Last edited 13 Oct 2016

Modern methods of construction

Since the Second World War, and the desperate need for new housing to be delivered quickly, modern methods of construction (MMC) has been promoted as a way of working more effectively to achieve more without using more. It centres around the use of off-site construction techniques that can benefit from factory conditions and mass production techniques.

In November 2005, still in the midst of a housing crisis, The National Audit Office (NAO) published 'Using modern methods of construction to build homes more quickly and efficiently'. The report considered how MCM could be used to build homes more quickly and efficiently.

It was commissioned by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and the Housing Corporation, and was indented to identify ways of getting best value when using MMC. It defined MMC as “…a process to produce more, better quality homes in less time.”

A parallel report published in February 2006 by the Barker 33 Cross-Industry Group, set up to examine why the uptake of MMC was low, suggested that “Modern Methods of Construction are about better products and processes. They aim to improve business efficiency, quality, customer satisfaction, environmental performance, sustainability and the predictability of delivery timescales. Modern Methods of Construction are, therefore, more broadly based than a particular focus on product. They engage people to seek improvement, through better processes, in the delivery and performance of construction.”

In the 2005 NAO report, it was suggested that the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister considered modern methods of construction included:

  • Panellised units produced in a factory and assembled on-site to produce a three dimensional structure.
  • Volumetric construction to produce three-dimensional modular units in controlled factory conditions prior to transport to site.
  • Hybrid techniques that combine both panellised and volumetric approaches.
  • Floor or roof cassettes, pre-cast concrete foundation assemblies, pre-formed wiring looms, mechanical engineering composites and innovative techniques such as tunnel form or thin-joint block work.

The NAO claimed that if modern methods of construction were adopted in place of more traditional methods:

  • It should be possible to build up to four times as many homes with the same on-site labour.
  • On-site construction time could be reduced by more than half.
  • Building performance could be at least as good
  • Cost ranges would be comparable depending on specific project circumstances, although they would be higher on average.
  • Risks increased at early stages of the development process so good risk management would become even more important.
  • Tight liaison with planning authorities would be vital.
  • Benefits would be wasted if projects were not properly planned.

Generally however it was considered that uptake was poor. Richard Jones, a partner at EC Harris, said, “…for years the industry tried to push modern methods of construction and it never really took off because it required a different approach and at the time the housebuilders didn't need a different approach. They were doing okay the way things were.”

The Barker 33 Group identified a number of barriers to uptake, including; approval delays, regulatory complexity and change, inadequate certification and the training needs of site and professional staff. Dr Ashley Lane, chair of the Barker 33 Group said "The issue is not about the product. It's about skills: logistics and planning and project management, training labour, education."

A study by the NHBC foundation, published in June 2016 found that 98% of the organisations had used or considered the use of an MMC approach on at least one of their developments in the previous three years. More than 75% cited a faster build programme and more than 50% suggested there was improved build quality. Ref Modern methods of construction: views from the industry (NF70)

However, the majority of organisations considered themselves 'late adopters' or 'followers' of the volumetric construction, pod and panelised forms of MMC, not 'market leaders'

Neil Smith, Head of Research and Innovation at NHBC said: “This report shows the high hopes invested in MMC, as a means of delivering transformational change to the house-building industry, have not yet been realised on the scale anticipated by its champions. It also illustrates that although cautious about over- commitment, the industry is nevertheless embracing MMC in many guises, and stands ready to explore new options and innovations.”

[edit] Find our more

[edit] Related articles on Designing Buildings Wiki