Australia’s timber framing industry can help the nation to speed up new housing delivery through modern methods of construction, a conference has heard.

During the recent Timber Construct forum hosted by the Timber Development Association, Nick Hewson, CEO of specialist timber consultancy Aboralis, talked about modern methods of construction (MMC) and what this means for Australia’s building industry.

Focusing predominately on low and medium rise housing, Hewson spoke about how the timber framing industry can help to deliver new homes in a manner which he says can be faster, safer, less costly and more environmentally friendly through MMC.

Defining MMC

Generally known as modern methods of construction, MMC refers to a range of innovative techniques which can move construction from traditional on-site building to (hopefully) more efficient offsite and digitally enabled approaches.

A framework published by the UK Government in 2020 lists seven categories of MMC.

These include:

• Pre-manufactured 3-D structural systems, which are made out of timber, steel or CLT. These are manufactured offsite and are brought to site as modular boxes.
• Pre-manufactured 2-D panelised structural systems.
• Pre-manufactured structural components such as columns, walls, floors, roof trusses or staircases.
• 3D printed components or entire 3D printed assemblies.
• Non-structural pre-manufactured assemblies such as kitchen or bathroom pods.
• Traditional building materials which have been made to be more easily and safely installed on site.
• Innovative on-site processes or use of technology to deliver faster and safer on-site installation (e.g. robotics, use of BIM connected to on-site workflows).

Proponents say that MMC can help to deliver construction which is faster, safer, less costly, more environmentally friendly and of better quality with fewer defects – largely by moving construction into a controlled factory environment.

What MMC is and is not

At its core, Hewson says that MMC is about ‘anything which is different to business as usual and building on site’.

He says that MMC is about doing more with less and replacing wasteful practices which are done on-site and doing these offsite in a controlled environment.

Conversely, Hewson lists several things which MMC is not.

For example, according to Hewson:

• MMC is not about simply taking things which have been done on-site and doing the same things prefabricated in a factory. Rather, MMC is about doing things smarter and more efficiently with greater simplification and repetition. Simply moving existing processes offsite into a factory environment will achieve little other than add to project costs.
• Whilst MMC can help to address industry challenges, it is not a magic cure that will solve all industry problems.
• MMC is not a static concept or a simple box ticking exercise. Rather, those embracing MMC need to consistently look for the next solution as technologies and practices evolve.
• MMC is not the death of architecture. Whilst repeatability can help to improve efficiency, MMC need not be about simply building the same boxes again and again.

(In this project in Cairns, Modscape+ Mobotics is helping to deliver 490 social and affordable homes. Collaborators: Tetris Capital, FCC Construction, Community Housing Ltd, Nettleton Tribe)

Advancing MMC/timber initiatives

When it comes to MMC, several technologies have a role.

As well as timber framing, this includes precast concrete, 3D structural steel systems, 2D light-gauge steel systems and mass timber systems such as glulam or CLT.

However, Hewson’s presentation focused predominately upon timber framing in low and medium rise housing.

During his presentation, Hewson highlighted several firms with innovative offerings.

With manufacturing facilities in Queensland and Victoria, for example Modscape + Modbotics operates a fully automated robotic production line which the company says can produce timber building components for an average 3-bedroom house in four hours.

Another provider, GTT, produces an ‘IKEA for buildings’ set of precision-engineered wall, floor and roof systems.

Using these systems, the company says that developers and builders can deliver detached homes on site with just four hours’ assembly time.

Other significant players include Timber Building Systems, Offsite, Pryda and MASSLAM.

These are in addition to mass timber market players such As Australian Sustainable Hardwood, Timberlink and Xlam.

Further, a range of industry and government efforts are underway to pursue further opportunities in this area.

Under the Future Framing Initiative, for example, parties ranging from lightweight timber suppliers through to fixings manufacturers, designers, fabricators, educators, builders, and installers are working together to develop a new industry standard for mid-rise timber framing.

Meanwhile, the Australian Building Codes Board has been tasked by the Australian Government with facilitating the development of a national voluntary certification scheme to enable manufacturers of prefabricated construction to demonstrate compliance with the National Construction Code.

Small steps and collaboration

In order to capitalise on opportunities, Hewson says that two strategies are necessary.

Where possible, the framing industry should take modest steps and grow at a sustainable pace rather than spending tens of millions of dollars on new equipment.

For example, those who produce floor or roof trusses could turn these into 3d cassettes.

Beyond this, greater collaboration is needed across players who are involved in design, manufacturing, installation and maintenance.

For example:

• Clients need to adopt a flexible mindset and to be willing to change their approach regarding design, procurement and construction processes. In one case, Hewson recalls a client being excited about MMC when touring a factory. After discussion about various ways about how they could adopt different processes, however, the client opted to remain with their current approach with which they were comfortable.
• Architects and designers should not only embrace design for manufacturing and assembly but should also go out onto factory floors and engage with the supply chain as much as possible. This will create a feedback loop in which designers and manufacturers can learn from each other.
• Builders should shift their mentality away from entire construction onsite and instead adopt an ‘assembly’ mentality involving offsite, premanufactured parts.
• Finally, timber industry suppliers need to more effectively listen to clients, designers and builders and seek to better understand and address client ‘pain points’ and areas of risk which are experienced when undertaking MMC.

(Delivered for client Stockland, this complex of 17 townhouses in the Perth suburb of Treeby involved semi-enclosed walls containing timber wall frames, breathable wrap and cladding as well as floor cassettes provided by Offsite. On average, manufacturing time was three days per dwelling whilst the install time was 2.5 days per dwelling.)

Criticisms and concerns

Not all commentators share Hewson’s enthusiasm for MMC.

Over recent years, former NSW Building Commissioner David Chandler has raised various concerns about this area.

In an email response to Sourceable seeking his current views on MMC particularly as they relate to timber, Chandler said that Australia’s journey to modernise its construction sector was always going to be lengthy.

Speaking in particular about timber and housing, Chandler raised concerns about several areas (note: many of Chandler’s comments refer predominately to mass timber).

In particular, according to Chandler:

• To date, the most visible clients who are using MMC are government agencies who are charged with meeting national housing targets. Many of these agencies ‘march to the drum of a conga line of politicians’ who come and go with election cycles. Many of these agencies lack a thorough understanding of construction and can become caught up in buzzwords such as MMC, prefabrication or mass timber. Many initiatives lack sponsor accountability and clear and transparent assessment against benchmarks in respect of claimed benefits (delivery timeframes, value for money etc.) compared with any alternatives to modernise business as usual which may have been available using traditional approaches on an incremental basis.
• Speaking particularly of mass timber, there has been concern about what has happened to some companies in this space. Experiences of companies such as the former Lendlease owned timber manufacturer DesignMade (which shut down in 2019 after only four years in operation) and prefabrication firm Strongbuild (which collapsed in 2018) raise concern the lack of broader market uptake for timber buildings particularly in Class 2 (apartment complexes) along with what happens to consumers who may be left with such buildings after they are constructed.
• As things stand, the most significant market segment in which mass timber has a presence has been in signature institutional buildings, where mass timber has been used to demonstrate environmental credentials. Few of these projects have provided a comprehensive value for money demonstration and there appears to be little appetite for mass timber in the private apartment space.
• In regards to mass timber, Chandler has in the past raised potential concerns about legacy risks such as moisture inundation, fire and the spread of smoke. He also questions the adequacy and reliability of mass timber supply to deliver upon Australia’s housing needs given that much of Australia’ mass timber is sourced from overseas. (In regards to mass timber, some suppliers do produce local content but local supply chains are relatively immature compared with their overseas counterparts. In regards to traditional timber framing products such as frames and trusses, industry advocates say that the local industry is more than capable of ramping up supply.)
• In developing digital and technological maturity, Australia’s design and construction industry needs to first learn to crawl before it can walk. This involves developing a better understanding of tolerances, building movement and executing basics in order to build correctly the first time and to avoid defects and rework. Simply transferring baked-in poor practices to a factory environment does not deliver the type of construction industry which the nation needs.
• Finally, Chandler raises concerns at any moves to water down NCC requirements in order to facilitate MMC. Modern construction consumers, he says, will not appreciate being delivered buildings which are not trustworthy and should not be made to be guinea pigs.

Asked following his presentation to comment on some of the criticisms of MMC from Chandler and others, Hewson acknowledged the work done by Building Commission NSW to address high-profile failures and rebuild trust and confidence in buildings.

He also acknowledged concerns about simply jumping to MMC and prefabrication without addressing basic underlying issues with current building practices.

A further concern which Hewson acknowledges is that as things stand, regulatory gaps in relation to MMC may potentially be enabling unsatisfactory practices to go undetected (see quote below).

To address these issues, Hewson stresses the importance of engaging reliable partners and building underlaying sovereign capacity.

If done well, he says that MMC can help to deliver better outcomes.

“I think what MMC does, its about unlocking the future workforce and its about engaging high quality,” Hewson said.

“It solves a lot of the problems.

“(To be sure,) it is poorly regulated at the moment. We don’t have a lot of guidance that makes sense in regard to offsite inspections and things like that, so there is a concern there. And I think his (Chandler’s) concern is that ill-disciplined suppliers or people that are rushing into this will do the wrong thing.

“To me, it’s about engaging with the right partners about getting the quality and processes right and its about getting the right people around the table to do it. I don’t think we want to go offshoring this to China and other countries. We need to build sovereign capability and capacity.”

(Nick Hewson image via LinkedIn)

A huge opportunity

Overall, Hewson says that opportunities for the timber framing industry are significant.

“There are now markets that are being opened up particularly for firms in the sector of low rise, infill townhouses and low-rise apartments,” he said.

“In the same way that timber has been the go-to for decades in terms of the way we have built up single-family houses, there is an opportunity for us to grab these sorts of incoming new markets and make sure that timber framing is the go-to choice for that.

“There is so much opportunity. It needs us to collaborate. It needs us to work together across companies.

“I really want to encourage you to be bold and work outside your comfort zones. This is the time to do it.”

Enjoying Sourceable articles? Subscribe for Free and receive daily updates of all articles which are published on our site

Want to grow your sales, reach more new clients and expand your client base across Australia’s design and construction sector?

Advertise on Sourceable and have your business seen by the thousands of architects, engineers, builders/construction contractors, subcontractors/trade contractors, property developers and building industry suppliers who read our stories across the civil, commercial and residential construction sector