MMC Categories are confusing and shouldn't they just be called the "Construction Categories"? 🤔
The use of the categories is a good start to helping us figure out a common language for sure but lets face it, they are a bit confusing in their current form. They also allow organizations using PMV to "play the system" a bit by including Categories 6 & 7 in their calculations. This is something the recent House of Lords MMC enquiry pointed out.
When I read the definitions of the different categories I begin to wonder "couldn't EVERYTHING we currently build find a place under these categories". So why MMC? Why not just Construction Categories?
The use of the word "pre-assembly" is great 🤩 The differentiation between structural and non-structural is also great 😍 There are really good things about using the categories so lets not muddy the waters with a "PMV" calculation🙄
If you want to encourage offsite construction or pre-assembly then aren't you really saying you want to use modular, panelized or pods (AKA CAT1, CAT2 and CAT5)? Saying you want to procure a building with a 55% or xx% of PMV is basically going down the same rabbit hole as saying you want to procure for lowest cost, i.e. its rubbish!
Go full pelt, put your foot down and stop messing about! 😁
Crazy on learning new things. #Making clash free models, #Reduce Change orders #Excited on Dynamo, #Green/sustainable development, #Advanced steel
1moHow the hoisting clip/plate connected with the floor framing?