Every form of construction is based on a set of rules (or system) which is the result of the properties and conditions of the materials employed and the requirements they have to meet. Analysing if new systems are changing traditional timber tectonics is the aim of this paper. First, the paper looks at the two fundamentally different prefabrication principles we can use nowadays. These relate to the two ways of designing and building with a system: systemised building and system building. Also, a large number of innovative new systems are making the relationship between various design aspects more and more complex. All these changes have an impact on the design process and the way architecture is formed: the paper shows how new systems and semi-finished products that have been developed in the past ten years are changing the traditional tectonics of timber, making possible a modern tectonic form

Costa Santos, Sandra

University of Dundee Online Publications

                                                                    University of DundeeModern timber tectonicsCosta Santos, SandraPublication date:2007Document VersionPublisher's PDF, also known as Version of recordLink to publication in Discovery Research PortalCitation for published version (APA):Costa Santos, S. (2007). Modern timber tectonics: from construction technique to building systems. Paperpresented at Tectonics Making Meaning, Eindhoven, Netherlands.General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in Discovery Research Portal are retained by the authors and/or othercopyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated withthese rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from Discovery Research Portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain. • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal.Take down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediatelyand investigate your claim.Download date: 03. Sep. 2023MODERN TIMBER TECTONICS: FROM CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUE TO BUILD-ING SYSTEMS.S. Costa SantosCesuga, SpainTectonics, the poetics of technology1 IntroductionThe architectural use of timber has involved, from the be-ginning, a process of rationalization. The trunk is taken from nature and converted to a preformed part that is connected to other parts, according to rules arising out of technical, cli-matic and social conditions. In timber, prefabricated elements show many advantages over traditional types of construction. Traditional timber con-struction is more expensive to design and implement (about a quarter of the material used in a structure is simply waste), slower and also more complicated than prefabricated timber construction. Prefabrication minimizes the waste of resourc-es (because less adaptation and adjustment is necessary), sim-plifies the collection and recycling of waste, allows a rational form of building and can achieve a high standard of quality [5]. Also, the erection costs on site are lower and timber is not exposed to construction moisture during erection. But pre-fabrication in timber demands a close cooperation between designers and manufacturers: this constructive process de-mands a change in the nature of timber design.  There is a close relationship between prefabrication, mass production and systems. Taking housing as an example of ty-pology, prefabrication of houses was rare until the beginning of the twentieth century, when prefabrication became a pos-sibility on a mass scale. In other words, prefabrication was only economically feasible in a mass produced way, where the prefabricated parts or components were connected to other parts according to certain rules. In reality, every form of construction is based on a set of rules which are the result of the properties and conditions of the materials employed and the requirements they have to meet. They dictate the specific properties of the building components, their use and their processing. These rules, derived from technical and rep-resentational conditions, form a system. Then, any form of construction involves designing and building with a system. Since a building system is mainly an intellectual approach to structure and construction, building systems and tectonic form are closely related. Therefore, the evolution from the traditional approach to structure and construction (traditional systems) is a prerequisite to modern tectonics. The different types of systems, as design and construction tools, are re-viewed in order to analyse if such evolution has taken place. 2 Modular theories and systems Since the industrial revolution, several attempts to develop specific systems as an alternative to traditional timber con-struction were made [2]. The success of the 40’s industrial-ization in America inspired Konrad Wachsmann and Walter Gropius to develop an industrialized constructive system in timber between 1941 and 1949. It was the General Panel Sys-tem and was mass produced, modular and comprehensive: it included manufacture, transport and assembly require-ments; services, structure and thermo-acoustic needs were also addressed. Elements were based on a module and could be assembled following any direction. It was a closed system: the elements were not designed to be used individually. The system wasn’t successful enough to beat the simplicity of plat-form frame construction.During the second half of the 1950s, high hopes were placed in building systems in order to meet the huge housing needs after the Second World War [4]. At the beginning of the 1960s, building systems were seen to represent the spirit of modern architecture, but after little more than a decade this attempt failed. Industrial methods and machine technology became a central issue in the debate on modern building culture, being used to systematize construction and technological develop-ments. But despite the intention to shape the everyday world in a creative and productive form, the call for economic forms of automation resulted in rigid layouts with monotonous and repetitive solutions, based on the modular theory. Poor de-sign and the attempt to subject everyday life to the imperative of adaptability led to a dead end. In the 1970s, the US government initiated the “Operation Breakthrough” to overcome the housing crisis in the States at that time. The programme favoured closed systems, including modular construction systems that had reached the end of their useful life in Europe [3]. After the 1970s were forgotten, the notion of construction unit systems from a single source was revived. These are made up with parts that fit only a specific building system, in other words: they are closed sys-tems. 2.1 Closed systems A closed system is a complete and finished product: its com-ponents or planning can’t be freely replaced, extended or completed. Their main drawback is that they are aimed at a very limited market.  In the manufacture of technical systems, traditional construction is often more efficient than closed building systems[4]. The KFN System, designed by Kaufmann 96 Architektur, can be shown as an example of closed system, offering dwellings with a high degree of prefabrication. Within this system, the architects developed a timber container called Fred. This mo-bile home consists of two boxes, one of which slides inside the other to form a 3 x 3 x 3-metre element that can be transported on an articulated lorry. On site, the two sections are drawn apart to form a living space with a floor area of 16 m². The dwelling is ready for occupation after site assembly. The structure of the boxes is made with a sawn timber stud frame between plastic-coated plywood panels either side and rockwool insulation in the cavity. 2.2 Meccano systemsMeccano systems can be considered a special type of closed system. They represent a way of forming bigger objects using coordinated smaller standard units (elements or modules). The principle is based on the combination of a limited number of modules to produce a reasonable amount of different con-structive elements or buildings. They require a high degree of prefabrication and can’t be freely completed or extended. Complete room units or modules can be suspended from or supported by a load-bearing frame. The replacement of the complete unit is needed if adaptation to changing conditions or renewal from time to time is required. When there is no independent load-bearing structure (load-bearing room units are those that can be stacked), the aspect of interchangeabil-ity no longer applies. Since the room units are assembled like building blocks, they can also be dismantled without damage and re-erected elsewhere. This is the case of the Transform System for example, that has modules that can be stacked vertically or horizontally and extended after completion. The modules have plan dimensions of 3x3, 3x6 or 3x9 m and are 3.23, 3.38 or 3.63 m high. Their load-bearing frame uses glulam pillars and beams connected with galvanized steel plates. Walls and floors are made with composite timber pan-els. The units are assembled on the workshop and transport-ed to site. Room units are usually fully finished internally and ready for occupation after they have been transported to the building site. They are coupled with transport restraints.However, when large scale production is confined to repeti-tions within the same structure, the universal application of room units is almost non existent. 2.3 Open systemsNon modular prefabricated construction allows for the inter-changeability of different types of structure and the location of components in a variety of positions; in other words, an open system. Designing with open systems involves coming to terms with things that already exist: an open system is a set of parts co-ordinated with each other. One of the aims of the open system approach is to develop and co-ordinate the subsystems and construction elements produced by different manufacturers. Developing the parts is as important as the sets of relationships between them in the manufacturing and assembly processes and in use. Today’s timber constructive systems are mainly open systems: they are flexible to be used individually or combined with other systems but need to be combined with services and finishes. The Finnframe Floor System is an example of open system. The elements of the system include Finnjoist, Kerto-S and Kerto-Q. Finnjoist is an I-joist with LVL flange and OSB web and forms the main element of the floor system. Kerto serves as flange material for Finnjoist; but it can also work as a structural lin-ear element in itself: long span beams, rimbeams, lintels and other structural applications. All these can be combined with this or other systems. 3 Conclusion. Systems todayUsually, prefabrication is related to cost- and time-savings and improved workmanship. Nowadays, we can use two fundamentally different prefabri-cation principles: dimension-related systems with modular coordination (closed and meccano systems) and in-dividual prefabrication systems with specified jointing principles (open sys-tems). They relate to the two ways of designing and building with a system: systemised building and system build-ing. The difference between them re-lates to the various degrees of prefab-rication.In systemised building, the quality and dimensions of individ-ual components are defined by the relevant standards with a view to achieve optimised working procedures, but, in a way, limiting the degree of design freedom. Today, as industrialization moves forward, the new manufac-turing processes are giving system building a new impetus. At the beginning of the 1990s, the technological innovations that took place in the manufacturing process provided greater flexibility through the use of computer-controlled machines. They made it feasible to produce every element as a unique item (even complex geometries), thus changing the concept of mass production which is not an absolute dogma any lon-ger because it does not ensure economic feasibility.  The fact that on site construction yielded to systems is closely related to the improved manufacturing technology because rationalization, standardization and prefabrication can be constrained by the inadequacies of the machines. Systems are replacing on-site construction throughout the spectrum of typologies. Almost all building systems in today’s timber ar-chitecture are flexible enough to be able to react to individual designs. Today is not the module but the maximum span what influences the final form and, in the end, only transport re-strictions impose the limit. Therefore, the traditional design process in timber architecture is being reversed: the struc-ture can be designed with a high degree of freedom and then customised by breaking it down into suitable individual ele-ments. Talking in constructional terms, systems can be broken down into complementary systems and synthetic systems [1]. The former consist of many complementary, partially autonomous layers (monofunctional components); the latter are those whose components are almost permanently attached and re-sult in elements that satisfy the load-bearing, insulating and weather-protecting requirements simultaneously (a complex layer with multiple functions).  The layered construction of timber frame, for instance, is complementary because every individual layer is monofunctional and complements the oth-ers. Also, in a large number of innovative new systems the re-lationship between design aspects such as thermal-acoustic requirements and cladding, as well as new constructive pos-sibilities is more and more complex. This interaction is bridg-ing the distance between the constructive technique and the system. Today, finished multi-layer products can offer what a carpenter would construct on site. All these changes have an impact on the design process and the way architecture is formed. In other words, modern technologies are changing traditional timber tectonics, moving towards synthetic open systems. References[1] Deplazes, A., Wood: indiferent, synthetic, abstract-plastic. Prefabrication technology in timber construction. Constructing architecture. Materials, processes, structures. A handbook, Birkhäuser: Basel, Boston, Berlin, pp. 77-81, 2005. [2] Grohe, G., El futuro de la construcción con madera. Tectónica, 13 estructuras/madera (II), pp. 28-37, 2001. [3] Russell, B., Building systems, industrialization and ar-chitecture, John Wiley & Sons, 1981. [4] Schittich, C., Open and closed systems: an interview with Helmut Schulitz. Detail, 2001-4, pp. 611-613, 2001. [5] Winter, W., Prefabrication and erection. Timber con-struction manual, ed. Th. Herzog, J. Natterer, R. Schweitzer, M. Volz, W. Winter, Birkhäuser Edition Detail, 2004. 

English

Modern timber tectonics:from construction technique to building systems

                                                              University of DundeeModern timber tectonicsCosta Santos, SandraPublication date:2007Document VersionPublisher's PDF, also known as Version of recordLink to publication in Discovery Research PortalCitation for published version (APA):Costa Santos, S. (2007). Modern timber tectonics: from construction technique to building systems. Paperpresented at Tectonics Making Meaning, Eindhoven, .General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in Discovery Research Portal are retained by the authors and/or othercopyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated withthese rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from Discovery Research Portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain. • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal.Take down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediatelyand investigate your claim.Download date: 05. Apr. 2019MODERN TIMBER TECTONICS: FROM CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUE TO BUILD-ING SYSTEMS.S. Costa SantosCesuga, SpainTectonics, the poetics of technology1 IntroductionThe architectural use of timber has involved, from the be-ginning, a process of rationalization. The trunk is taken from nature and converted to a preformed part that is connected to other parts, according to rules arising out of technical, cli-matic and social conditions. In timber, prefabricated elements show many advantages over traditional types of construction. Traditional timber con-struction is more expensive to design and implement (about a quarter of the material used in a structure is simply waste), slower and also more complicated than prefabricated timber construction. Prefabrication minimizes the waste of resourc-es (because less adaptation and adjustment is necessary), sim-plifies the collection and recycling of waste, allows a rational form of building and can achieve a high standard of quality [5]. Also, the erection costs on site are lower and timber is not exposed to construction moisture during erection. But pre-fabrication in timber demands a close cooperation between designers and manufacturers: this constructive process de-mands a change in the nature of timber design.  There is a close relationship between prefabrication, mass production and systems. Taking housing as an example of ty-pology, prefabrication of houses was rare until the beginning of the twentieth century, when prefabrication became a pos-sibility on a mass scale. In other words, prefabrication was only economically feasible in a mass produced way, where the prefabricated parts or components were connected to other parts according to certain rules. In reality, every form of construction is based on a set of rules which are the result of the properties and conditions of the materials employed and the requirements they have to meet. They dictate the specific properties of the building components, their use and their processing. These rules, derived from technical and rep-resentational conditions, form a system. Then, any form of construction involves designing and building with a system. Since a building system is mainly an intellectual approach to structure and construction, building systems and tectonic form are closely related. Therefore, the evolution from the traditional approach to structure and construction (traditional systems) is a prerequisite to modern tectonics. The different types of systems, as design and construction tools, are re-viewed in order to analyse if such evolution has taken place. 2 Modular theories and systems Since the industrial revolution, several attempts to develop specific systems as an alternative to traditional timber con-struction were made [2]. The success of the 40’s industrial-ization in America inspired Konrad Wachsmann and Walter Gropius to develop an industrialized constructive system in timber between 1941 and 1949. It was the General Panel Sys-tem and was mass produced, modular and comprehensive: it included manufacture, transport and assembly require-ments; services, structure and thermo-acoustic needs were also addressed. Elements were based on a module and could be assembled following any direction. It was a closed system: the elements were not designed to be used individually. The system wasn’t successful enough to beat the simplicity of plat-form frame construction.During the second half of the 1950s, high hopes were placed in building systems in order to meet the huge housing needs after the Second World War [4]. At the beginning of the 1960s, building systems were seen to represent the spirit of modern architecture, but after little more than a decade this attempt failed. Industrial methods and machine technology became a central issue in the debate on modern building culture, being used to systematize construction and technological develop-ments. But despite the intention to shape the everyday world in a creative and productive form, the call for economic forms of automation resulted in rigid layouts with monotonous and repetitive solutions, based on the modular theory. Poor de-sign and the attempt to subject everyday life to the imperative of adaptability led to a dead end. In the 1970s, the US government initiated the “Operation Breakthrough” to overcome the housing crisis in the States at that time. The programme favoured closed systems, including modular construction systems that had reached the end of their useful life in Europe [3]. After the 1970s were forgotten, the notion of construction unit systems from a single source was revived. These are made up with parts that fit only a specific building system, in other words: they are closed sys-tems. 2.1 Closed systems A closed system is a complete and finished product: its com-ponents or planning can’t be freely replaced, extended or completed. Their main drawback is that they are aimed at a very limited market.  In the manufacture of technical systems, traditional construction is often more efficient than closed building systems[4]. The KFN System, designed by Kaufmann 96 Architektur, can be shown as an example of closed system, offering dwellings with a high degree of prefabrication. Within this system, the architects developed a timber container called Fred. This mo-bile home consists of two boxes, one of which slides inside the other to form a 3 x 3 x 3-metre element that can be transported on an articulated lorry. On site, the two sections are drawn apart to form a living space with a floor area of 16 m². The dwelling is ready for occupation after site assembly. The structure of the boxes is made with a sawn timber stud frame between plastic-coated plywood panels either side and rockwool insulation in the cavity. 2.2 Meccano systemsMeccano systems can be considered a special type of closed system. They represent a way of forming bigger objects using coordinated smaller standard units (elements or modules). The principle is based on the combination of a limited number of modules to produce a reasonable amount of different con-structive elements or buildings. They require a high degree of prefabrication and can’t be freely completed or extended. Complete room units or modules can be suspended from or supported by a load-bearing frame. The replacement of the complete unit is needed if adaptation to changing conditions or renewal from time to time is required. When there is no independent load-bearing structure (load-bearing room units are those that can be stacked), the aspect of interchangeabil-ity no longer applies. Since the room units are assembled like building blocks, they can also be dismantled without damage and re-erected elsewhere. This is the case of the Transform System for example, that has modules that can be stacked vertically or horizontally and extended after completion. The modules have plan dimensions of 3x3, 3x6 or 3x9 m and are 3.23, 3.38 or 3.63 m high. Their load-bearing frame uses glulam pillars and beams connected with galvanized steel plates. Walls and floors are made with composite timber pan-els. The units are assembled on the workshop and transport-ed to site. Room units are usually fully finished internally and ready for occupation after they have been transported to the building site. They are coupled with transport restraints.However, when large scale production is confined to repeti-tions within the same structure, the universal application of room units is almost non existent. 2.3 Open systemsNon modular prefabricated construction allows for the inter-changeability of different types of structure and the location of components in a variety of positions; in other words, an open system. Designing with open systems involves coming to terms with things that already exist: an open system is a set of parts co-ordinated with each other. One of the aims of the open system approach is to develop and co-ordinate the subsystems and construction elements produced by different manufacturers. Developing the parts is as important as the sets of relationships between them in the manufacturing and assembly processes and in use. Today’s timber constructive systems are mainly open systems: they are flexible to be used individually or combined with other systems but need to be combined with services and finishes. The Finnframe Floor System is an example of open system. The elements of the system include Finnjoist, Kerto-S and Kerto-Q. Finnjoist is an I-joist with LVL flange and OSB web and forms the main element of the floor system. Kerto serves as flange material for Finnjoist; but it can also work as a structural lin-ear element in itself: long span beams, rimbeams, lintels and other structural applications. All these can be combined with this or other systems. 3 Conclusion. Systems todayUsually, prefabrication is related to cost- and time-savings and improved workmanship. Nowadays, we can use two fundamentally different prefabri-cation principles: dimension-related systems with modular coordination (closed and meccano systems) and in-dividual prefabrication systems with specified jointing principles (open sys-tems). They relate to the two ways of designing and building with a system: systemised building and system build-ing. The difference between them re-lates to the various degrees of prefab-rication.In systemised building, the quality and dimensions of individ-ual components are defined by the relevant standards with a view to achieve optimised working procedures, but, in a way, limiting the degree of design freedom. Today, as industrialization moves forward, the new manufac-turing processes are giving system building a new impetus. At the beginning of the 1990s, the technological innovations that took place in the manufacturing process provided greater flexibility through the use of computer-controlled machines. They made it feasible to produce every element as a unique item (even complex geometries), thus changing the concept of mass production which is not an absolute dogma any lon-ger because it does not ensure economic feasibility.  The fact that on site construction yielded to systems is closely related to the improved manufacturing technology because rationalization, standardization and prefabrication can be constrained by the inadequacies of the machines. Systems are replacing on-site construction throughout the spectrum of typologies. Almost all building systems in today’s timber ar-chitecture are flexible enough to be able to react to individual designs. Today is not the module but the maximum span what influences the final form and, in the end, only transport re-strictions impose the limit. Therefore, the traditional design process in timber architecture is being reversed: the struc-ture can be designed with a high degree of freedom and then customised by breaking it down into suitable individual ele-ments. Talking in constructional terms, systems can be broken down into complementary systems and synthetic systems [1]. The former consist of many complementary, partially autonomous layers (monofunctional components); the latter are those whose components are almost permanently attached and re-sult in elements that satisfy the load-bearing, insulating and weather-protecting requirements simultaneously (a complex layer with multiple functions).  The layered construction of timber frame, for instance, is complementary because every individual layer is monofunctional and complements the oth-ers. Also, in a large number of innovative new systems the re-lationship between design aspects such as thermal-acoustic requirements and cladding, as well as new constructive pos-sibilities is more and more complex. This interaction is bridg-ing the distance between the constructive technique and the system. Today, finished multi-layer products can offer what a carpenter would construct on site. All these changes have an impact on the design process and the way architecture is formed. In other words, modern technologies are changing traditional timber tectonics, moving towards synthetic open systems. References[1] Deplazes, A., Wood: indiferent, synthetic, abstract-plastic. Prefabrication technology in timber construction. Constructing architecture. Materials, processes, structures. A handbook, Birkhäuser: Basel, Boston, Berlin, pp. 77-81, 2005. [2] Grohe, G., El futuro de la construcción con madera. Tectónica, 13 estructuras/madera (II), pp. 28-37, 2001. [3] Russell, B., Building systems, industrialization and ar-chitecture, John Wiley & Sons, 1981. [4] Schittich, C., Open and closed systems: an interview with Helmut Schulitz. Detail, 2001-4, pp. 611-613, 2001. [5] Winter, W., Prefabrication and erection. Timber con-struction manual, ed. Th. Herzog, J. Natterer, R. Schweitzer, M. Volz, W. Winter, Birkhäuser Edition Detail, 2004. 

Northumbria Research Link

Citation: Costa Santos, Sandra (2007) Modern timber tectonics: from construction technique to  building  systems.  In:  Tectonics  Making  Meaning,  10-  12  December  2007,  Eindhoven University. URL: This  version  was  downloaded  from  Northumbria  Research  Link: http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/21354/Northumbria University has developed Northumbria Research Link (NRL) to enable users to access the University’s research output. Copyright © and moral rights for items on NRL are retained by the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners.  Single copies of full items can be reproduced,  displayed or  performed,  and given to  third parties in  any format  or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided the authors, title and full bibliographic details are given, as well  as a hyperlink and/or URL to the original metadata page. The content must  not  be changed in any way. Full items must not be sold commercially in any format or medium without  formal  permission  of  the  copyright  holder.   The  full  policy  is  available  online: http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/policies.htmlThis document may differ from the final, published version of the research and has been made available online in accordance with publisher policies. To read and/or cite from the published version of the research, please visit the publisher’s website (a subscription may be required.)MODERN TIMBER TECTONICS: FROM CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUE TO BUILD-ING SYSTEMS.S. Costa SantosCesuga, SpainTectonics, the poetics of technology1 IntroductionThe architectural use of timber has involved, from the be-ginning, a process of rationalization. The trunk is taken from nature and converted to a preformed part that is connected to other parts, according to rules arising out of technical, cli-matic and social conditions. In timber, prefabricated elements show many advantages over traditional types of construction. Traditional timber con-struction is more expensive to design and implement (about a quarter of the material used in a structure is simply waste), slower and also more complicated than prefabricated timber construction. Prefabrication minimizes the waste of resourc-es (because less adaptation and adjustment is necessary), sim-plifies the collection and recycling of waste, allows a rational form of building and can achieve a high standard of quality [5]. Also, the erection costs on site are lower and timber is not exposed to construction moisture during erection. But pre-fabrication in timber demands a close cooperation between designers and manufacturers: this constructive process de-mands a change in the nature of timber design.  There is a close relationship between prefabrication, mass production and systems. Taking housing as an example of ty-pology, prefabrication of houses was rare until the beginning of the twentieth century, when prefabrication became a pos-sibility on a mass scale. In other words, prefabrication was only economically feasible in a mass produced way, where the prefabricated parts or components were connected to other parts according to certain rules. In reality, every form of construction is based on a set of rules which are the result of the properties and conditions of the materials employed and the requirements they have to meet. They dictate the specific properties of the building components, their use and their processing. These rules, derived from technical and rep-resentational conditions, form a system. Then, any form of construction involves designing and building with a system. Since a building system is mainly an intellectual approach to structure and construction, building systems and tectonic form are closely related. Therefore, the evolution from the traditional approach to structure and construction (traditional systems) is a prerequisite to modern tectonics. The different types of systems, as design and construction tools, are re-viewed in order to analyse if such evolution has taken place. 2 Modular theories and systems Since the industrial revolution, several attempts to develop specific systems as an alternative to traditional timber con-struction were made [2]. The success of the 40s industrial-ization in America inspired Konrad Wachsmann and Walter Gropius to develop an industrialized constructive system in timber between 1941 and 1949. It was the General Panel Sys-tem and was mass produced, modular and comprehensive: it included manufacture, transport and assembly require-ments; services, structure and thermo-acoustic needs were also addressed. Elements were based on a module and could be assembled following any direction. It was a closed system: the elements were not designed to be used individually. The system wasnt successful enough to beat the simplicity of plat-form frame construction.During the second half of the 1950s, high hopes were placed in building systems in order to meet the huge housing needs after the Second World War [4]. At the beginning of the 1960s, building systems were seen to represent the spirit of modern architecture, but after little more than a decade this attempt failed. Industrial methods and machine technology became a central issue in the debate on modern building culture, being used to systematize construction and technological develop-ments. But despite the intention to shape the everyday world in a creative and productive form, the call for economic forms of automation resulted in rigid layouts with monotonous and repetitive solutions, based on the modular theory. Poor de-sign and the attempt to subject everyday life to the imperative of adaptability led to a dead end. In the 1970s, the US government initiated the Operation Breakthrough to overcome the housing crisis in the States at that time. The programme favoured closed systems, including modular construction systems that had reached the end of their useful life in Europe [3]. After the 1970s were forgotten, the notion of construction unit systems from a single source was revived. These are made up with parts that fit only a specific building system, in other words: they are closed sys-tems. 2.1 Closed systems A closed system is a complete and finished product: its com-ponents or planning cant be freely replaced, extended or completed. Their main drawback is that they are aimed at a very limited market.  In the manufacture of technical systems, traditional construction is often more efficient than closed building systems[4]. The KFN System, designed by Kaufmann 96 Architektur, can be shown as an example of closed system, offering dwellings with a high degree of prefabrication. Within this system, the architects developed a timber container called Fred. This mo-bile home consists of two boxes, one of which slides inside the other to form a 3 x 3 x 3-metre element that can be transported on an articulated lorry. On site, the two sections are drawn apart to form a living space with a floor area of 16 m². The dwelling is ready for occupation after site assembly. The structure of the boxes is made with a sawn timber stud frame between plastic-coated plywood panels either side and rockwool insulation in the cavity. 2.2 Meccano systemsMeccano systems can be considered a special type of closed system. They represent a way of forming bigger objects using coordinated smaller standard units (elements or modules). The principle is based on the combination of a limited number of modules to produce a reasonable amount of different con-structive elements or buildings. They require a high degree of prefabrication and cant be freely completed or extended. Complete room units or modules can be suspended from or supported by a load-bearing frame. The replacement of the complete unit is needed if adaptation to changing conditions or renewal from time to time is required. When there is no independent load-bearing structure (load-bearing room units are those that can be stacked), the aspect of interchangeabil-ity no longer applies. Since the room units are assembled like building blocks, they can also be dismantled without damage and re-erected elsewhere. This is the case of the Transform System for example, that has modules that can be stacked vertically or horizontally and extended after completion. The modules have plan dimensions of 3x3, 3x6 or 3x9 m and are 3.23, 3.38 or 3.63 m high. Their load-bearing frame uses glulam pillars and beams connected with galvanized steel plates. Walls and floors are made with composite timber pan-els. The units are assembled on the workshop and transport-ed to site. Room units are usually fully finished internally and ready for occupation after they have been transported to the building site. They are coupled with transport restraints.However, when large scale production is confined to repeti-tions within the same structure, the universal application of room units is almost non existent. 2.3 Open systemsNon modular prefabricated construction allows for the inter-changeability of different types of structure and the location of components in a variety of positions; in other words, an open system. Designing with open systems involves coming to terms with things that already exist: an open system is a set of parts co-ordinated with each other. One of the aims of the open system approach is to develop and co-ordinate the subsystems and construction elements produced by different manufacturers. Developing the parts is as important as the sets of relationships between them in the manufacturing and assembly processes and in use. Todays timber constructive systems are mainly open systems: they are flexible to be used individually or combined with other systems but need to be combined with services and finishes. The Finnframe Floor System is an example of open system. The elements of the system include Finnjoist, Kerto-S and Kerto-Q. Finnjoist is an I-joist with LVL flange and OSB web and forms the main element of the floor system. Kerto serves as flange material for Finnjoist; but it can also work as a structural lin-ear element in itself: long span beams, rimbeams, lintels and other structural applications. All these can be combined with this or other systems. 3 Conclusion. Systems todayUsually, prefabrication is related to cost- and time-savings and improved workmanship. Nowadays, we can use two fundamentally different prefabri-cation principles: dimension-related systems with modular coordination (closed and meccano systems) and in-dividual prefabrication systems with specified jointing principles (open sys-tems). They relate to the two ways of designing and building with a system: systemised building and system build-ing. The difference between them re-lates to the various degrees of prefab-rication.In systemised building, the quality and dimensions of individ-ual components are defined by the relevant standards with a view to achieve optimised working procedures, but, in a way, limiting the degree of design freedom. Today, as industrialization moves forward, the new manufac-turing processes are giving system building a new impetus. At the beginning of the 1990s, the technological innovations that took place in the manufacturing process provided greater flexibility through the use of computer-controlled machines. They made it feasible to produce every element as a unique item (even complex geometries), thus changing the concept of mass production which is not an absolute dogma any lon-ger because it does not ensure economic feasibility.  The fact that on site construction yielded to systems is closely related to the improved manufacturing technology because rationalization, standardization and prefabrication can be constrained by the inadequacies of the machines. Systems are replacing on-site construction throughout the spectrum of typologies. Almost all building systems in todays timber ar-chitecture are flexible enough to be able to react to individual designs. Today is not the module but the maximum span what influences the final form and, in the end, only transport re-strictions impose the limit. Therefore, the traditional design process in timber architecture is being reversed: the struc-ture can be designed with a high degree of freedom and then customised by breaking it down into suitable individual ele-ments. Talking in constructional terms, systems can be broken down into complementary systems and synthetic systems [1]. The former consist of many complementary, partially autonomous layers (monofunctional components); the latter are those whose components are almost permanently attached and re-sult in elements that satisfy the load-bearing, insulating and weather-protecting requirements simultaneously (a complex layer with multiple functions).  The layered construction of timber frame, for instance, is complementary because every individual layer is monofunctional and complements the oth-ers. Also, in a large number of innovative new systems the re-lationship between design aspects such as thermal-acoustic requirements and cladding, as well as new constructive pos-sibilities is more and more complex. This interaction is bridg-ing the distance between the constructive technique and the system. Today, finished multi-layer products can offer what a carpenter would construct on site. All these changes have an impact on the design process and the way architecture is formed. In other words, modern technologies are changing traditional timber tectonics, moving towards synthetic open systems. References[1] Deplazes, A., Wood: indiferent, synthetic, abstract-plastic. Prefabrication technology in timber construction. Constructing architecture. Materials, processes, structures. A handbook, Birkhäuser: Basel, Boston, Berlin, pp. 77-81, 2005. [2] Grohe, G., El futuro de la construcción con madera. Tectónica, 13 estructuras/madera (II), pp. 28-37, 2001. [3] Russell, B., Building systems, industrialization and ar-chitecture, John Wiley & Sons, 1981. [4] Schittich, C., Open and closed systems: an interview with Helmut Schulitz. Detail, 2001-4, pp. 611-613, 2001. [5] Winter, W., Prefabrication and erection. Timber con-struction manual, ed. Th. Herzog, J. Natterer, R. Schweitzer, M. Volz, W. Winter, Birkhäuser Edition Detail, 2004. 

Modern timber tectonics: from construction technique to building systems

Northumbria Research Link
Citation:  Costa  Santos,  Sandra  (2007)  Modern  timber  tectonics:  from  construction  technique  to 
building systems. In: Tectonics Making Meaning, 10- 12 December 2007, Eindhoven University. 
URL: 
This version was downloaded from Northumbria Research Link: http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/21354/
Northumbria University has developed Northumbria Research Link (NRL) to enable users to access 
the University’s research output. Copyright © and moral rights for items on NRL are retained by the 
individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners.  Single copies of full items can be reproduced, 
displayed or performed, and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or 
study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided the authors, 
title and full bibliographic details are given, as well as a hyperlink and/or URL to the original metadata 
page. The content must not be changed in any way. Full items must not be sold commercially in any  
format or medium without formal permission of the copyright holder.  The full policy is available online: 
http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/pol  i cies.html  
This  document  may differ  from the  final,  published version of  the research  and has been made 
available online in accordance with publisher policies. To read and/or cite from the published version 
of the research, please visit the publisher’s website (a subscription may be required.)
                        
MODERN TIMBER TECTONICS: FROM 
CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUE TO BUILD-
ING SYSTEMS.
S. Costa Santos
Cesuga, Spain
Tectonics, the poetics of technology
1 Introduction
The architectural use of timber has involved, from the be-
ginning, a process of rationalization. The trunk is taken from 
nature and converted to a preformed part that is connected 
to other parts, according to rules arising out of technical, cli-
matic and social conditions. 
In timber, prefabricated elements show many advantages 
over traditional types of construction. Traditional timber con-
struction is more expensive to design and implement (about 
a quarter of the material used in a structure is simply waste), 
slower and also more complicated than prefabricated timber 
construction. Prefabrication minimizes the waste of resourc-
es (because less adaptation and adjustment is necessary), sim-
plifies the collection and recycling of waste, allows a rational 
form of building and can achieve a high standard of quality [5]. 
Also, the erection costs on site are lower and timber is not 
exposed to construction moisture during erection. But pre-
fabrication in timber demands a close cooperation between 
designers and manufacturers: this constructive process de-
mands a change in the nature of timber design.  
There is a close relationship between prefabrication, mass 
production and systems. Taking housing as an example of ty-
pology, prefabrication of houses was rare until the beginning 
of the twentieth century, when prefabrication became a pos-
sibility on a mass scale. In other words, prefabrication was 
only economically feasible in a mass produced way, where 
the prefabricated parts or components were connected to 
other parts according to certain rules. In reality, every form 
of construction is based on a set of rules which are the result 
of the properties and conditions of the materials employed 
and the requirements they have to meet. They dictate the 
specific properties of the building components, their use and 
their processing. These rules, derived from technical and rep-
resentational conditions, form a system. Then, any form of 
construction involves designing and building with a system. 
Since a building system is mainly an intellectual approach to 
structure and construction, building systems and tectonic 
form are closely related. Therefore, the evolution from the 
traditional approach to structure and construction (traditional 
systems) is a prerequisite to modern tectonics. The different 
types of systems, as design and construction tools, are re-
viewed in order to analyse if such evolution has taken place. 
2 Modular theories and systems 
Since the industrial revolution, several attempts to develop 
specific systems as an alternative to traditional timber con-
struction were made [2]. The success of the 40’s industrial-
ization in America inspired Konrad Wachsmann and Walter 
Gropius to develop an industrialized constructive system in 
timber between 1941 and 1949. It was the General Panel Sys-
tem and was mass produced, modular and comprehensive: 
it included manufacture, transport and assembly require-
ments; services, structure and thermo-acoustic needs were 
also addressed. Elements were based on a module and could 
be assembled following any direction. It was a closed system: 
the elements were not designed to be used individually. The 
system wasn’t successful enough to beat the simplicity of plat-
form frame construction.
During the second half of the 1950s, high hopes were placed 
in building systems in order to meet the huge housing needs 
after the Second World War [4]. At the beginning of the 1960s, 
building systems were seen to represent the spirit of modern 
architecture, but after little more than a decade this attempt 
failed. Industrial methods and machine technology became a 
central issue in the debate on modern building culture, being 
used to systematize construction and technological develop-
ments. But despite the intention to shape the everyday world 
in a creative and productive form, the call for economic forms 
of automation resulted in rigid layouts with monotonous and 
repetitive solutions, based on the modular theory. Poor de-
sign and the attempt to subject everyday life to the imperative 
of adaptability led to a dead end. 
In the 1970s, the US government initiated the “Operation 
Breakthrough” to overcome the housing crisis in the States at 
that time. The programme favoured closed systems, including 
modular construction systems that had reached the end of 
their useful life in Europe [3]. After the 1970s were forgotten, 
the notion of construction unit systems from a single source 
was revived. These are made up with parts that fit only a 
specific building system, in other words: they are closed sys-
tems. 
2.1 Closed systems 
A closed system is a complete and finished product: its com-
ponents or planning can’t be freely replaced, extended or 
completed. Their main drawback is that they are aimed at a 
very limited market.  In the manufacture of technical systems, 
traditional construction is often more efficient than closed 
building systems[4]. 
The KFN System, designed by Kaufmann 96 Architektur, can 
be shown as an example of closed system, offering dwellings 
with a high degree of prefabrication. Within this system, the 
architects developed a timber container called Fred. This mo-
bile home consists of two boxes, one of which slides inside 
the other to form a 3 x 3 x 3-metre element that can be 
transported on an articulated lorry. On site, the two sections 
are drawn apart to form a living space with a floor area of 16 
m². The dwelling is ready for occupation after site assembly. 
The structure of the boxes is made with a sawn timber stud 
frame between plastic-coated plywood panels either side and 
rockwool insulation in the cavity. 
2.2 Meccano systems
Meccano systems can be considered a special type of closed 
system. They represent a way of forming bigger objects using 
coordinated smaller standard units (elements or modules). 
The principle is based on the combination of a limited number 
of modules to produce a reasonable amount of different con-
structive elements or buildings. They require a high degree of 
prefabrication and can’t be freely completed or extended. 
Complete room units or modules can be suspended from or 
supported by a load-bearing frame. The replacement of the 
complete unit is needed if adaptation to changing conditions 
or renewal from time to time is required. When there is no 
independent load-bearing structure (load-bearing room units 
are those that can be stacked), the aspect of interchangeabil-
ity no longer applies. Since the room units are assembled like 
building blocks, they can also be dismantled without damage 
and re-erected elsewhere. This is the case of the Transform 
System for example, that has modules that can be stacked 
vertically or horizontally and extended after completion. The 
modules have plan dimensions of 3x3, 3x6 or 3x9 m and are 
3.23, 3.38 or 3.63 m high. Their load-bearing frame uses 
glulam pillars and beams connected with galvanized steel 
plates. Walls and floors are made with composite timber pan-
els. The units are assembled on the workshop and transport-
ed to site. Room units are usually fully finished internally and 
ready for occupation after they have been transported to the 
building site. They are coupled with transport restraints.
However, when large scale production is confined to repeti-
tions within the same structure, the universal application of 
room units is almost non existent. 
2.3 Open systems
Non modular prefabricated construction allows for the inter-
changeability of different types of structure and the location 
of components in a variety of positions; in other words, an 
open system. Designing with open systems involves coming 
to terms with things that already exist: an open system is a 
set of parts co-ordinated with each other. One of the aims of 
the open system approach is to develop and co-ordinate the 
subsystems and construction elements produced by different 
manufacturers. Developing the parts is as important as the 
sets of relationships between them in the manufacturing and 
assembly processes and in use. Today’s timber constructive 
systems are mainly open systems: they are flexible to be used 
individually or combined with other systems but need to be 
combined with services and finishes. 
The Finnframe Floor System is an example of open system. 
The elements of the system include Finnjoist, Kerto-S and 
Kerto-Q. Finnjoist is an I-joist with LVL 
flange and OSB web and forms the 
main element of the floor system. Kerto 
serves as flange material for Finnjoist; 
but it can also work as a structural lin-
ear element in itself: long span beams, 
rimbeams, lintels and other structural 
applications. All these can be combined 
with this or other systems. 
3 Conclusion. Systems today
Usually, prefabrication is related to 
cost- and time-savings and improved 
workmanship. Nowadays, we can use 
two fundamentally different prefabri-
cation principles: dimension-related 
systems with modular coordination 
(closed and meccano systems) and in-
dividual prefabrication systems with 
specified jointing principles (open sys-
tems). They relate to the two ways of 
designing and building with a system: 
systemised building and system build-
ing. The difference between them re-
lates to the various degrees of prefab-
rication.
In systemised building, the quality and dimensions of individ-
ual components are defined by the relevant standards with a 
view to achieve optimised working procedures, but, in a way, 
limiting the degree of design freedom. 
Today, as industrialization moves forward, the new manufac-
turing processes are giving system building a new impetus. At 
the beginning of the 1990s, the technological innovations that 
took place in the manufacturing process provided greater 
flexibility through the use of computer-controlled machines. 
They made it feasible to produce every element as a unique 
item (even complex geometries), thus changing the concept 
of mass production which is not an absolute dogma any lon-
ger because it does not ensure economic feasibility.  
The fact that on site construction yielded to systems is closely 
related to the improved manufacturing technology because 
rationalization, standardization and prefabrication can be 
constrained by the inadequacies of the machines. Systems are 
replacing on-site construction throughout the spectrum of 
typologies. Almost all building systems in today’s timber ar-
chitecture are flexible enough to be able to react to individual 
designs. Today is not the module but the maximum span what 
influences the final form and, in the end, only transport re-
strictions impose the limit. Therefore, the traditional design 
process in timber architecture is being reversed: the struc-
ture can be designed with a high degree of freedom and then 
customised by breaking it down into suitable individual ele-
ments. 
Talking in constructional terms, systems can be broken down 
into complementary systems and synthetic systems [1]. The 
former consist of many complementary, partially autonomous 
layers (monofunctional components); the latter are those 
whose components are almost permanently attached and re-
sult in elements that satisfy the load-bearing, insulating and 
weather-protecting requirements simultaneously (a complex 
layer with multiple functions).  The layered construction of 
timber frame, for instance, is complementary because every 
individual layer is monofunctional and complements the oth-
ers. 
Also, in a large number of innovative new systems the re-
lationship between design aspects such as thermal-acoustic 
requirements and cladding, as well as new constructive pos-
sibilities is more and more complex. This interaction is bridg-
ing the distance between the constructive technique and the 
system. Today, finished multi-layer products can offer what 
a carpenter would construct on site. All these changes have 
an impact on the design process and the way architecture is 
formed. In other words, modern technologies are changing 
traditional timber tectonics, moving towards synthetic open 
systems. 
References
[1] Deplazes, A., Wood: indiferent, synthetic, abstract-
plastic. Prefabrication technology in timber construction. 
Constructing architecture. Materials, processes, structures. 
A handbook, Birkhäuser: Basel, Boston, Berlin, pp. 77-81, 
2005. 
[2] Grohe, G., El futuro de la construcción con madera. 
Tectónica, 13 estructuras/madera (II), pp. 28-37, 2001. 
[3] Russell, B., Building systems, industrialization and ar-
chitecture, John Wiley & Sons, 1981. 
[4] Schittich, C., Open and closed systems: an interview 
with Helmut Schulitz. Detail, 2001-4, pp. 611-613, 2001. 
[5] Winter, W., Prefabrication and erection. Timber con-
struction manual, ed. Th. Herzog, J. Natterer, R. Schweitzer, 
M. Volz, W. Winter, Birkhäuser Edition Detail, 2004. 


https://discovery.dundee.ac.uk/files/27136682/CostaSantos.S.pdf

Modern timber tectonics:from construction technique to building systems

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

University of Dundee Online Publications

University of Dundee Online Publications

Northumbria Research Link

Northumbria Research Link

Northumbria Research Link