One of the key drivers of industrialised construction is decreasing complexity of designs, by adopting a process of standardisation, to a greater or lesser degree.

One of the more philosophical discussion around standardisation within industrialised construction, is whether there is a risk that buildings will all look the same, or make more sense on an architect’s drawing than in the real world.

While it can be a balancing act, but at the Industrialised Construction Conference, Anne Daw, Head of MMC Delivery at HLM Architects, reminded us of our humanity.

The NHS especially, needs buildings to be human in their use and design. And with much of the Health Service’s infrastructure old and in need of redevelopment, now is the perfect time to adopt these industrialised methods of construction.

The NHS has faced numerous challenges over the last two decades, least of all underinvestment in buildings, with the RAAC crisis the latest reminder of that desperate need for renewal.

Fortunately, thinks appear to be changing, with the New Hospital Programme (NHP) set to inject some life into the NHS’ ‘crumbling’ infrastructure.

Anne explains the NHP and Hospital 2.0 and how the construction sector is rising to meet the challenge.

The new hospitals programme is currently out for tender to 10 contractors and plans to deliver five-year investments of approximately £3 billion per year. The funding is included in the budget for the first five years and is expected to continue all the way to 2039.

There are seven hospitals already in construction – that’s wave zero – then a further 16 hospitals before 2030 to be in construction, and then nine hospitals after that.

The NHP addresses the who, why, what, where, and when of the hospital programme. It’s going to be the biggest hospital building programme in a generation and this is in addition to the regular replacement and refurbishment works.

But the question really for us is the how. How are we going to be able to do all this?

That question is broadly answered by the Hospital 2.0 standardised design. Looking at the big picture, Hospital 2.0 standardised design is going to consolidate demand and create a single standardised product.

That standardisation is going to improve efficiencies at both ends of delivery and will hopefully encourage manufacturers to invest in advanced design and engineering, and also enable designers and manufacturers to capitalise on continuous improvements.

The NHP framework sets out some lofty targets for the construction sector, but achieving these while also ensuring that human element remains intact is not without challenges.

Things like capacity, skills and tools all have the potential to hold back even the most well thought out design programme.

Rising to these challenges is imperative, as Anne explains.

The first challenge is capacity in the construction industry. We’re embarking on the biggest hospital building programme in a generation, with some of the most complex spaces, technologies, and systems threaded through them.

And we’re trying to integrate new buildings into complicated existing estates. This is inevitably going to test our industry’s capacity, both in knowledgeable design consultants and in contractors who have experience delivering hospitals at that size and complexity.

The second challenge is going to be skills. In addition to the experience of construction at this scale and complexity, Hospital 2.0 would really benefit from some additional skills that are key to industrialisation, but not yet widespread in the construction industry.

These are things like manufacturing processes, DfMA, digitalisation, productization and embodied carbon modelling. Multi-skilled installers are another important one, people who aren’t limited to working in a single trade, which is really important when you’ve got products that are multifunctional.

The third challenge is in tools and methods. Digital tools are so intertwined with this delivery approach that the productivity the NHP requires cannot be achieved over the long term without them.

The final challenge is suitability. Despite attempts to standardise every sector, what I have learned in our work with the MoJ, the MoD and the DfE is that there is always something that is not standard about every project.

We have to allow some level of customisation within the standard system to adapt to these situations without breaking standardisation. Without this, we will not be able to achieve programmes of this scale in healthcare. Meeting project-specific requirements is essential, because healthcare spaces are fundamentally linked to local populations and areas in a way that other spaces are not.

The kit of parts approach remains a core element of standardisation and will likely play a large role in the development of Hospital 2.0. But where does this all fit within the realm of industrialised construction?

Anne suggests that unless an integrated, standardised model is developed, then development of the NHP will fall into the old construction habits of working in siloes, therefore undermining the advantages of industrialisation.

I applaud the encouragement of a kit-of-parts design process, as well as the inclusion of a digital kit of parts to assist with it. But without a standard data template to align the geometry, the language and the format of the kit of parts, I think we are likely to continue in a siloed approach, constantly reinventing the wheel. That will work against the industrialisation of this model.

There have been many kits of parts and platforms developed over the last few years, but most of the effort has been in the realm of policy on one hand, and on the other hand, delivery-led manufacturer and fabrication kits of parts. What has been missing is the design implementation piece in the middle.

We need a process that allows us to account for local differences in each project while still maintaining the standardisation required for the industrialised process to thrive.

If we fail to understand that things on the ground are slightly different, we will fail to increase productivity and fail to achieve uptake of standardisation. It is most important for us to get everyone aligned in the implementation stage and allow for flexibility to adjust to conditions on the ground—without risking the mission.

A fully aligned construction process is what will ultimately drive industrialisation. It is not enough to merely design a kit of parts and put it to market. Industrialised construction also involves communication and a clearly defined target and goals.

And without digital integration, the concept loses its usefulness over traditional construction. As Anne points out, this digital integration is the ‘next step’ towards full embracement of industrialised methods across the wider construction sector.

We are at a point where we need to move our focus away from build systems for individual sectors and towards a process-driven, outcome-driven platform. If we recognise that there will be a need for adaptation to conditions on the ground, then we must create the tools and methods to align everyone through that process.

HLM recently completed a proof-of-concept digital kit of parts for the Ministry of Housing with Akerlof, Buro Happold, and Limburger Associates. This incorporated a digital toolkit to align the design process.

Housing is very diverse, particularly across the country, and despite the variation in housing types, styles and site conditions. We created an overarching set of standardised quality principles, documents, and data templates, along with a database from which the digital kit of parts was developed.

These overarching digital assets ensured alignment at every stage of development without stifling design or creating additional burdens for manufacturers and the construction sector. They ensured that everyone was speaking the same language and understood the mission and the outcomes correctly. They also respected the expertise and responsibilities of each party and provided a mechanism for the golden thread of information.

To me, this is the next step. If we want to move towards industrialisation, we need to understand it as a governing or ordering system rather than simply a build system.

Read the full article HERE