ is essentially the governmental agency, usually the planning & building department, that works closely with the AEC industry to ensure the needs and wants of both parties are achieved.

Innovation

Through collaboration and sharing of knowledge and skills, new and efficient methods of producing ideas begin to emerge.

Missing Middle

This concept aims to challenge the the need for creating cost effective and community supported rental housing in between high and low density neighbourhoods.

Technology Transfer

The way in which technology has the means necessaray to transfer from one indsutry to another.

Industrialization

The process and development of industries (i.e manufacturing) through standardization that have expanded to affect the greater population.

AEC Industry

Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ)

Collaboration

The ability for people to work towards a common common using their unique skills and experience.

Digital Twin

The process in which the manufacturers reconstructs the drawings received from the architect into a 3D model for manufacturing, optimizing the building’s material and hardware use.

Scope of Learning

Amalgamation of specific categories such as the learner, learning experience, learning environment, the learning process, evaluation of learning process, and the teaching situation to understand a student’s ability to learn and grow.

Fordism

Related to industrialization, where the assembly line was developed to provide a more precise product and also decrease labor and time per unit output.

Commodification

The process in which something is treated as an object to be traded for monetary value. This can include things such as goods, services, ideas, nature, etc.

[fig. 1] Prefabrication history, Author, 2022.

[fig. 2] Aladdin Homes ad, National Geographic, 1920.

[fig. 3] Aladdin Homes Kit Catalogue, North American Construction Co., 1916.

[fig. 4] Transfer of Industrial Knowledge, Author, 2022.

[fig. 5] Robotic manufacturing, Intelligent City, 2021.

[fig. 6] Parametric modelling, Intelligent City, 2021.

[fig. 7] Robotic assembly process, Intelligent City, 2021.

[fig. 8] Section drawing, Intelligent City, 2021.

[fig. 9] Image of R-Town building, R-Hauz, 2021.

[fig. 10] R-Town axo diagram, CMV Architects, 2018.

[fig. 11] R-Hauz project timeline, Author, 2022.

[fig. 12] R-Town Pilot Project construction, Wood Works, 2021.

[fig. 13] Canada expansion of Prefab, Author, 2022.

[fig. 14] Global expansion of Prefab, Author, 2022.

[fig. 15] Image of BCPH building, Ema Peter, 2014.

[fig. 16] Mass timber drawings, Author, 2022.

[fig. 17] Image of interior BCPH building, Ema Peter, 2014.

[fig. 18] Image of BCPH working environment, Author, 2022.

[fig. 19] Image of Digital Twin modelling, Author, 2022.

[fig. 20] Image of wood sculpture, Author, 2022.

[fig. 21] Diagram of collaboration at BCPH, Author, 2022.

[fig. 22] Diagram comparing traditional and prefab construction practice, Author, 2022.

[fig. 23] Traditional way of building, FP Innovations, 2016.

[fig. 24] Innovative way of building, Intelligent City, 2021.

[fig. 25] Diagram of the hesistancy towards prefab, Author, 2022. 2021.

[fig. 26] Diagram of Katerra’s acquired companies, Author, 2022.

[fig. 27] Diagram of Katerra’s dismembered management, Author, 2022

[fig. 28] Image of Performative Wood structure, Maverick Chan, 2022.

[fig. 29] Diagram of intersection the spirit of learning with prefab, Author, 2022.

[fig. 30] Mille Feuille prefab wood structure on display, Author, 2022.

[fig. 31] Axo drawing of robot fabrication 1, Author, 2022.

[fig. 32] Collage of construction process of prefab workshop, Author, 2022.

[fig. 33] Comparing robot code and wood dowel connections, Author, 2022.

[fig. 34] Axo diagram of construction of Mille Feuille, Author, 2022.

[fig. 35] Drawing of Mille Feuille elevation, Author, 2022.

[fig. 36] Image of performative wood structure, Maverick Chan, 2022.

[fig. 37] Image of Performative Wood structure 2, Maverick Chan, 2022.

[fig. 38] Image of box joint connection, Maverick Chan, 2022.

[fig. 39] Axo drawing of robot fabrication 2, Author, 2022.

[fig. 40] Drawing of Performative Wood elevation, Author, 2022.

[fig. 41] Diagram of the Evolution of Prefabrication, Author, 2022.

[fig. 42] Diagram of the Scope of Learning, Author, 2022.

[fig. 43] Regional Map of Greater Toronto Area, Author, 2022.

[fig. 44] Regional Map of Innovation Corridor, Author, 2022.

[fig. 45] Map of Brampton, Author, 2022.

[fig. 46] Axo Drawing of Sheridan College, Author, 2022.

[fig. 47] Phase 1 of Sheridan’s master plan, Urban Strategies, 2019.

[fig. 48] Diagram of GPII Methodology, Author, 2022.

[fig. 49] Cyclical Diagram of GPII Methodology, Author, 2022.

Part I

Research into Innovative Construction Methods

What is Prefabrication?

Prefabrication – often associated with the terms “off-site”, “assembly”, or just “fabrication” – can be seen as stuck in the trenches of 19th century conventions of standardization2. Adopted from the manufacturing industry, notably the concept of Fordism, prefabrication was intended to address the stagnant nature of the construction industry – an innovation for a new architecture. Defining the concept of prefabrication becomes that much more important in this ever-changing technological world we live in.

The 1932 Webster’s dictionary defines prefabrication “to fabricate the parts of a whole at a factory so that construction consists mainly of assembling and uniting standardized parts.” While this is not entirely wrong, it does omit one of the most important tenets of prefabrication that is the integration and collaboration of industry professionals. While the technology of industrialization has progressed since 1932, the word has not, leaving us to say prefabrication rooted in its old meaning.

This thesis attempts to reinvent the word ‘prefabrication’ from its outdated meaning embedded within the industrialist paradigm to a concept of integration of technology, learning, and collaboration between architects, designers, engineers, contractors, and owners.

2. Smith, Ryan E. Prefab Architecture: A Guide to Modular Design and Construction. John Wiley & Sons, 2010.

Industrialization

[fig. 1] Prefabrication history, Author, 2022.

This playful graphic highlights how prefabrication adopted the standardization of the assembly line production of cars during the early 1900s. This knowledge and skills was transferred to the construction industry where timber was pre-cut for kit

Even though materials and methods of productions have advanced other industries, such as car manufacturing, common construction methods within the building industry have not changed over the last 80 years3. Construction is often believed to be the slowest of all industries in implementing scientifically sound technological innovations.

The industry realized that if industrial manufacturing processes can produce products and good for society, why can’t the same process be harnessed to produce higher quality and more affordable architecture? In its early days, prefabrication was less about a project’s quality, scope, cost, and time but rather fascinated with the idea of industrialization4. This shifted the thinking of the industry, relying on the transfer of technology and knowledge from the manufacturing industry.

The result of this new era of construction was a homogenized landscape of homes that were “readi-cut” timber members delivered on-site for on-site assembly. Unfortunately, this focus on monotonous housing typologies overshadowed the importance to understand the integration of systems, skills, and collaboration of professions within this new construction process.

3. Kuan, S, and Kaustinen, M. “What Is Holding Back the Expanded Use of Prefabricated Wood Building Systems?” White Paper. Vancouver, British Columbia: Forest Innovation Investment of British Columbia, August 2016.

4. Smith, R. Prefab Architecture, 2010.

Commodification

[fig. 3] Aladdin Homes Kit Catalogue, North American Construction Co., 1916.

The Aladdin catalogue of ready-to-build homes, illustrating the house as a product that would be delivered on-site.

Early prefabrication methods allowed for the mass production of these “kit of homes”. This acceptance of the standardization and mass production affects both the potential construction industry and as a way of life. The production of prefabricated projects in the future will not be determined by the technologies initially adopted by the assembly line under the mass-production paradigm, but rather by the social and economic struggles of the day5. People appreciated quick and ready-to-build homes as much as the construction industry’s desire to develop an innovative construction process.

[fig. 2] Aladdin Homes ad, National Geographic, 1920.

An advertisement for Aladdin Homes that not only illustrate the cost and imagery of their products but also place an emphasis on their prefabrication process. An example of

Standardization was just as much a product of desire for society as it was for the construction industry. But in recent years, development of new technologies has allowed the industry to realize that while short term desires have been met, long term stability has not. New paradigms have emerged that question this prefabrication method.

5. Batchelor, R. “Henry Ford: mass production, modernism, and design. Manchester Universty Press, 1994.

[fig. 4] Transfer of Industrial Knowledge, Author, 2022.

Part II

[fig. 5] Robotic manufacturing, Intelligent City, 2021.

Technology is the embodied knowledge in which method or process is executed6. Technology transfer refers to the exchange of capability from one part to another. The transfer of technology can happen anywhere between industries, government, and educational institutions. For prefabrication to thrive as the future of building construction, an understanding and implementation by professions in the AEC industry into the transfer of technology is necessary.

According to Williams and Gibson, technology transfer may occur in one of four ways7: quality research into an idea, the development of knowledge of the idea by the user, the community of researchers of facilitators and barriers of the transfer process, or collaboration through a continuation of exchange of ideas. While the first three options are linear modes of transfer, the fourth method requires an open, collaborative model of working. This option is a dynamic, non-hierarchical network that suggests prefabrication as an ongoing exchange that involves the sharing of knowledge and learning from different professions.

The following companies - Intelligent City, R-Hauz, and BC Passive House – demonstrate this option of an innovative, collaborative approach to prefabrication. They illustrate the transfer of technology occurs through the integration of knowledge, experience with the spirit of learning.

6. Tornatzky, L.G, and Fleischer, M. “The Process of Technological Innovation”. Lexington Books. 1990.

7. Williams, F. and Gibson, D. “Technology Transfer: a communication perspective. California: Sage Publications. (1990).

PARAMETRIC

PARAMETRIC

PARAMETRIC

PARAMETRIC REPEATABLE

Vancouver, BC

[fig. 7] Robotic assembly process, Intelligent City, 2021.

The integration of robotics as their primary means of prefabrication is key to delivering high-precision and consistant manufactured components as well as facilitates opportunities for learning about technologies.

[fig. 6] Parametric modelling, Intelligent City, 2021.

Their parametric modelling allows them to realise hundreds of iterations through an understanding of variables within a project’s context. This innovation in technology provides opportunities for discovery and learning among the company and partners in industry.

Intelligent City is a leader in prefabrication located in Vancouver, British Columbia. The company’s front runner’s Oliver Lang and Cindy Wilson began this company that drew heavily on their longstanding research into parametric software, automation technologies, and advanced building materials such as mass timber. Through collaboration with engineers, researchers, architects, and builders, Intelligent City developed a prefabricated mass timber system called Platforms for Life – a structural floor panel system that integrates various building systems that can be repeated in different projects with different contexts.

Vancouver, BC

[fig. 8] Section drawing, Intelligent City, 2021.

The result of mastering parametric modelling and robotic manufacturingdelivering high-quality design solutions for wholistic urban living.

Lang and Wilson believes that prefabrication necessitates an architecture that is design-engineered and integrated within the construction supply chain. This will allow for a better understanding of where the industry is going. Their unique approach has already begun to see success with two of their projects already in the design phase. They have received substantial funding to continue their research and design work along with accolades awarding their development of scalable clean energy technologies.

Their approach reimagines the concept of prefabrication from a standardized, uniform product to an architecture that is adaptable through collaboration and learning8. Intelligent City demonstrates innovation happens not merely by adoption but a commitment to learning and an openness for discovery. When they began their research 17 years ago, mass timber was beginning to emerge in the market. Fast forward today, they have developed innovative technologies that has redefined the construction industry’s approach in precision, consistency, and manufacturing.

8. Lam, Elsa. “Home Products.” Canadian Architect 65, no. 2 (April 2020)

sustainable urban living parametric design robot manufactured

[fig. 9] Image of R-Town building, R-Hauz, 2021.

Toronto, ON

[fig. 10] R-Town axo diagram, CMV Architects, 2018.

The repetition of their townhouse prototype allows R-Hauz to develop infill housing projects quickly and provides seamless integration of collaboration between owners, architects, buildings, and

Based in Toronto, R-Hauz focusses their efforts of prefabrication that reconciles inter-city real-estate by addressing the Greater Toronto Area’s housing crisis of the “missing middle”. Their projects only focus on two typologies - infill developments and laneway housing. Interestingly, they have only created one 6-storey prototype, which happens to be the limit within the Ontario Building Code permitting mass timber construction, townhouse that is meant to be repeated on multiple projects with some level of customization9. While they appear to have a single direction towards housing revitalization, they bring several innovations in construction much needed in Ontario’s building industry.

9. Camilleri, C. “R-Hauz: Affordable, Mid-Density Housirrg That’s Energy Efficient to Build and Live In,” n.d. 2019..

precedent analysis | process of prefabrication | GPI | Richard Mohammed

Toronto, ON

[fig. 12] R-Town Pilot Project construction, Wood Works, 2021.

Erection of prefabricated components on-site, without hindering activitiies on street level.

[fig. 11] R-Hauz project timeline, Author, 2022.

The company’s experience in project development and close relationship with the municipality allows them to deliver projects in an extremely fast timeline.

R-Hauz is a company comprised of experts in real-estate, construction, and engineering. With decades of experience within their fields, they’ve come together to create a company that reflects the aspirations of prefabrication construction. Their history within the construction industry allows them to recognize the need for integration of systems through collaboration and learning by industry professionals10. The result is an architecture of prefabricated mass timber, using techniques rarely seen for residential use in Toronto.

10. Barbosa, Filipe, Jonathon Woetzel, Jan Mischke, Maria Ribeirinho, Mukund Sridhar, Matthew Parsons, Nick Bertram, and Stephanie Brown. “Reinventing Construction through a Productivity Revolution | McKinsey.” (February 2017).

Toronto, ON

[fig. 14] Global expansion of Prefab, Author, 2022.

The potential to expand prefabrication construction across the globe through the methodology executed by R-Hauz.

[fig. 13] Canada expansion of Prefab, Author, 2022;

R-Hauz expanding the use of prefabricated mass timber across Canada.

R-Hauz is an example of taking processes that are dominant in one geographic location of Vancouver and applying it where it is underutilized. Not only does this provide a challenge but it demonstrates a commitment to continue to innovate within the construction process. It sets an example that prefabrication has the potential to flourish in many locations, creating a global model for construction that integrates sustainable construction methods with the spirit of collaboration and knowledge transfer.

[fig. 15] Image of BCPH building, Ema Peter, 2014.

glulam beams, stacked horiztontally laminated veneer lumber (LVL) produced from laminated strands or veneers wood I-joists that contain an OSB wed and lumber top and bottom cords cross laminated timber (CLT) are dimensional lumber oriented at right angles to each otherand glued to form structural panels

[fig. 18] Image of BCPH working environment, Author, 2022.

Prefabricated elements are built to precision within the facility.

[fig. 17] Image of interior BCPH building, Ema Peter, 2014. The working environment of the prefabricated facility.

Nestled in the Pemberton Valley, north of Whistler, BC Passive House prefabricated factory’s all-wood high-efficiency design is an example of the collaboration between architect, builder, and client. BC Passive House (BCPH) prefabricated its own high-performance building components that would provide their employees of skilled contractors, carpenters, and engineers with as high-quality a work environment as the ones they were building for others.

[fig. 16] Mass timber drawings, Author, 2022.] Image of BCPH building, Ema Peter, 2014. Typical mass timber structural elements that BCPH specializes in building1

A prefabricated facility that builds prefabricated elements seemed fitting that a work environment represents the skills and craft of the people in it. More importantly, it represents the high-quality design because of the collaboration efforts by the client and builder (who happen to be the same party) and the architect John Hemsworth.

the LCT system

1. Jones, Susan. “Mass Timber: Design and Research.” Novato, Calif: Oro Editions, 2017.

Pemberton, BC

[fig. 20] Image of wood sculpture, Author, 2022.

Experts at BCPH created this wood sculpture piece out of scrap mass timber elements.

I had the pleasure of visiting the facility this past Fall and learned about the company’s history as well as the importance of collaboration between the client and the architect at the early stages of a project. Matheo Dürfeld, CEO of BCPH, has a long history of using better construction techniques and encourages his staff to learn skills that were not commonplace to produce more refined products. His early work included log homes that evolved into mass timber structures, given them the opportunity to collaborate with architects, engineers, and construction professionals globally.

[fig. 19] Image of Digital Twin modelling, Author, 2022.

Digital twin model of projects to optimize mass timber consumption as well as communicate precision and consistency among engineers and carpenters.

As I walked through the facility, it was great to see prefabricated components being built by these highly skilled carpenters. To achieve these precision components, BCPH develops a digital twin of the finalized drawings received from the architect. This ensures consistency between the architect and manufacturer as well as optimizes the use of wood to minimize waste. This creates a kit-of-parts which is transported to project site for assembly. This would not be possible without the close relationship between professions as well as the skills and expertise of contractors.

Pemberton, BC

Pemberton, BC

[fig. 21] Diagram of collaboration at BCPH, Author, 2022.

A diagram that illustrates how the relationship between builder and client can lead to opportunities for learning and collaboration of the construction process.

BCPH was a special case as the builder and the client were the same people. However, the methodology of prefabrication remains the same - developing strong and collaborative relationships at the initial stages can lead to an integrative and robust construction process.

Conventional Construction Method

Developer Project Scope

Developer Project Scope

Prefabrication Construction Method

Prefabrication Construction Method

Developer

Developer

Planner/ Architect Planner/ Architect

Concept Development Tender

Concept Development Tender

Contractor Contractor

Prefabrication

Prefabrication

Planner/ Architect Planner/ Architect

Collaborative Design Process

Collaborative Design Process

Contractor Contractor

Component Manufacturer Consulting

Component Manufacturer Consulting

Contractor Trades/ Subcontractors Construction

Coordination of tradeswork Construction begins

Coordination of tradeswork Construction begins

Digital Twin Components Building Assembly

Contractor Trades/ Subcontractors Construction Digital Twin Components Building Assembly

Design Prepared for Manufacturing Off-site Manufacturing Delivery & Assemblyv

Design Prepared for Manufacturing Off-site Manufacturing Delivery & Assemblyv

[fig. 22] Diagram comparing traditional and prefab construction practice, Author, 2022.

A diagram that illustrates how the relationship between builder and client can lead to opportunities for learning and collaboration of the construction process2

2. Tam, C. M., Vivian W. Y. Tam, John K. W. Chan, and William C. Y. Ng. “Use of Prefabrication to Minimize Construction Waste - A Case Study Approach.” International Journal of Construction Management 5, no. 1 (January 2005)

After looking into these four precedents, it was clear to see how prefabrication has reimagined the construction process. The collaborative process at the beginning is very crucial. Having all stakeholders at the table allows for the best interests of the client to be carried throughought the entire project timeline. Rather than isolating each phase, prefabrication allows for an integrated project delivery carried out by a robust digital twin that is ready for fabrication and ultimately final assembly.

Part III

Barriers to

traditional

[fig. 23] Traditional way of building, FP Innovations, 2016.

The traditional way of of building done today - a typical construction site entrenched within in-situ building execution.

The Hesitancy Towards Prefabrication

innovation

[fig. 24] Innovative way of building, Intelligent City, 2021.

Innovative tools and technologies allow the construction industry to evolve from traditional building practices.

If prefabrication technologies have demonstrated innovations within the construction industry, why are they so reluctant to adopt it?

In a world full of technology being used to improve our building practices, many construction projects seem to lag behind the adoption of technology and techniques embedded within the industry. While Intelligent City, R-Hauz, and BCPH have found a way to integrate learning and collaboration within their execution of prefabrication techniques, there are still preconceptions and fears about taking alternative approaches11

11. Tam, Vivian W.Y., C.M. Tam, S.X. Zeng, and William C.Y. Ng. “Towards Adoption of Prefabrication in Construction.” Building and Environment 42, no. 10 (October 2007).

[fig. 25] Diagram of the hesistancy towards prefab, Author, 2022.

Mapping the complex interrelated and compounding issues about the hesitancy of adopting prefabrication building techniques by the constrruction industry.

A study completed by FP Innovations, a research and development institute in support of Canada’s forestry sector, investigated the barriers to prefabrication by interviewing over 70 stakeholders in B.C, other provinces across Canada and countries where greater adoptions has occurred. Interviewees included developers, engineers, AHJ’s, architects, general contractors, and fabricators. The three main factors contributing to the hesitancy in adoption was the lack of understanding and training, lack of testing and training institutions, and lack of manufacturers and suppliers12. While moving to more efficient building practices might seem like a natural progression, the current state of the industry is reluctant to innovate or incorporate prefabrication techniques into their projects13

It is clear more research and development need to be done through practical, learning environments to gain the confidence of stakeholders and move prefabrication beyond its current state. This will allow for better guidance within the industry. The standards and knowing where and when prefabrication can be applied can be confusing for the construction industry in real-time and therefore necessitates an environment to develop existing skills while learning about the best practices of prefabrication.

12. Smith, Ryan E. “Prefab Architecture”. (2010).

13. Kamar, K.A.M., Alshawi, M, and Hamid, K. “Barriers to the Industrialized Building Systems (IBS): The Case of Malaysia”. International Postgraduate Research Conference. University of Salford. (2009).

Architecture & Engineering

Construction

A Case Study: The Tragedy of Katerra

[fig. 26] Diagram of Katerra’s acquired companies, Author, 2022.

The management of Katerra’s construction supply chain.

Prior to their downfall in 2020, the concept behind the prefabrication company Katerra was simple: control all phases of the construction process14. They aspired to be a company that would essentially control the entire construction supply chain from property acquisition to architecture and design, construction, and management of the property. As a result, the company branded itself as the “all-in-one” architect, engineer, contractor, and subcontractors. Three years into their business, by 2018 Katerra splurged their near billion-dollar funding by acquiring several architecture, engineering and construction companies. They were beginning to see their empire take shape because of investment capital rather than collaborative design interventions.

By 2019 the company began to experience trouble as they laid off workers, the exit of one of the company’s co-founders, the withdrawal from many apartment projects, and the closure of their prefabrication facility in Phoenix. Blinded by the funds their empire stood on, they believed they could acquire the entire supply chain of the construction industry, merge them, and take on hundred-million-dollar projects around the world in a short period of time. As their luck would have it, the COVID-10 pandemic was the last blow to the idea of what their empire could have been. The pandemic forced hundreds of layoffs and ultimately the company’s decision to file for bankruptcy.

14. Jones, Kell, and Glass, Jacqui. “Why Katerra’s Demise Shouldn’t Deter Construction’s Innovators.” Global Construction Review, June 9, 2021.

A Case Study: The Tragedy of Katerra

[fig. 27] Diagram of Katerra’s dismembered management, Author, 2022.

While still under the umbrella of Katerra, these companies still worked within their own buisiness model due to the lack of leadership in prefabrication management from Katerra.

Katerra created a business model rather than a collaborative relationship within their construction conglomerate. The company’s founders attempted to transfer their management skills in the electronic industry to the construction industry15. They failed to realize the difference in economies of scale between industries. Where large of amounts of funding would work in one, it would not work in the other. More importantly, they were focused on the control and power of the construction industry rather than exploring the potential of creative design solutions and learning from the resources they acquired. The biggest problem for the company was convincing developers and contractors to move away from traditional subcontracting work16. Typically, when a project involves significant risk and capital, they tend to stick with what they know rather than adopt new construction methods and technologies17. Katerra’s ironic ambition to become a leader in construction and manufacturing and yet failing to recognize the necessary tenets of prefabrication led to their implosion.

The tragedy of Katerra raises important questions: what if the company understood the fundamentals of prefabrication tenets? What if they prioritized the value of learning and collaboration of prefabrication with the resources they acquired? Katerra had all the pieces: funding, intelligence, and quality services, but their lack of understanding knowledge, and ability to learn from their acquisitions became a loss for the world of construction.

15. Jones, K, and Glass, J. “Why Katerra’s Demise Shouldn’t Deter Construction’s Innovators.”

16. Obando, Sebastian. “What Does Katerra’s Demise Mean for the Contech and Modular Industries?” Construction Dive, October 2021.

17. Ibid.

[fig. 28] Image of Performative Wood structure, Maverick Chan, 2022.

PREFABRICATION

Collaboration

Skills & Knowledge

Testing & Experimentation Innovation Engagement

The main tenets of prefab brings together professionals in the AEC industry early on to realize design solutions.

Professionals share their unique experience that are used to make strategic, collective decisions.

Integrative technologies allow for experimentation in architectural solutions.

Development of tools allow for breakthroughs in the manufacturing process.

Having all stakeholders involved engages them not only in the process but the overall design goals.

[fig. 29] Diagram of intersection the spirit of learning with prefab, Author, 2022.

Mapping overlaps between the tenets of prefabrication and the spirit of learning.

Through digital tools

Democratic and peer-led brainstorming

Working collectively provides students with opportunities to develop and improve each other’s ideas.

Access to resources to enhance and master their skills.

Sense of discovery; what works and what doesn’t

Failures and setbacks are welcomed to be used as learning opportunities.

Implementation of new educational tools to further students’ learning.

Hands-on, practical workshops to encourage active participation.

Collaboration

Skills & Knowledge Testing & Experimentation Innovation

Engagement

SPIRIT OF LEARNING

This graphic charts the main categories where similarities exist within the spirit of learning and the fundamentals of prefabrications. I am interested in intersecting the respective strengths from collaborative environments of learning with prefabrication.

I believe this intersection of worlds is what the industry is missing. This integration paradigm requires a reworking of the fundamental missions of schools of architecture, engineering, and construction toward a cross-disciplinary learning. Many universities, such as ETH Zurich, University of Virginia, and University of British Columbia, have taken the role of integrated environments where architecture, engineering, and trades students come together to learn how to solve problems in a collaborative way.

What’s more, the integration of construction industry within the classroom creates opportunities to share knowledge and activities for the next generation of design18. Placing fabricators, contractors, and owners within the realm of academic allows them to begin to question ideas or methods that are difficult to address in real-time of on-going project deadlines.

18. Smith, Ryan E. “Prefab Architecture” (2010).

Prefabrication Studies: Robotic Fabrication Workshop

[fig. 30] Mille Feuille prefab wood structure on display, Author, 2022.

On display at UBC, the structure is a demonstration of prefabrication by robotic fabrication and the collaboration of students and professionals within the construction industry.

This past summer I participated in a robotic fabrication course hosted by UBC and University of Waterloo that included a cross-disciplinary collaboration with the construction industry. The workshop was structured in two phases – a classroom component and a fabricating component. The workshop was led by three forward-thinking individuals embedded within the world of prefabrication: David Correa, a leader in design engineering within the construction industry, AnnaLisa Meyboom, a visionary associate professor within UBC’s School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, and Oliver Krieg, the CTO at Intelligent City.

Prefabrication Studies: Robotic Fabrication Workshop

[fig. 31] Axo drawing of robot fabrication 1

The process and precision of robotic fabrication on an 8’ x 4’ sheet of plywood.

The workshop allowed for an opportunity for collaboration between students and professionals within the industry. It was fascinating to be in an environment where different groups of people with different levels of experiences were bonded by the spirit of learning with the curiosity of a student. We were presented with new technologies emerging within the construction industry, primarily automated robotic fabrication. However, not just the idea of robotic fabrication but the pairing with wood material become the focus of the course. It allowed us to realize a deep understanding of all stages an aspects of wood construction, and the vision and skills that robotic fabrication can bring together diverse experts and stakeholders to build better buildings.

Prefabrication Studies: Robotic Fabrication Workshop

[fig. 32] Collage of construction process of prefab workshop, Author, 2022.

Following the classroom component, the remainder of the workshop required everyone – students, architects, designers, contractors, and instructors – to build our demonstration project. The experience of working among such talented, experienced, and curious people was truly inspiring. Physically assembling the structure had its challenges but working collaboratively as a team led to creative design solutions and ultimately a project completed on time.

[fig. 33] Comparing robot code and wood dowel connections, Author, 2022.

G-code detailing of the robot to cut each line of the panels (above) contrasted with the elegant detailing of wood dowles connection.

Prefabrication Studies: Robotic Fabrication Workshop

[fig. 34] Axo diagram of construction of Mille Feuille, Author, 2022.

The lapping construction process of the panels.

[fig. 35] Drawing of Mille Feuille elevation, Author, 2022.

Prefabrication Studies: Performative Wood Installation

[fig. 36] Image of performative wood structure, Maverick Chan, 2022.

The result of exploring robotic prefabrication techniques with wood.

The robotic fabrication workshop laid the foundation for the work I would be doing in a wood fabrication course for the rest of the summer. We were asked to test and experiment with wood material with the capabilities of the 6-axix robotic maneuvering. The outcome of the course would be some type of structure that would display the potential of wood prefabrication techniques.

[fig. 37] Image of Performative Wood structure 2, Maverick Chan, 2022.

Prefabrication Studies: Performative Wood Installation

[fig. 38] Image of box joint connection, Maverick Chan, 2022.

[fig. 39] Axo drawing of robot fabrication 2

The same method of fabrication learned from the robotic worshop.

Working with a group of talented classmates, we focused on creating a structure that highlighted intricate wood joinery called box joints. The robot was programmed through grasshopper software to cut the angles of each panel such that the connection surfaces were flush. The process was ultimately a team effort, working collaboratively to demonstrate the importance of prefabrication within the realm of education and learning environments.

[fig. 40] Drawing of Performative Wood elevation, Author, 2022.

[fig. 41] Diagram of the Evolution of Prefabrication, Author, 2022.

The diagram illustrates the potential of prefabrication - beginning from its conventional and historic applications to my own research and understanding and how contemporary approaches demonstrate a more dynamic evolution integrated within learning and collaborative settings.

Innovative Approaches

Innovative Approaches

Process of Research Development

Execution & Evolution

My proposed research is an investigation of an architecture that culminates the ideologies of prefabrication technologies and techniques within the realm of learning. The research has demonstrated that while prefabrication has been an avenue for the construction industry to go beyond existing building practices, it still lags behind opportunities for innovation. Nonetheless, as companies begin to discover new methods of cross-disciplinary integration through knowledge sharing, collaboration, learning, and engagement, there shows promise for sustainable adoption of prefabrication.

architect

industry experts

network capabilities

Evaluation of Learning Process Teaching Situation Learning Experience

application of prefab techniques relationship development creative design solutions informed decision making learning from the past collaborative

Learner

EDUCATION IN PREFABRICATION

Learning Process Learning Environment

hands-on/ practical

students engineers developers contractors manufacturers iterative & recursive testing & prototyping classroom

fabrication facility workshops knowledge transfer

Understanding the Scope of Learning

[fig. 42] Diagram of the Scope of Learning, Author, 2022.

Mapping the categories associated with the scope of education and learning and its relationship to the development of prefabrication.

In this new paradigm for education embedded within prefabrication, future professionals in the construction industry feel empowered to make decisions that will affect the innovation of building practices in the future19. The complex and technologically diverse nature of the construction industry necessitates a benefit of manufacturers working closely with designers, as their collective input can encourage innovation and help future demands of the industry. Prefabrication is therefore an integral part of a scope of education and learning that is intended to prepare students to enter in the AEC profession whether a theoretical, practical, or a hybrid model.

The value of education and learning is rooted in developing skills through a sense of discovery. Unfortunately, the construction industry values what they already know because of the risk involved with exploring what they don’t know. However, in order to prepare for an integrated and collaborative construction industry, they must realize the risk involved in prefabrication.

19. FP Innovations. “Research Programs - advanced building systems - publications and tools.” (2016).

Design Proposal: The School of Prefabrication

The research gone into this thesis has culminated into a design proposal with a reoccurring theme of learning. The design proposal that will be developed in the following term will focus on a prefabrication facility that teaches people, specifically those already within the AEC industry, about prefabrication in mass timber. There is a need for a solution that not only allows the industry to keep up with the continuous development of prefabrication technologies but actively educates professionals about them. The school of prefabrication will have three main programmatic components: a facility that manufactures prefabricated wood elements, a testing and prototyping component, and most importantly an education program on prefabrication techniques in mass timber using current prefabrication technologies (i.e., CNC’s, robotics).

Placing professionals of the AEC industry within an environment of learning will allow them to ask questions that would otherwise be forgotten or disregarded within the traditional methods of the existing industry. It provides them with opportunities for discovery, professional growth, and collaboration with other motivated students that is needed to propel the trajectory of current building practices.

Waterloo/ Kitchener

[fig. 43] Regional Map of Greater Toronto Area, Author, 2022.

The site for this facility will be in Ontario, Canada. The province is not as dominant as the prefabrication industry in B.C. and therefore serves as a great testing ground to expand these construction methods across the country. In 2015, Ontario approved a change in their building code that would allow the construction of mid-rise, six storey mass timber buildings. Ontario joins British Columbia, who made the change in 2010, in a new era for exploring innovative construction methods and building typology.

Toronto

Lake Ontario

Brampton

Site Strategy: Brampton - The Innovation Corridor

[fig. 44] Regional Map of Innovation Corridor, Author, 2022.

Brampton is located along the Toronto-Waterloo Innovation corridor. This is a region spanning 112 km that is a global centre of talent, growth, innovation, and discovery. It is the second largest technology cluster in North America that attracts developers and creates job opportunities. Within this context of learning and collaborative environments sprinkled across the region, this thesis lends itself within the realm of technological innovation within the construction industry.

As a suburb within the Greater Toronto Area (GTA), Brampton is seeing consistent growth and is projected to reach a population over one million by 2040. The city is one of the few suburbs in the GTA that are prioritizing sustainable urban growth. In 2018, Council voted unanimously to endorse Brampton Vision 2040 – a comprehensive urban policy and design document guiding Brampton’s future as a connected, inclusive, and innovative city20. The priorities include building complete communities, creating local jobs, developing community hubs and educational opportunities, and attracting investment and employment that nurture a creative and entrepreneurial environment.

In support of this vision, Sheridan College is undergoing a campus master plan that will work towards demonstrating an inclusive and innovative place of academia and industry. Locating the school of prefabrication within this context of context that mixes academia and industry seems fitting through the ideaology of prefabrication construction.

Site Strategy: Brampton, ON

[fig. 45] Map of Brampton, Author, 2022.

Brampton is situated within many different transit regional routes, close proximity to Toronto and an International airport making it an ideal location for an educational facility on prefabrication to reach the many.

20. The City of Brampton. “Living the Mosaic: Brampton 2040 Vision. (2018).

Site Strategy: Sheridan College

Sheridan’s Centre for Advanced Manufacturing and Design Technologies (CAMDT)

digital fabrication

robotic automation

design & engineering

simulation & modelling

[fig. 46] Axo Drawing of Sheridan College, Author, 2022.

Sheridan College master plan, fully built out by 2050. It’s phasing strategy allows for a variety a ways the campus can evolve over the long-term.

The ambitious campus plan for Sheridan College will cultivate highly skilled, creative people and industry through active learning and the incubation of new ideas. The plan is intended to deliver a flexible framework for physical transformation on campus, creating a sense of belonging for learning, teaching, and working21

Within the school, Sheridan hosts a Centre for Advanced Manufacturing and Design Technologies (CAMDT). This research center exemplifies Sheridan’s leading role as a hub connecting industry, curriculum, and applied research. Their resources include digital modelling, simulation, digital fabrication, and robotics provide companies of all sizes to Sheridan’s advanced manufacturing expertise and equipment, allowing them to collaborate and explore state-of-the-art tools that would be otherwise unavailable within the industry. Currently, there is no division within CAMDT that specializes within prefabrication construction and with the overlap and similarities in technologies, associating the school of prefabrication is an opportunity worth exploring.

21. Sheridan College. “Davis Campus: Campus Master Plan Executive Summary”.

Site Strategy: Sheridan College

[fig. 47] Phase 1 of Sheridan’s master plan, Urban Strategies, 2019.

Phase 1 of Sheridan College’s master plan (0-15 years) is intended to situate academic partnered with industry uses along the street frontage.

Given the long-term nature of the campus plan, Sheridan will need to continue to evaluate the need for new spaces and facilities to meet academic needs to support an appropriate mix of institutional and partnership development. The first phase of the master plan is a likely location for the school of prefabrication. According to the Campus Vision, “new buildings located with frontage on McLaughlin Road and Steeles Avenue have an exceptional opportunity to showcase Sheridan’s creative, collaborative, and cutting-edge programs and partnerships in a highly visible location.” The school of prefabrication should take advantage of this opportunity to visibly highlight the technologies and building processes as well as the prefabricated mass timber school itself.

Exercise I

Explorations into Factory Design and Learning Environments

Exercise II

Investigations into Specific Areas of Construction Cultivating into a School of Prefabrication

[fig. 48] Diagram of GPII Methodology, Author, 2022.

This graphic provides the structure of the methodology of design for the development of the thesis.

The methodology of the design portion of the thesis will be organized around two design exercises, each drawing from the main areas of research conducted during this term:

1) Explorations into factory design and learning environments. This exercise will take the form of site documentation and analysis of existing prefabrication facilities and identifying opportunities for spaces of learning and collaboration. The hope is to possibly visit Intelligent City’s newly built prefabrication facility in Delta, B.C. as well as a revisit to the BC Passive House Factory in Pemberton, BC. 2) Investigations into specific areas of building practices. This second exercise will undergo diagramming, drawing, and ideally robotic fabrication methods to explore areas in which prefabrication technologies can address the hesitancy of adoption by the construction industry. This exercise is intended to design, develop, and construct prototypes of simple building assemblies to recognize the tangible value of prefabrication techniques.

These iterative exercises will seek to develop their own narratives, building upon each other, into an architectural design that moves away from traditional factory buildings to a space that elicit excitement, desire, and discovery among the AEC industry.

Exercise I

Explorations into Factory Design and Learning Environments

Exercise II

Investigations into Specific Areas of Construction

1.5 weeks 1.5 weeks

Cultivating into a School of Prefabrication

GPII Methodology

GPII Structure

Januray April

Committe Meeting 1 Introduction

Weeks 1-3 Cycle 1

Commitee Meeting 2 Review

Weeks 4-6 Cycle 2

Mid-Review Feedback on interation of the School of Prefab Weeks 7-9 Cycle 3

Commitee Meeting 3 Review Weeks 10-12 Cycle 4

Committee Meeting 4 Review - feedback on 2nd iteration Weeks 13-15 Cycle 5 Week 16 Final Review

[fig. 49] Cyclical Diagram of GPII Methodology, Author, 2022.

This adjusted graphic orgnanizes itself into a cyclical mode of delivery that aligns with committee meetings and review timelines.

The two design exercises outlined will be carried out in a three-week cyclical working method, with about a week and a half for both exercises to be developed. The hope is for these assignments to eventually speak to one another and therefore inform the work as the semester progresses.

This three-week cycle is also intended to align with committee meetings as well as the mid-term and final reviews. The intention of this design methodology seeks to further the thesis as much as possible by exploring methods that which this thesis is working towards – the hesitancy of prefabrication can only be resolved through drawing, learning, testing, and building solutions.

to be continued... January 2023.

ArchDaily. “Material of the Future: 4 Architects That Experiment with Cross Laminated Timber,” April 27, 2020. https://www.archdaily.com/938213/material-of-the-future-4-architects-that-experiment-with-cross-laminated-timber.

Batchelor, R. “Henry Ford: mass production, modernism, and design. Manchester Universty Press, 1994.

Barbosa, Filipe, Jonathon Woetzel, Jan Mischke, Maria Ribeirinho, Mukund Sridhar, Matthew Parsons, Nick Bertram, and Stephanie Brown. “Reinventing Construction through a Productivity Revolution | McKinsey.” Accessed October 12, 2022. https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/operations/our-insights/reinventing-construction-through-a-productivity-revolution.

Camilleri, Carolyn. “R-Hauz: Affordable, Mid-Density Housirrg That’s Energy Efficient to Build and Live In,” n.d., 4.

Eastman, Charles M., and Rafael Sacks. “Relative Productivity in the AEC Industries in the United States for On-Site and Off-Site Activities.” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 134, no. 7 (July 2008): 9. https://doi.org/10.1061/ ASCE 0733-9364 2008 134:7 517.

FP Innovations. “Research Programs - advanced building systems - publications and tools.” (2016).

Gates, Bill. “How to Avoid a Climate Disaster: The Solutions We Have and The Breakthroughs We Need.” Alfred A. Knopf, 2021.

Jones, Kell, and Jacqui Glass. “Why Katerra’s Demise Shouldn’t Deter Construction’s Innovators.” Global Construction Review, June 9, 2021. https://www.globalconstructionreview.com/why-katerras-demise-shouldnt-deter-constructions-i/.

Jones, Susan. “Mass Timber: Design and Research.” Novato, Calif: Oro Editions, 2017.

Kamar, K.A.M., Alshawi, M, and Hamid, K. “Barriers to the Industrialized Building Systems (IBS): The Case of Malaysia”. International Postgraduate Research Conference. University of Salford. (2009).

Kuan, S, and Mark Kaustinen. “What Is Holding Back the Expanded Use of Prefabricated Wood Building Systems?” White Paper. Vancouver, British Columbia: Forest Innovation Investment of British Columbia, August 2016. https://library.fpinnovations.ca/en/viewer?file=%2fmedia%2fWP%2f3308.pdf#phrase=false&pagemode=bookmarks.

Lam, Elsa. “Home Products.” Canadian Architect 65, no. 2 (April 2020): 28–33.

Obando, Sebastian. “What Does Katerra’s Demise Mean for the Contech and Modular Industries?” Construction Dive, October 2021. https://www.constructiondive.com/news/what-does-katerras-demise-mean-for-the-contech-and-modular-industries/608037/.

Sheridan College. “Davis Campus: Campus Master Plan Executive Summary”.

Smith, Ryan E. Prefab Architecture: A Guide to Modular Design and Construction. John Wiley & Sons, 2010.

Tam, Vivian W. Y., C. M. Tam, S.X. Zeng, and William C. Y. Ng. “Towards Adoption of Prefabrication in Construction.” Building and Envrionment. 2006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2006.10.003.

Tam, C. M., Vivian W. Y. Tam, John K. W. Chan, and William C. Y. Ng. “Use of Prefabrication to Minimize Construction Waste - A Case Study Approach.” International Journal of Construction Management 5, no. 1 (January 2005): 91–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2005.10773 069.

The City of Brampton. “Living the Mosaic: Brampton 2040 Vision. (2018).

Tornatzky, L.G, and Fleischer, M. “The Process of Technological Innovation”. Lexington Books. 1990.

UNEP. “Changes in Building and Construction Have Great Potential to Slow Global Warming,” December 3, 2020. http://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/story/changes-building-and-construction-have-great-potential-slow-global-warming.

Williams, F. and Gibson, D. “Technology Transfer: a communication perspective. California: Sage Publications. (1990).

Yuan, Fanning. “Main Obstacles to Prefabricated Construction: The Contractor’s Perspective in China.” Dept. of Construction Management and Real Estate, Chongqing University, August 2018. https://ascelibrary.org/doi/epdf/10.1061/9780784481738.026.