Prefabrication experiments - 9 - The Frankfurt pre-cast concrete panel system by Ernst May

A report published in 1928 by the American consul in Cologne, estimated Germany’s dwelling shortage at 800 000 units (see the dream of the factory made house). The housing crisis fuelled many experiments in construction systems for dwellings. German architects and engineers inspired by the advances in steel and concrete promoted affordable, flexible, easily assembled, durable and hygienic housing strategies using these new materials and methods. The Bauhaus and its young proponents of a new architecture undertook a number of these experiments. Their research into individual and collective dwelling prototypes was often a collaborative effort associated with the building industry. The collaboration between these two fields, architecture and industry, is one of the major constituents of modern architecture.

Ernst May, architect and urban planner from Germany, was one of the major players in disseminating collective housing schemes in Germany at the beginning of the twentieth century. One of these schemes built in the heart of the housing crisis included 1400 units in Praunheim. Rationalisation, standardisation, modularity and component based building were the ideas proposed by May. The project included a pre-cast concrete panel factory set-up by Ernst May in a large empty manufacturing plant. The factory produced slabs, panels and pre-stressed beams. These sub-assemblies incorporated, as needed, windows, doors and hardware and were then transported to and assembled on site. Each standard modular one-story concrete slab could be produced in less than five minutes. Ernst May’s system was a major facet in the «Reichsforschungsgesellchaft» research for housing organization in Germany.

The panel based construction system was based on the repetition of a few clearly defined dwelling plans, the standardisation of building details and the coordination of different building systems from kitchens to bathrooms and their mechanical components. The simple system of horizontal slab panels for floors and vertical slab panels for walls employed pre-cast concrete as a fire-resistant and soundproof material, two properties required for the success of collective housing.

Wall and floor panel construction systems were the most successful and enduring forms of industrialized building. The strategy minimized overhead required for procurement in as much as the panels were produced as needed. Marketing overhead was also reduced to a minimum as the panel was a simple sub-assembly and did not require market education to be adopted as was the case in many of the prefab experiments in modular housing which had, and sometimes wrongly still have, the cheap or low-cost temporary housing connotation.

see Herbert G, The Dream of the Factory Made House, MIT Press, 1984 - p50

Prefabrication experiments - 8 - Thorncliffe Cast-iron houses

The late eighteenth century brought major changes to Great Britain. The industrial revolution began shifting work from craftsmen to the regimented division of labour in factories supported by greater involvement of steam driven machines in the production process. One of the most significant changes was the use of Iron in construction. The replacement of coal in iron production, the invention of the Bessemer converter and the use of the rolling mill, advanced iron production from marginal forge based production to iron mills capable of rolling profiled beams and shaped sheets in continuous production. This transformation of traditional forms of construction to experimental iron based kit-of-parts construction is well documented. The most instrumental example is Joseph Paxton’s Chrystal Palace.

The Chrystal Palace (1851) exposed large spans with minimal material use as well as component-based construction. The building introduced the kit-of-parts as an overall system of construction, coherent from factory to on-site assembly. This coherence contributed to the beginning of a systemic and modular approach to architecture and influenced builders to accept iron as the material for modern construction.

Iron and cast-iron, as used in the Chrystal Palace, were since the invention of the steam engine, cheaper to produce in comparison to traditional building materials.  Early production methods allowed the precise -and continuous manufacturing of diverse structural members and sheets. The new methods of production of iron and steel helped stimulate the invention of many housing experiments in Great Britain.

The Thorncliffe Cast-iron Houses are one of the remarkable systems to come out of Great Britain during this period of exploration. Only a few hundred were built as a means of addressing the housing shortage and the higher costs of traditional methods. This system is unique as it is analogous to massive construction. The cast-iron plates perform as structure and skin, mimicking stack-bond brick construction, optimising the compressive strength of cast-iron. The cast-iron panels could be mass-produced shipped on-site and assembled in a week. The panels were produced with a patented flange that facilitated assembly and created a watertight seal.

The envelope was composed of the cast-iron panels covered in a cement based enamel covering on the outside and interior walls were of traditional wood construction. What makes this project of particular interest is the modular composition imposed by the panels. Each panel is recognizable on the house creating a unit to whole relationship that gives the project an aesthetic unity foreshadowing the modular coordination of building components.

Add from San Jose evening news, May 12, 1928.http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1977&dat=19280509&id=hTAiAAAAIBAJ&sjid=EqQFAAAAIBAJ&pg=1485,3841256

Prefabrication experiments - 7 - « FRAME construction for buildings » patent US1581487

Modern architecture is inseparable from the new materials and methods of the industrial revolution. The new production methods and the continuous development of materials inspired the avant-garde to break free from traditional models of massive construction in favour of the skeletal potentials of concrete and steel. Armed with these new materials and techniques and a willingness to solve the social issues of the urbanisation and industrialisation of society, architects and engineers explored alternatives to traditional building.

This climate of relative enthusiasm was a fertile ground for the invention of new building systems. The number of patents for concrete and steel systems and construction systems requested at the time are a testament to the era’s generative confluence.

Within this context, the potential of «Frame construction» with the greater spans offered by concrete or steel or even in some experiments, hybrids of concrete and steel, instituted the modern open or free plan. The Frame, an evolution of the medieval wooden box frame, is an open form of building. The grid of columns and beams, whether doweled, nailed, welded or bolted together, create an unrestricted structural network.

Unrestricted or open is an expression of the «Frame’s» adaptability to multiple forms of planning: «un plan libre». A free plan is open-ended to suit the needs of the user, or the expression of the architect. The «Frame» construction is an expression of maximum structural results with minimal material use. No structural interior or exterior walls are required. Freedom of interior and exterior expression are the fundamental components of the «plan libre».

Viewed as the material expression of modern society, the Frame construction system is associated with the modern skyscraper, the industrial aesthetic, and the international style. The Frame of concrete, wood or steel maximises the potential for interior space and its pre-fabrication minimises the on-site waste associated with traditional construction methods.

The «open building» research initiative founded on the theories of N.J. Habraken alludes to this type of frame construction as providing a platform onto which coordinated building components could be anchored. The frame is open and receptive to a multitude of possibilities allowing for modular coordination of interchangeable building components maximising potential for adaptability and flexibility over time.

Frame construction for building : see 

http://www.google.com.tr/patents/US1581487

Prefabrication experiments - 6 - The Suitcase House by Palace Corporation

Colonisation and population displacement be they by necessity, by the pioneer spirit, by disaster or by war has always demanded low-cost, simply and quickly built housing. A wooden pre-cut cottage shipped by boat by English craftsmen to fishing villages in New England in the 17th century often cited as the first prefab home in the United States is an example of transportable housing.

The need to build houses quickly and simply was a major challenge at the turn of the twentieth century. In Europe, war and urbanisation were the driving forces whereas westward immigration, land harvesting for agriculture were catalyzing factors in the United States. During the 30’s and 40’s government programs such as the Highway Act and the G.I. Bill stimulated migration patterns and increased the need for affordable housing for returning soldiers wishing to re-establish themselves after the horrors of war. Industrialization and prefabrication were fairly marginal in mainstream construction at the time, and many companies looking for outlets invested creatively in the outlets offered by government programs.

One of these experiments was the fascinating «suitcase house» proposed by the Palace Corporation in 1945. The suitcase house was an easily assembled, demountable and transportable form of housing suited to the needs of migrating populations, of the armed forces, of farming communities, of returning soldiers and as advertised, newlyweds.

It was meant as a low-cost quickly built alternative to stick framing. Unfolded in 20 minutes, ready to be occupied. It was designed as a lightweight structure composed of steel studs covered in «homasote» panels giving it a transport weight of 10 pounds per square foot. The structural core was rigid frame that contained all the other panels necessary in its unfolding. Although «aesthetics» was not the main objective, the structure was proposed as a quick and easy solution to a major problem.

The «homasote» boards were first introduced in 1916 as a versatile construction panel. Lightweight, thin, easy to install, the precursor of today’s gypsum panels, they were a staple component of turn of the century prefab homes. The «suitcase» house was never a commercial success. It was a product-centric look into the future of housing. The notion of housing as a product is where more research needs to take place. How do we consider site, local building culture and customs and provide a low-cost, quickly built, adaptable form of housing? The suitcase house framed within this question only partially addressed the problem of temporary housing.

The suitcase house _ http://libraries.mit.edu/archives/exhibits/suitcase/img/suitcase-sm.jpg