The Construction Research Programme - Project · PDF file... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 CHAPTER 3:The CASE ... CHAPTER 1 THE CONSTRUCTION RESEARCH PROGRAMME 6

The Construction Research Programme -Project Showcase

FEBRUARY 2007

ContentsFOREWORDBy Margaret Hodge, Minister for Industry and the Regions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

CHAPTER 1: The CONSTRUCTION RESEARCH PROGRAMMEHistory and Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5The Change Agenda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5Scope of the Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6Project Selection and Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8The Fairclough Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

CHAPTER 2: The FUTUREThe Innovation Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11The Technology Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11National Platform for the Built Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12Strategic Research Agenda (SRA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13The European Construction Technology Platform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14Framework Programme 7 (2007-2013) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14Knowledge Transfer Network for the Modern Built Environment . . . . . . . . . . .14Sustainable Construction Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

CHAPTER 3: The CASE STUDIESConstruction supply networks (BUILDING DOWN BARRIERS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18Advancing the Integration of the Supply Chain (ISC Project) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20ICT enabled collaborative working (AVANTI) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22Offsite Manufacture (BUILDOFFSITE) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24Measuring the value of off-site (IMMPREST) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26Technical Design Quality Control (BSRIA SERIES) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28Learning from the European Concrete Building Project (ECBP) . . . . . . . . . . . . .30Mobile Technology (COMIT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32RFID Tagging Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34Managing Strategic Risk (STRATRISK) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36Value added Design (VALiD) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38Specifying Timber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40Composites in Construction (NGCC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42Dynamic Compaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44

ANNEX A: FURTHER INFORMATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46ANNEX B: WIDER LINKS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47

2

ForewordThis report celebrates the achievements of the Construction Research Programmeand looks forward to the challenges andopportunities opening up for the sectorthrough the newly established NationalPlatform for the Built Environment.

In doing so, we have 14 case studies highlighting the work undertakenwithin the programme. The projects selected here are seen as havingmade, or having the potential to make, a positive impact on the sector -but this does not mean that those not selected from the list will not. Theprojects selected show the breadth and range of the portfolio, fromtechnologies, materials and building service engineering to process - withthe emphasis very much on the way the programme tried to address thereforms highlighted by Sir John Egan’s Construction Task Force in itsseminal report “Rethinking Construction”.

Although we have now said goodbye to the dedicated constructionresearch programme this does not mean that the job is done. Far from it.

The sector has historically under-invested in its own research bycomparison with both other UK sectors and, crucially, with its overseascompetitors. DTI is committed to working with the National Platform todevelop the case for more, and more strategic, research investment andadditionally to encourage the sector to take advantage of the significantresearch funds available through both the European Commission andfrom UK research funders.

The Platform needs to translate these opportunities into projects whichexcite and engage UK companies.

The Platform’s Strategic Research Agenda launched in June 2006 is astep in the right direction. The SRA is a key document for the sectorgiving the industry a voice to speak to Government, to articulate long-term research needs and inform future research funding – including thefunds available through the Government’s Technology Programme.

T H E C O N S T R U C T I O N R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M M E P R O J E C T S H O W C A S E

3

Equally important, the time has come to try to better connect thesector’s real business problems with the centres of excellence that existin the UK. To this end, the DTI has approved the funding of a majorKnowledge Transfer Network for the Modern Built Environment to try tounlock this knowledge and make the key connections between businessand research expertise.

I would like to express my thanks to all those who participated in theprogramme; companies, Institutions, Universities and researchorganisations and those who made the Construction Researchprogramme such a success.

I would also like to acknowledge the industry assessors and the teamsat Atkins and Davis Langdon Management Consultancy for their effectivemanagement of the research portfolio on our behalf.

Rt Hon Margaret Hodge MBE MP

Minister of State:Industry and the Regions

4

THECONSTRUCTIONRESEARCHPROGRAMME

CHAPTER 1


5

History and OperationThe Change AgendaThe 1998 report ‘Rethinking Construction’ by the Construction TaskForce, chaired by Sir John Egan, identified radical steps needed toimprove the efficiency and quality of delivery in UK Construction. Thepriorities identified by Sir John in turn led to the development and re-structuring of the then DETR’s research programme to be able tobetter deliver the Task Force’s recommendations.

Post 2000, all research projects entering the programme had to show aclear contribution to the overall aims of “Rethinking Construction” (andits follow-up report “Accelerating Change”) and “Building a BetterQuality of Life”, the Government’s strategy for sustainable constructionpublished in 2000.

Both reports aimed to bring about a radical change and continuousimprovement in the way the industry goes about each aspect of itsbusiness. Both were concerned with achieving a more profitable andcompetitive industry which provides better valueto customers; an industry which respects andtreats its stakeholders fairly and one whichminimises its impact on the environment.

In keeping with sustainable development,research proposals had to show potential impacton at least one of the following areas:

Economic Benefit – Creating a profitable andcompetitive industry – at home and abroad –which provides customer satisfaction and value.An industry which focuses on the needs andexpectations of customers and otherstakeholders, improves profit margins, measuresand compares performance, learns from othersand shares experience, develops and respectspeople and undertakes its work in an ethical andsustainable manner

CHAPTER 1THECONSTRUCTIONRESEARCHPROGRAMME

6

Social Benefit – Creating an industry which respects and treats itsstakeholders fairly and provides a safe and healthy built environment.An industry which meets people’s needs and aspirations in ways thatare acceptable to society.

Environmental Benefit – Creating an industry which protects andenhances the environment and minimises the impact on consumptionof energy and natural resources.

Rethinking Construction and Building a Better Quality of Life remainkey documents driving the competitiveness and client value agenda for construction.

The Department has recently undertaken a key review of Building aBetter Quality of Life – setting out the current challenges and issues.The document can be found on the Dept’s website at:http://www.dti.gov.uk/sectors/construction/sustainability/strategy/page13543.html

Scope of the ProgrammeThe Programme encompassed contracts awarded under Partners inInnovation, and the preceding Partners in Technology programme, the5-year BRE Framework Programme, established following privatisationof the BRE in 1997 and ‘LINK’ projects co-funded by the Departmentand EPSRC as part of the MCNS (‘Meeting clients’ needs throughstandardisation’) and IDAC (‘Integration in design and construction’)programmes.

Partners in Innovation (PII) was the Programme’s flagship collaborativeresearch scheme which provided up to half the costs of research andinnovation (R&I) projects. It was open to all UK companies, industrybodies, institutions, research and technology organisations and


7

universities. Run as an annual competition, new money available forthe scheme each year was circa £7m with around £21 million ofresearch projects in the portfolio at any one time.

The PII programme was refined annually, and in its final year ofoperation comprised:

‘PII Focus’ – contracts for specific projects that addressed priorityareas specified by the Department following consultation with industry.The topic areas were based on both industry drivers as identified bythe former Construction Research and Innovation Strategy Panel andtested by open consultation.

‘PII Open’ – contracts awarded on proposals on any important topic ofrelevance to the Government’s key policy objectives for construction.

‘PII Programmes’ – A directed call, seeking applications for integratedmajor programmes of work that bring together the major R&Icompetencies and industrial concerns. PII Programmes attractedsignificant levels of public and matching private funding. Introduced inresponse to the Fairclough review, these were designed to support acritical mass of integrated R&I activity within selected key areas andencourage collaboration between the key players which will ultimatelylead to the development of self-supporting centres and networks ofexcellence in those areas. (the BUILDOFFSITE and AVANTIprogrammes are ‘showcased’ in Chapter 3).

The Construction Research programme also ran a trial in a smallerscale ‘fast-track’ scheme – an opportunity for a rapid response to time-limited opportunities to capture learning from experience.

Project Selection and ManagementIndustry engagement with the project selection process was alwaysconsidered crucial to the success of Construction Researchprogramme. The PiI programme in particular was developed by theDepartment on an annual basis in close consultation with industry. The process evolved over time but essentially involved:

• Construction Research and Innovation Strategy Panel (and latterlynCRISP) identifying high-level strategic directions / objectives

• Feedback from / discussions with industry bodies• A workshop to help identify priority areas, with representatives from

major players in the industry and the research and technologyorganisations (RTOs).

CHAPTER 1THECONSTRUCTIONRESEARCHPROGRAMME

8

The outcome from this process was an annual ‘prospectus’ thatreflected both the policy objectives of the Department and the needsof industry. It outlined the policy context and key features of theprogramme and called for proposals in well-defined categoriesrecognisable to the sector. Project selection also engaged independent expert panels drawn from industry, Government and ourresearch managers.

Management of the research portfolio was undertaken by ResearchManagement contractors reporting to theme managers within theDepartment. The input of the research managers, primarily fromAtkins and Davis Langdon Management Consultancy, supported byFBE Management, Fulcrum Consulting and Alan Baxter and Associates,amongst others, proved invaluable in bringing real industry expertise tothe management activity.

Evaluation An end of project evaluation system was devised to ensure theresearch projects were being addressed and managed in a wayappropriate for public funding. This type of evaluation does nothowever show the impact of the programme.

Two portfolio evaluation exercises were undertaken in 2000. Anevaluation of the impact of projects in the technology and performanceportfolio by Taylor Woodrow; and a project looking to improveunderstanding on how to identify more successful project proposalsbased on the construction process portfolio, undertaken by ConsensusResearch and Davis Langdon Consultancy. A 2003 study by Databuildsampled the project portfolio, project partners and wider industry tocompile an indicative impact assessment.

The conclusion from these projects wasthat, where it has been possible todetermine a benefit in cost terms, returnis high in relation to the level ofGovernment funding. Although theportfolio contained both high impact, andindeed some very low impact researchproposals, both Taywood and Databuildidentified projects where the resultantpotential savings to the industry over justone or two years were sufficient to coverthe cost of the whole ConstructionResearch Programme portfolio funding.


9

The Fairclough Review The former Government Chief Scientific Adviser, Sir John Faircloughwas commissioned to give an independent view of the rolegovernment should play in supporting construction research.

Published in February 2002, “Rethinking Construction Innovation andResearch” made several key recommendations including thesafeguarding of investment in construction R&D, encouraging industryto develop and own a vision for construction’s contribution to thequality of life agenda, for Government R&D priorities to be based on astrategic analysis of issues and for Government to commission longer-term programmes of R&D encouraging collaboration and networks toensure relevance. Outside of these areas Government shouldprogressively withdraw funding support, leaving shorter-termknowledge transfer and research on incremental improvements to befunded by industry.

The Construction Research Programme moved to the DTI in 2001 andwas reviewed additionally as part of the Government’s widerInnovation review – discussed in Chapter 2. Many of Sir John’s findingsmatched the Innovation Review conclusions and have remainedinfluential in shaping the sector’s innovation agenda.

Sir John Fairclough felt CRISP (the Construction Research andInnovation Strategy Panel), could form the nucleus for a neworganisation, owned by industry, and linked to the vision of theStrategic Forum. CRISP has since evolved, through nCRISP, into theNational Platform for the Built Environment. Further details of thePlatform, and the opportunities it gives the sector, are discussed inChapter 2 below.

Everyone in thecountry stands tobenefit from amodern, efficient,high quality and goodvalue constructionindustry. Innovation,driven by wellfounded R&D,is the best way forward.

Sir John Fairclough

‘‘’’

10

THEFUTURE

CHAPTER 2


11

The Innovation ReportThe DTI’s Innovation Report, 'Competing in the global economy: theinnovation challenge', published in December 2003 concluded that abusiness-led Technology Strategy Board (TSB) should be appointedto select the technology areas where public funds would be used tosupport collaborative research and knowledge networks.

Underpinning this, the Business Support Review concluded that sectorspecific support schemes, including PII, should be rationalised intostreamlined support products and Collaborative Research should besupported through a single Technology Programme.

The Technology ProgrammeThe Technology Programme is the combinationof business support products and informationthat the Government is offering business inresponse to the Technology Strategy. The TSB,comprising mainly experienced business leaders,identifies the new and emerging technologiescritical to the growth of the UK economy intowhich government funding and activities can be directed.

In the Spring and Autumn each year, businesses,including construction businesses now have theopportunity to compete for funding using the DTIbusiness support product: Collaborative Researchand Development. The calls for each round aredeveloped and approved by the TechnologyStrategy Board after consultation with interestgroups such as sector based Innovation andGrowth Teams, Research Councils and otherpriority setting Institutions. One of the keyfuture advisory bodies will be the National

Platform for the Built Environment.

The first 3 research competitions yielded over£19 million of funding for research projects eitherfrom the sector or directly impacting on BuiltEnvironment Technology issues.

CHAPTER 2THEFUTURE

12

Looking forward, in April 2006 the Technology Strategy Boardpublished key medium term strategies for technology in a TSBpublication, Developing UK Capability. The strategies are intended toprovide a technology focus and create a dialogue for taking forwardactivity in areas where UK business can succeed. The strategies buildon the Call to Action document published in November 2005 whichidentified the following key areas:

• Advanced Materials • Bioscience and Healthcare • Design Engineering and Advanced Manufacturing • Electronics and Photonics • Information and Communication Technologies • Sustainable Production and Consumption

Construction and operation of the ModernBuilt Environment depends on technologydevelopment in 5 of these 6 key areas.

National Platform for theBuilt EnvironmentThe National Platform (NP), built on theformer nCRISP organisation, sets thestrategic vision and technology prioritiesfor the sector, and acts as a key influencer,including representing the industry in theEuropean Technology Platform structure. It promotes collaborative research, amongother mechanisms, as a vital catalyst forlong-term industry improvement.

Crucially, the National Platform is ownedand led by industry while engaging thewider construction research community.Not only does this ensure that researchprogrammes reflect the real needs ofindustry and clients but it also creates asingle powerful voice for the builtenvironment industry. To be effective insecuring research funding and influencingour regulatory environment, the sector hasto be focused and work collaboratively.


13

The Platform consists of two groups, a High Level Group, chaired byKeith Clarke, Chief Executive of Atkins, which meets regularly to providestrategic guidance, and a Support Group, chaired by Bob White ofConstructing Excellence, Chairman of Mace. The Support Groupdevelops the detailed programme within the Strategic Research Agendaand related activities.

Strategic Research Agenda (SRA)The Platform’s SRA Framework was published in June 2006, and buildson the European Construction Technology Platform’s 2030 Vision andSRA. It sets out three key areas which will shape research in the UKbuilt environment sector over the next 10-15 years. The areas identified are:

• Reducing resource consumption • Creating a new client and user focused, knowledge-based

construction process • ICT and automation

The three research themes were decided following consultation withstakeholders from across the industry as the UK’s priorities from amongthose identified by the European Strategic Research Agenda (see below).Reducing resource consumption was clearly seen by all stakeholders asthe top priority to be addressed for sustainable success of the industry.

Once complete, the Strategy will be a key document, articulating thesector’s research and innovation needs and influencing R&D strategy andspend in industry, and Government support for innovation (including theUK Technology Programme, Research Council and European FrameworkProgramme funds). This document should also help influence innovationin procurement - a key driver for built environment innovation.

CHAPTER 2THEFUTURE

14

The European ConstructionTechnology PlatformThe European Construction Technology Platform (ECTP) was launchedat Maastricht in 2004. The ECTP aims to analyse the sector'schallenges in terms of society, sustainability and technologicaldevelopment. Research and innovation strategies will be developed tomeet these challenges in order to meet the needs of society. TheECTP is seen as a key grouping to inform future European researchcalls through Framework Programme 7 and beyond. The ECTP issupported by over 30 national organisations including the UK National Platform.

Framework Programme 7 (2007-2013)The Framework Programme for Research, Technological Developmentand Demonstration (FP) is the European Community’s primary fundingmechanism for collaborative research and development projects and arange of other initiatives to assist science, technology and engineering.€50 billion will be made available over 7 years in FP7, including €9bnfor ICT research, €3.5bn for nanotechnology, materials and processes,€1.8bn for environmental issues and €4.1bn for transport research.

The Knowledge Transfer Networkfor the Modern Built EnvironmentFollowing an open competition in 2006, the DTI approved a £3 millionin grant support to establish a 3-year Knowledge Transfer Networkaiming to increase the breadth, depth and speed of knowledge transferof technology into UK construction businesses.

The selected KTN delivery consortium, led by the Building ResearchEstablishment, is focusing on construction issues in three key marketsectors – Healthcare (BRE), Infrastructure (CIRIA) and Office (BSRIA).The network activity is underpinned by a Knowledge Managementprocess devised by ARUP. The University Research Group for the BuiltEnvironment – URG(B)E will provide a gateway to research in theacademic knowledge base. Sector Boards from the three communitiesof interest help steer the direction and targets of the knowledgetransfer activity.


15

Sustainable Construction Strategy Last year, DTI carried out a review of theGovernment's Strategy for SustainableConstruction, published in 2000, in consultationwith sector stakeholders. The review examinedthe current main strands of Government policyand initiatives related to sustainable construction;the current good practice within the industry,and took a forward look on how industry seessustainable construction developing and thefuture priorities.

The review is seen as a first step. TheDepartment is now working with policy leads andstakeholders from across Government andindustry to produce a range of targets andmeasures which will inform a new SustainableConstruction Strategy. The Strategy will take alonger-term view on how the UK constructionindustry can be more sustainable and support theUK’s overall sustainability goals.

The constructionindustry mustembrace moresustainable forms ofbuilding. This meansbuildings that meetthe needs of societyand stimulate theeconomy, but withhigher environmentalperformance,particularly in termsof energy and waterefficiency and wastemanagement.

Sir John Harman

and Victor Benjamin

SUSTAINABLE BUILDINGS

TASK GROUP

‘‘

’’

16

THECASE STUDIES

CHAPTER 3

The 14 case studies featured in thefollowing pages are a small selectionfrom the full portfolio of projectssupported by the ConstructionResearch Programme between 1998and 2006.

The selection is intended to show the breadth ofthe portfolio, from materials and producttechnology development, building serviceengineering to process - with the emphasis verymuch on how the programme supported theessential reforms highlighted by Sir John Egan’sConstruction Task Force in its seminal report“Rethinking Construction”.

The full project portfolio comprised projectsdeveloped and funded under three main project streams:

Partners in InnovationDTI’s (formerly DETR’s) cost-shared annualcompetition for research funding

The BRE Framework ProgrammeA 5-year programme of activity established following privatisation ofthe BRE in 1997.

LINK A collaborative research programme jointly funded by DTI with theEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC).

Details of the full project portfolio of over 1400 projects – including asearch engine and links to sources of further information can be foundat: www.constructionresearch.info/dti/projects.asp

17


CHAPTER 3THECASESTUDIES

18

BUILDING DOWN BARRIERS

This project, led by the TavistockInstitute in partnership withDefence Estates (DE), CIRIA,Laing, Amec and others was amilestone in the reform ofattitudes and processes in theprocurement of major projects.In particular it embedded theconcept of supply chainmanagement in the awareness ofboth the construction industryand its client governmentdepartments, together with theconcepts of integrated teams andcollaborative working. Itcomprised ‘action research’,working out the principles ofintegration and collaboration ontwo live projects, namely multi-facility sports complexes atAldershot and Wattisham forArmy Land Command. Inparticular it implemented thevision of two Directors ofDefence Estates to import supply chain management intoconstruction from best practice inmanufacturing industry.

The project generated a‘Handbook of supply chainmanagement’, associated

management ‘tools’ and acommunity of practice of thosewho had had live experience oftheir application.

The outcome of DE’s search forimprovement in its constructionprocurement is that it has adopted a newprocurement system refinedfrom the BDB initiative. The essence of this procurementmethod, referred to as “primecontracting”, is that a singleentity, the prime contractor, isresponsible to the DE for thedesign, construction andmaintenance of any projectprocured using this method. It isintended to draw on the bestavailable tools, techniques andpractices, including assessmentof WLC, SCM, value engineering,value management and riskmanagement to achieve through-life value for money for the clientand increased profitability forsupply chain members.The approach was espoused andcarried forward by the DesignBuild Foundation andsubsequently by ‘Be’ and


19

Constructing Excellence. BuildingDown Barriers has influenced notonly the industry but also theOffice of Government Commerce- feeding directly into thedevelopment of procurementstrategy in Defence Estates andis quoted as best practice byother public sector procurementagencies. Similar progressionwas evident in a subsequentseries of projects on supply chainmanagement that informed andsupported the thinking andactivity of the Strategic Forum for Construction.

For Further Information :www.ciria.org.ukOr contact: Dr. Richard Holti,Open University Business [email protected]


20

The ISC PROJECT Advancing the Integration of the Supply Chain in Construction

The ISC project was carried outjointly by the Open University(OU) Business School andConstructing Excellence for theBuilt Environment (CE). It waspart funded by the DTI and theEngineering and Physical SciencesResearch Council.

The project set out to developguidance tools and processes forachieving greater integrationbetween the members of thesupply chains responsible fordesigning and delivering the built environment.

Over the three years of theproject, the project teamestablished action research teamswith seven CE membercompanies or groups ofcompanies. These leadparticipants were the PearceGroup, Taylor WoodrowConstruction, Laing O’Rourke,Bovis Lend Lease, IrvineWhitlock, Wates and the BuildingDesign Partnership. Each actionresearch team comprisedresearchers and staff from thefocal company.

The action research teamsestablished an agenda forintegrated supply chaininnovation, hypotheses about anarea of ISC development, andimplemented the necessarychanges. A further eightcompanies signed up to workwith OU Business Schoolresearch team on a less intensivebasis, forming action learning setswithin an Action Learning Club,feeding off the conceptsdeveloped in the action research.

These action research activitiescombined to produce findings inthe following areas:

• An analysis of the issues facedby firms in the constructionsector in crafting a strategicrationale for investing incollaborative supply chainrelations

• A conceptualization of theprocess of developingprogressively more integratedways of working with chosensupply partners over asequence of built environmentprojects, including thechallenges and potential pitfallsthat need to be overcome;


21

• An evaluation methodology andmeasurement system thatsupply chain integrators andtheir key supply partners canuse to measure their jointperformance and improve it overtime to demonstrate delivery ofimproved value to clients.

These are set out in a FinalEvaluation Report which will bepublished by ConstructingExcellence in 2007.

The project also producedguidance material drawing onthese research findings. Theresearch team developed aworkshop-based methodology for

initiating and developingintegrated ways of working withinbuilt environment supply chains.This methodology is also about tobe published by ConstructingExcellence. It permits an aspiringsupply chain integrator to clarifytheir strategic rationale andidentify relevant strategic supplypartners, and then to move on byestablishing where the moreintegrated ways of working needto be developed through thesupply chain. This methodologymakes use of a four-foldcategorization of areas in whichintegrated working may need tobe developed. The diagramsummarises these four areas:

For further information see www.constructingexcellence.org.ukOr contact: Dr. Richard Holti, Open University Business [email protected]


22

AVANTIICT enabled collaborative working -

sharing what we know and making it work

The AVANTI programme was oneof the two ‘programmes’ ofactivity selected for funding byDTI in 2002. The introduction oflarger areas of development –aiming to become self-funding,ongoing networks – was aresponse to therecommendations made by SirJohn Fairclough in RethinkingConstruction Research andInnovation (see Chapter 1).

The Avanti initiative was led byCollaborating for the BuiltEnvironment (Be) in partnershipwith Teamwork and IAI. Thegroup identified a need to reducethe risks involved in adoption ofnew methods of working,bringing together areas of currentbest-practice (such as CPICprotocols) that had previouslygained too little marketpenetration to have significantimpact on the sector.

The objective was to deliverimproved project and businessperformance through the use ofICT to support collaborativeworking, applying the AVANTIapproach by getting people towork together; providingprocesses to enable

collaboration; and applying toolsto support collaborative working.

The Avanti approach increasesthe quality of information, thepredictability of outcomes and byreducing risk and waste. Avanti isnot an IT system or tool. As amethod or approach, Avanti canbe applied to projects using 2DCAD as well as those using 3Dintelligent modelling or buildinginformation models. It issupported by handbooks, toolkitsand on-site mentoring.

The core of the Avanti method isan approach where all CADinformation is generated with thesame origin, orientation andscale, and organised in layersthat can be shared. All layers andCAD model files are namedconsistently within a specificAvanti convention to allow othersto find the relevant CAD data.

Avanti achieves its core objectivein three ways; through providingconsultants, each an expert inthe Avanti approach; Informationstandards and procedures; andcross-project assessment and measurement.


23

Evaluation of the impacts of theAvanti have shown:

• Early commitment offering upto 80% saving onimplementation cost onmedium size project

• 50-85% saving on effort spentreceiving information andformatting for reuse

• 60-80% saving on effort spentfinding information anddocuments

• 75–80% saving in effort toachieve design co-ordination

• 50% saving on time spent toassess tenders and award sub-contracts

• 50% saving on effort in sub-contractor design approval

Constructing Excellence, whomerged with Be, have taken overas custodians of Avanti and aredeveloping a self-sustainingbusiness to support roll out of theAvanti methodology to the UKconstruction industry. They willalso draw on the results of otherDTI-supported collaborativeresearch such as Building Down Barriers.

For Further Information:http://www.constructingexcellence.org.uk/resources/az/view.jsp?id=841


24

OFFSITE MANUFACTURE

‘Buildoffsite’ is an industry-widecampaigning organisationpromoting greater uptake ofoffsite technique by UKconstruction. Buildoffsite (thenknown as Prospa) was one oftwo major “programmes” ofactivity funded under Partners inInnovation in reaction to the callby Sir John Fairclough toestablish major on-goingnetworks of expertise.

Currently approximately 50organisations are in membershipwith an additional 10 industrytrade and research organisationsdesignated as associatemembers. The membershipincludes international and nationalclients, designers, maincontractors, specialist contractors,manufacturers, consultants,universities and Government andpublic bodies.

Buildoffsite’s development ismanaged by an Executive Groupwhich includes senior industryrepresentatives acting as sectorchampions for key market sectorsand Buildoffsite’s programme ofactivities is managed by aDirection Group comprisingMembers and Associates.

Principle activities withinBuildoffsite have included:

• Development of a web-siteand regular newsletters topromote offsite the details ofBuildoffsite activities and outputs.

• Publishing the first illustratedGlossary of Off-siteconstruction terminology andcase studies detailing themeasured business benefitsarising from the use of off-siteconstruction methods.

• Initiating the development ofan assessment/certificationscheme providing globalrecognition of compliant off-site solutions.

• Supporting the developmentof the IMMPREST projectmanagement “tool” tosupport decision makingrelating to the potential valueand cost effectiveness of off-site solutions in newconstruction projects


25

• Facilitating the establishmentof collaborations to establishvirtual supply chains – leadingto real world innovative project solutions

• Hosting numerous events suchas “Meet the Client” Briefingsinvolving leading clientMembers such asGlaxoSmithkline and B&Q ;major Debates on off-sitesolutions in collaboration withkey clients and leading industryand trade associations; SectorGroups meetings in keymarkets including ultra largesteel frame structures andcomposite structures: regionalWorkshops; and a ChathamHouse Rule Debate for majorindustry figures to review theimpact of off-site methods onwider construction processes.

• Launching the Discovering Off-site programme of technicaltours to off-site manufacturersand construction projectsincorporating off-site methods.

• Delivering awareness raisingevents key sectors such as anevent for the Health Sector incollaboration with theDepartment of Health.

• Participated at national andinternational industryexhibitions and conferences.

• Delivered numerousNetworking and Business toBusiness Events for theMembership and Guests

Buildoffsite is now wellpositioned and resourced tosustain its rapidly developingwork programme going forward.Buildoffsite is fulfilling a uniquerole within the UK constructionindustry providing the focal pointand authoritative vehicle for bothdeveloping and driving active andinformed promotion of off-site construction.

Further details:www.buildoffsite.com


26

IMMPRESTMeasuring the cost and value of off-site construction

IMMPREST (Interactive Methodfor Measuring PRE-assembly andSTandardisation benefit inconstruction) originated from a 3year research project part fundedby DTI and EPSRC, measuringthe benefits of pre-assemblingbuilding elements off-site. Theproject was led by LoughboroughUniversity in collaboration with11 industrial partners and theirsupply-chains.

IMMPREST is a cost and valuecomparison tool for offsiteconstruction. In the simplestterms, it is a comprehensivecheck-list of considerations, setwithin an interactivespreadsheet, enabling detailedevaluation and analysis.

The widely-known benefits of‘offsite’ are commonly citedwhen justifying an offsiteapproach, yet methodicalassessments of the benefit ofthese solutions have beenlacking. Common methods ofevaluation simply use material,labour and transportation costswhen comparing various options,disregarding other cost-relateditems such as site facilities, craneuse and rectification of works.

Often these cost factors areburied within the imprecisepreliminaries figure, with littlereference to the associatedbuilding approach. Other sourcesof value, which do not alwayslend themselves to evaluation inmonetary terms, such as healthand safety, effects onmanagement and processbenefits, are either implicit ordisregarded within thesecomparison exercises.

IMMPREST was developed toaddress this significant deficitwithin the construction industry,by ensuring that decisionsregarding different buildingapproaches are based onstructured, value-basedassessments.

Since the completion of theIMMPREST project in 2003,there has been a significantincrease in interest in off-siteconstruction and the tool hasbeen adopted as the Buildoffsiterecommended methodology forcomparing the costs and value oftraditional construction withoffsite solutions.


27

IMMPREST has been applied to aseries of case study comparisonswith the objective of providingauthoritative cost and value datafor use by the constructionindustry and its Clients. Thesecase studies have includedprojects undertaken by N G Bailey(pictured), BAA and Crown HouseTechnologies, and there areproposals to include projectsfrom, amongst others, Corus Hi-Point and Yorkon.

Over 20 software licenses for theoriginal have been sold and theresearch team is now pursuingthe development of the toolkitinto a fully commercial version.This work, led Loughborough,includes functions to better

support the estimating processand the storage and use of datacollected over a number ofprojects. An interim version ofthe toolkit, including these newimprovements, is being preparedfor release soon.

Further details:www.immprest.com


28

TECHNICAL DESIGN QUALITY CONTROL

This project exemplifies a seriesof guides produced by BSRIAwith significant potential - at avery practical level - to improvethe way the industry worked inits particular sector.

Led by BSRIA, along with a over17 industrial sponsors and manymore contributors includingCIBSE, The Technical designquality control (TDQC) projectwas targeted on buildingengineering services,developing systematic qualitycontrol guidance for HVAC designers.

In the mid 1990’s, BSRIAundertook a study into the useof engineering design marginsfor CIBSE. The work concludedthat design margins could beseen as part of the widerproblem of over-engineering,coupled with design deficienciesand a lack of feedback todesign. There was nosystematic guidance available tothe building services designeron the appropriate use of designmargins and showed that theuse of unnecessary marginsfrequently led to over-sizing of systems.

Much of the detailed technicalaspects of design were based onpersonal learning and experience;there was little evidence ofstandardisation. The marginsstudy concluded that thereneeded to be effective qualitycontrol of the actual technicaldesign process and proceduresto include checks on input data,on staged calculation outputs andcomparisons with benchmarkingdata where available.

The TDQC team undertook acomprehensive review of currentbuilding services design practiceand procedures was carried outin consultation with the industry,based on the knowledge gainedfrom the Margins work, toidentify best practice and currentproblems, and explore relevantdesign tools.

The result was a good practiceguidance entitled “Design checksfor HVAC” published in April2002 and included a "map" of theHVAC building services designprocess; design Guidance sheetsgiving information and guidanceon design inputs, outputs andpractical watchpoints for 60 keydesign topics, to aid the design


29

process and reduce errors; anddesign Check sheets that can be included in project QA procedures.

This guidance provides a formalframework to record and reviewdesign inputs and encouragedesigners to consider therequirements for installation,commissioning, operation andcontrol and subsequentmaintenance of their selectedsystems at the design stage. It contributes to greaterconsistency in HVAC design andto an overall raising of designstandards by identifying,recording and presenting best practice.

The publication subsequentlybecame one of BSRIA’s bestsellers. Significantly itsrecommendations were adoptedby a number of major M&E designpractices, integrating them intotheir quality procedures.

Other work in the guide seriesfunded through the ConstructionResearch Programme included theIllustrated guide to electricalbuilding services and Practicalguide to building servicescalculations which was consideredto be of great value, particularly tograduate and junior engineers.

For Further Information:www.bsria.co.uk


30

LEARNING FROM THE ECBP

A number of projects werefunded extending the use of theknowledge that came from theEuropean Concrete BuildingProject at Cardington.

The European Concrete BuildingProject, an initiative created bythe British Cement Association(BCA), BRE, CONSTRUCT andthe Reinforced Concrete Council(RCC), used a full-scale multistorey test building to carry outprocess research and someperformance research onconcrete frame buildings. Thebuilding demonstrated manysignificant improvements in theconstruction process whichbecame the focus of a series ofresearch projects funded by DTIwhich included support for thedevelopment and publication of 8best practice guides derived fromlessons learnt from theCardington experience.

The BRE led project- Achievingbest practice in concrete frameconstruction – developed casestudies which illustrated thepracticalities of implementinginnovations on small to mediumsized concrete frame constructionprojects and concentrated on

reaction to the selectedinnovations in the context ofnormal commercial projects.

Commercial subsidy of anyinnovation was limited to theparticipating company’swillingness to explore thepracticality of the innovationproposed. Many unforeseen andpreviously undocumentedcomplicating issues wereuncovered. The publisheddiscussion of these issues wasexpected to better inform theindustry and research communityas many of the practicalities and realities of working onsmaller concrete frameconstruction sites.

The findings were published inthe BRE Report ‘Best practice inconcrete frame construction:Case Studies’. An additional bestpractice guide on the use of ultrahigh strength concretes wasprepared and distributed to industry.

The project’s objective wasfurther achieved by the study ofgeneral industry attitudes to theinnovations trialled in theCardington process research.


31

This included noting barriers toadoption, views of industry anduptake rates determined fromindustry feedback. Thisknowledge has been used tohighlight two specific areaswhere minimal extra effort mightrealistically produce a largeincrease in impact. Thesefindings were reported to industryin the BRE report ‘Innovation inconcrete frame construction1995-2015’, which also included areview of past and presentinnovation in concrete frameconstruction. A wide consultationprocess was undertaken as partof the project and the findings areexpected to help industry takestock of the developments madeover the past 10 years and tofocus future industry innovationeffort on areas likely to beimportant to clients and society generally.

Other projects building onknowledge from the ECBPincluded the development of theNational Structural ConcreteFrame Specification by a researchteam led by CONSTRUCT, whichis aimed at standardisingspecifications across the industryand reducing ambiguities; and a

further project led by BRE, with a major developer, into theapplication of practical lessonslearnt from Cardington beingincorporated into high- riseresidential structures.

For Further Information: www.bre.co.uk www.construct.org.uk www.concretecentre.com


32

COMITConstruction Opportunities for Mobile IT

COMIT (ConstructionOpportunities for Mobile IT),began as a two-year researchand development project initiallyled by ARUP, in partnership withBSRIA and LoughboroughUniversity. The project broughttogether representatives fromconstruction, technology,research and disseminationorganisations to form the COMIT Community.

COMIT’s early aim was toestablish a project community tofacilitate the realisation ofbusiness benefits from theadoption of mobile informationand communication technologies.In other words to, “learn fromexperience to deliver measurablebusiness benefits”. Following itssuccess, COMIT aims nowextend to becoming a “Centre ofExcellence” for theimplementation of Mobile IT inthe Construction Industry.

COMIT’s objectives anddeliverables achieved during thefirst two years included eightcase studies, four demonstrationprojects (and associated reports),press articles, newsletters,videos and the COMIT Website

that has become the key‘information hub’ for theorganisation.

All of the case studies werechosen by the COMITcommunity and all eight havenow been completed. Theyinvolved a number of COMITmember companies, addressedvarious processes and looked ata number of technologies suchas Tablet PC’s, Wireless LAN’s,PDA’s, Digital Pens and Paperand RFID tags. It was found thatall the case studies achievedboth generic and specificbenefits. Costs varied from£7,400 to £135,000 and the ROIpayback period was attained in a year.

Similarly, the demonstrationprojects were chosen by theCOMIT community. Thirtypossible projects were looked atfrom past work. These werevoted down to ten and then tofour by the membership. Thefour demonstration projectslooked at the key process areasof Maintenance Inspections,Monitoring Progress, Site Designand Problem Resolution, as wellas Monitoring Health and Safety.


33

The companies involved included;Stent Foundations, PearceConstruction, Orange, Taylor Woodrow, Sysnet,Knowledge Online and MobileComputing Systems.

The COMIT project has been aresounding success, so much sothat at the request of itsmembers COMIT began as a selffunded organisation in September2005. A steering group has beenelected and there are now 40paying members.

The COMIT community in its newindustry-owned form is looking tobuild upon the work done in thefirst two years and continuereporting on projects and casestudies. Some of the newprojects being worked upon nowinclude: RFID in Construction and‘Intelligent Tools’, Rapid Site Set-up, Location and Mapping ofBuried Underground Services,On-site accounting of personneland continued projects involvingquality inspections at HeathrowTerminal 5.

COMIT also continues to share its experiences and knowledgewith the wider world throughconferences, exhibitions, pressevents, university lectures andthrough its very popular website.The website includes informationon all its work including a veryvaluable ‘lessons learned’ areahighlighting good practice in theimplementation of mobiletechnology.

For further information:www.comitproject.org.uk


34

RFID TAGGING TECHNOLOGY

This project, led by BRE, set outto examine the technical issuesand business benefits of usingtagging & wireless technology inthe manufacturing, installationand maintenance of high valuedconstruction products.

Radio Frequency IdentificationDevice technology, commonlyreferred to as RFID tagging or e-tagging, already has a proventrack record in many applications,for example in the tracking oflivestock, maintenance of infrastructure and improving thelogistics in retail and otherindustries, but has yet to beemployed widely in construction.

An RFID system consists of twomain components, the tag andthe reader, which work togetherto provide the user with a non-contact solution to uniquelyidentify items and their locations,unlike barcodes, RFID tags donot require a line of sight for identification.

This project built on previouswork by Bovis Lendlease (oniTAG) and previous DTI fundedtagging project led by BRE, byusing these technologies for

maintaining/ planningreplacement of boilers in homesand doors.

The system developed usedtagging and handheld devices toautomate asset tracking and thescheduling of maintenance tasks.The system provides wirelesslycollected data that can bepresented through the webbrowser for remote access andinterface to the existing assetmanagement system. Thetagging system comprised ofthree components; a centraliseddatabase with reporting throughthe web browser; a wirelesshand-held device; RFIDread/write passive tagsembedded into boilers and doors.

This technology should offerconstruction new opportunitiesto improve the maintenance ofassets and manufactures todevelop smart products and new services.

The potential savings (money andefficiency) that these pilots haveshown include improvements inproductivity, data capture, Jobtracking, quality control, stockcontrol as well as an


35

improvement in customerinformation. RFID can also leadto a reduction in paper work,eliminating the cost of sendingwrong products to site andenabling web based customerinformation system. RFID allowsmanufacturers to offer new valueadded maintenance services fortheir products

For further information:www.bre.co.uk


36

STRATRISKRethinking decision making on strategic risks & opportunities for

the construction industry

The STRATrisk research projectwas a collaborative venturebetween The Institute of CivilEngineers, The ActuarialProfession, the Universities ofBath and Bristol and industry,aimed at firstly gaining anunderstanding of how strategicrisk is identified and managed inUK construction companies andsecondly in providing a toolkit forcompany boards to betterunderstand and manage thosestrategic risks and opportunitieswhich could materially impact onthe survival of the enterprise.

The resulting report andguidelines, aimed at directors ofcompanies and public sectorbodies, set out, for the first time,the various steps whichcompanies should take in orderto manage strategic riskseffectively. It stresses the needfor ‘risk leadership’ within anorganisation to establish the rightculture and internalcommunications system.

Strategic risks include loss ofreputation, fraud, staffing,customer dissatisfaction, over-complexity and financialmismanagement. Some strategic

risks are foreseeable but othersare less so, but they can still bemanaged and this guidanceproduced by the project aims toshow how.

Seven main recommendationsemerged from the study:

• Recognise that strategic risksare different and managethem differently.

• Strategic risks differ incharacter as well as inmagnitude to other risk andare generally more dynamic,uncertain and interconnected.

• Establish a systematic, holisticapproach. Organisations needto manage strategic,operational and projects risksin a holistic way and assignresponsibilities for managingeach area of risk.

• Ensure strong Boardcommitment and leadership

• Create appropriate culture • Improve communications• Build flexibility into operations,

systems and responsemechanisms

• Use Suitable tools


37

The project also identified anumber of interlinked tools thatcould be used to help managestrategic risk:

• Concept mapping: helping toestablish links betweenobjectives and risks, issuesand activities

• Horizon scanning: helping to Identify potentially important issues

• Pattern recognition: Providingan understanding of underlyingpatterns of risk

• Risk Grouping: Gathering risksin broad categories for reportsto the Board

Over 80 opinion formers attendedthe launch event andsubsequently the Institution ofCivil Engineers held a specialPresidential Forum, bringingsenior industry figures together toexplore the project findings,identify the lessons for theircompany and identify areas forfuture development.

The findings of the project werecaptured in Strategic Risk a Guidefor Directors published byThomas Telford Ltd in May 2006.

For Further Information:www.stratrisk.co.uk


38

VALiDValue in Design

“Value delivery is the key goal ofall projects” - This constructionindustry mantra is familiar but doall stakeholders in today’scomplex project relationshipsshare a common vision andunderstanding of “value”? This isa difficult but often unansweredquestion, despite the many valuerelated capabilities offered today.

VALiD (Value in Design)comprises the main findings of athree-year joint industry andacademic research project“Managing Value Delivery inDesign”. Part funded by the DTIand EPSRC, the project sought toincrease customer satisfactionthrough a better, sharedunderstanding of appropriatevalue systems (for the project

process, the product and itsperformance) and standardisedmechanisms that map andmeasure the flow and delivery ofvalue within the design solution.

The project was led by SheppardRobson and LoughboroughUniversity, and engaged anumber of key organisationsincluding Collaborating for theBuilt Environment (Be), TheCommission for Architecture inthe Built Environment (CABE),Royal Institute of CharteredSurveyors (RICS), the RoyalInstitute of British Architects(RIBA) and others.

The objectives of the researchproject were to develop acommon value culture andlanguage for clients, users anddesigners; to provide standardmechanisms that capture andcommunicate an evolving set ofproject values; to relate designtasks to project values, justifyingtheir outcomes and monitoringoverall project effectivenessregarding value delivery andhence user satisfaction uponoccupation; and to recommendimplementation strategies toencourage uptake and provideappropriate training.


39

The resulting VALiD (Value inDesign) approach to valuedelivery integrates stakeholdervalue judgements into the projectprocess. Outputs include a suiteof simple, practical methods thatcan be customised to engagestakeholders throughout thedelivery process. It takes people’sjudgements and uses them tounderstand stakeholder value andto demonstrate project performance.

VALiD offers a series of activitiesthat align with relevant stages ofa project. An appropriate set isselected for a particular projectand linked to its delivery process.The nature of VALiD activitieschanges as the projectprogresses to reflect its shifting focus.

This new approach tounderstanding and deliveringvalue is based on six principles:

• value delivery is the goal of all projects

• value is subjective and based upon stakeholders’underlying values

• successful projects delivervalue for all stakeholders

• project teams have providerand customer stakeholders,each with their ownunderstanding of value andexpectation for its delivery

• value is judged by eachstakeholder from their ownperspective and aggregated toprovide a project view

• effective project value deliveryrequires an ongoing dialoguebetween all stakeholders tonegotiate appropriatecompromises and balancestakeholder views

For further information see:www.valueindesign.com


40

TIMBER SPECIFICATIONBalancing specification and design lives for durable

timber construction

If used correctly timber is one ofthe most environmental friendlybuilding materials and can play amajor role in contributing to abuilding's sustainability. But as anatural, bio-degradable material,wood as part of a structuraldesign must address the issue ofdurability as an integrated aspectof the design alongsideverification of potential stressesand deformations in service.

To address durability concerns,timber structures are often over-specified, which can lead to theuse of oversized members andadd unnecessary costs - financialand environmental. Wood is alsooften treated with syntheticchemicals whereas with the useof correct passive durabilitydesign this may be unnecessary.Equally there is also widespreaduse of unnecessary non-benignsurface treatments and finishescausing potential future disposalproblems. The small firms andpractices that largely comprisethe timber supply chain areextremely conscious of this, butneed assistance in changingtowards the benign use oforganic building materials.

The use of passive durabilitydesign alleviates many oftimber’s end-of-life cycleproblems through:

• The greater use of Europeanlarch, British-grown oak andDouglas fir (all sustainablyproduced national timbers)that are able to withstand ourclimatic conditions withoutsynthetic treatments;

• The specification and use ofprotective timber buildingdesign features,("weatherings", local "roofs",overhangs, flashings, raisedpost bases) which have olderversions known for centuries,that tend to have beenforgotten.

This objective of the project, ledby TRADA Technology (TimberResearch and DevelopmentAssociation) with industrypartners, aimed to draw togetherthe key items of currentlyfragmented information resourceand repackage it in an IT Toolboxformat, constructed to act as aneasily navigable informationresource geared towardsassisting in specification of


41

timber for appropriate durability inthe context of a structural timberdesign. The team studied earlydesign decisions and relatedprocesses influencing degradationof timber structures andcomponents, as well asconducting selective interviewswith mainstream professionals;clients’ advisors and client representatives.

The project website containsdetails of the project and the betaversion of the softwaredeveloped as the principal outputis now accessible online.

For Further Information:http://research.ttlchiltern.co.uk/pif306/index.htm


42

COMPOSITES IN CONSTRUCTION

NGCC represents thecomposites in constructionindustry in the UK and unites itsmembers in one body. Itsmembership covers all sectors ofthe industry and it provides a vitallink for NCN (NationalComposites Network – a DTIknowledge transfer network) tothe construction sector.Activities of NGCC includedissemination of information andnews, forums for collaborationand networking, and providing acentral focus for those needingsupport within the industry. Thegroup has been operational sinceits launch in November 2000. Initial DTI funding kick-started thegroup, but the main activities

have been self-funded sinceMarch 2003. Additional DTIfunding was provided in 2003 tohelp set up regional groups forthe network. These regionalgroups were designed to betterengage the local community andindustry. Active groups wereestablished in Scotland, Wales,North West and Central England.BRE lead the DTI projects toestablish and coordinate NGCC.

Composites (fibre reinforcedpolymers) continue to findeffective use in a wide variety ofconstruction applications ranging from new build structures to refurbishment andrestoration projects.


43

Their use is set to increasefurther over the coming decadeas major opportunities ariseincluding the 2012 Olympics, thecurrent housing crisis and an everaging infrastructure. Keyproperties such as light weight,excellent long-term durability,flexibility in design, prefabricationand fast construction process on-site will enable innovative cost-efficient structures to bedeveloped using compositematerials in both a pure form andalso working synergistically withother materials to give improved performance.

In order to meet these newchallenges, NGCC (NetworkGroup for Composites inConstruction) has realigned theway in which it operates. NGCCaims to bridge the interfacebetween the composites industryand the construction community,providing guidance, technicalsupport and advice whereneeded. In order to achieve this,core activities such asnetworking, CPD seminars,conferences and site visits willcontinue; but to improvetechnology and informationtransfer,

a new interactive websitehas been launched as well as aredesigned newsletter targeted atthe wider constructioncommunity. NGCC has also beenworking closely with the NationalComposites Network (NCN) toproduce a ‘road map’ for thecomposites in constructionindustry in order to facilitate thestep changes required to meetthe new opportunities.

NGCC has changed itscoordinating organisation inMarch 2006; the head-office isnow at NetComposites Ltd,Chesterfield under the directionof Dr Sue Halliwell.

For Further Information:www.ngcc.org.uke-mail: [email protected]


44

DYNAMIC COMPACTION

A key policy objective ofGovernment has been to achieve60% of new housing onbrownfield land, along with thedesire to encourage regenerationof former industrial areas. Thisobjective required a range ofmeasures to ensure such land issafe and economically viable forredevelopment. The increasinguse of brownfield sites forbuilding developments oftenmeans that some form of groundtreatment is needed before development.

The repeated dropping of a heavyweight onto the ground surfaceis one of the simplest and mostbasic methods of groundimprovement and is a widelyused means of treatingbrownfield sites. The major useof the method in the UK hasbeen to compact loose, partiallysaturated soil or fill by dynamiccompaction - repeated impactsof a large mass commonlydropped from a large crane etc orby rapid impact compaction.

It is important that thosespecifying dynamic compactionground treatment understand thenature of the particular treatment

process employed and itspotential benefits for the groundconditions being considered.There was, however, very littleguidance on this methodavailable to industry and acomprehensive specification fordynamic compaction wasrecognised as long overdue inthe UK.

An authoritative specification wasproduced by BRE, withyindustrial partners. Thedocument was produced usinginformed advice on technical bestpractice through a SteeringGroup comprising the leading UKspecialist ground improvementcontractors who also providingsponsorship for the work.Information on industryrequirements were also besought from the whole supplychain. It provides a technicallyprescriptive specification for theprocess, including design issues,which is based on accepted bestpractice.

The Specification and Notes forGuidance represents anauthoritative and unifyingstatement of best practice. Thenew guidance aimed to raise


45

technical standards within aframework of fair competition forspecialist contractors, byproviding common benchmarksfor all parties to a dynamiccompaction contract - and providevalue for money for clients. Itsuse will save considerable time attender stage, avoidmisunderstandings betweenthose specifying the works andthe specialist contractors,particularly in the use of standardterminology, and provide commonbenchmarks for all parties to adynamic compaction contract.

For Further Information:www.brebookshop.com

46

ANNEX AFURTHER INFORMATION

Developing UK Capability

www.dti.gov.uk/files/file27950.pdf

Technology Programme

www.dti.gov.uk/innovation/tech-priorities-uk/about_the_programme/CR&D/page11705.html

National Platform for the Modern Built Environment –

Strategic Research Agenda

www.ncrisp.org.uk/Publications/UKSRA_6page_Final%20Brochure.pdf

Knowledge Transfer Network for the Modern Built Environment

www.mbetktn.co.uk

European Construction Technology Platform

www.ectp.org/

Framework Programme 7

http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/

Strategy for Sustainable Construction

www.dti.gov.uk/sectors/construction/sustainability/strategy/page13543.html

Construction Research and Innovation Compendium

www.constructionresearch.info/dti/projects.asp

Innovation and Research Focus

www.innovationandresearchfocus.org.uk/


47

ANNEX B WIDER LINKS

Department For Trade And Industry

www.dti.gov.uk

Department For Communities And Local Government

www.communities.gov.uk

Constructing Excellence In The Built Environment (Ce)

www.constructingexcellence.org.uk

Building Research Establishment (Bre)

www.bre.co.uk

Steel Construction Institute (Sci)

www.steel-sci.org

Construction Industry Research

And Information Association (Ciria)

www.ciria.org.uk

Timber Research And Development Association (Trada)

www.trada.co.uk

The Concrete Society

www.concrete.org.uk

Innovative Manufacturing Research Centres

www.epsrc.ac.uk/researchfunding/programmes/innovativemanufacturing/innovativemanufacturingresearchcentres/

Sustainable Urban Environment Research Centres

http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/researchfunding/programmes/infrastructureandenvironment/initiatives/sue/default.htm

Small Business Service

www.sbs.gov.uk

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSIMAGES

Cover Citibank - Richard Davies

Page 5 School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape -

University of Newcastle

Page 9 Hayes School - PCKO Architects / Grant Smith

Page 11 Gateshead Millennium Bridge - Michele Turriani

Page 13 Birmingham Bullring Centre

Page 15 Maurer Court, Greenwich Millennium Village - CABE

Page 19 Aldershot Sports Hall, courtesy of MOD

Page 23 Advanced Dental Surgery - A & M Photography Ltd

Page 27 Murray Grove - Cartwright Pickard

Page 41 Ecology & Art Pavilions & Children Play Centre -

CABE /David Whyte

Printed in the UK on recycled paper containing a minimum of 75% post consumer waste.First published in February 2007. Department of Trade and Industry. www.dti.gov.uk

© Crown Copyright. DTI/Pub 8495/02/07/2k URN 07/606

The Construction Research Programme - Project · PDF file... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 CHAPTER 3:The CASE ... CHAPTER 1 THE CONSTRUCTION RESEARCH PROGRAMME 6

Documents