Modular Construction Insights

No modular construction insights have been published here yet, and no article title is invented to make the page look busy. What follows is what will go in it, and who each piece is for.

Start a Project Read the guide

A01 · Abstract title-block sheet

The page · 01

Written for the person planning a building

The first kind of writing here is for somebody who has land, a use in mind and no reason to know how any of this works. It will cover the decisions that turn out to matter and the order they arrive in: what a survey settles, why the finish is chosen last, what phasing forecloses, and which questions are easy to answer on a drawing and hard to answer on a plot.

Each piece will be about one decision rather than a general survey of a subject, and it will end where the honest answer ends. Where the answer depends on ground we have not seen, it will say so instead of offering a rule of thumb. A rule of thumb published on a website is how somebody ends up building the wrong thing confidently.

The page · 02

Written for the architect or engineer checking us

The second kind is for the professional a client brings to the meeting. It will take one part of the system — a wall build-up, the way a screen meets a glazing frame, a base condition, an assembly sequence — and set out what is drawn, what is standard practice, what is a project input and where the licensed signature sits.

These will be dry, specific and shorter than the first kind. They exist so that a consultant can form a view of the work without a meeting, and so that a client can hand something over and get a real opinion back. Neither is served by a piece that avoids the difficult part of its own subject.

The page · 03

The record of what changed, and why it changed

The third kind is the account of a decision that went the other way: a standard revised, a material ruled out, a design reopened, a claim withdrawn. Each has a reason behind it that a reader planning their own building can use, and each is the kind of thing a company normally keeps to itself.

Publishing a correction is unusual in this market, and it is the one thing a rival cannot copy without first having been wrong in the same way. It also does something simpler: it lets a reader see how the studio behaves when it discovers it was mistaken, which is worth more than a page of claims about diligence.

The page · 04

What will never be posted here

No article will carry a performance figure, an energy or carbon number, a price or a claim about a certification. None will describe an image as a completed or delivered building, or name a client, a place or a date that cannot be evidenced. None will be written to fill a publishing schedule, which is the usual reason a page like this fills up with nothing.

Until one of the three is ready, this page stays as it is. An empty index that states what it is for is worth more to a reader than a full one assembled out of general articles about prefabrication, and it is a good deal easier to look at again later without embarrassment.

Questions

Questions to settle around practical intelligence for early project decisions.

When will the first piece be published?

No date is announced, because announcing one would mean writing to a deadline rather than to a subject. The queue is behind the product pages and the drawing sets, which are what a buyer actually needs first. When a piece is worth a reader’s time, it appears; there is no schedule to keep it company.

Can I ask for a subject to be covered?

Yes, and a question asked twice by two different clients is the best reason for a piece to exist. Ring either of the studio numbers or send the question with your project enquiry. If the answer is short enough to give you directly, you will get it directly instead of waiting for it to be written up.

Will these be technical, or written for a general reader?

Both, kept separate and labelled. A piece written for somebody planning their first building and a piece written for the consultant checking a wall build-up are different jobs, and mixing them produces something that serves neither. Each will say at the top which of the two it is.

Do you publish anything about competitors?

No company is named here, and none will be. Where a common practice in this market is worth arguing with — a rendering that does not match its own plan, a performance figure printed as universal — the practice is described and the argument is made on its merits. Naming a firm adds nothing to the argument.

Will you write about your own mistakes?

That is one of the three kinds listed above, and it is the one most likely to be useful. A standard revised, a material ruled out, a design reopened: each of those has a reason behind it that a client planning a building can learn something from, and printing it costs nothing that is worth keeping.

Is there a newsletter?

Not yet, and there will not be one until there is something worth sending. Anyone who wants to know when writing appears here can say so alongside a project enquiry. It is a small thing to ask for and a small thing to honour, which is the only reason it is offered at all.

Send the question instead of waiting for the article

If you are weighing a decision on a real plot, ask it directly — the answer will be about your ground rather than a general case.

Start a Project