Services
Newtecnic bring our in-house engineering designers with leading UK-based fabricators and installers to deliver complete buildings to the highest quality at a lower price. Newtecnic's aim is to be a champion of building construction through an exceptional attention to detail at an affordable price.
Newtecnic’s services comprise:
Production drawing packages
Recladding packages
Site Support
Design Management
Packages for digital fabrication
Accreditation: ConstructionLine Gold (00474024), ISO 45001 & SSIP, ISO 9001, ISO/IEC 27001, CIS registered.
H&S and environmental policies: Click here to view Newtecnic policies
1. Design packages which are ready to build
Newtecnic develops designs which are ready to build, while providing sufficient choice of fabrication and assembly methods for competitive tender. These achievements have been recognised by the company winning the Queen’s Award for Enterprise in 2018.
2. Own construction technologies and physical prototyping and testing
The firm develops its own construction technologies for projects in order to reduce construction cost without reducing performance or visual elegance. As part of its role in industry leadership, Newtecnic’s own facade technologies are developed through physical prototyping and testing at the engineering departments of leading universities.
3. Interaction with fabricators and contractors
The development of designs, using engineering strategies, is assisted by an interaction with fabricators and contractors and making building assemblies as mock-ups, that become key components of the constructed building. This task is done locally wherever Newtecnic works in the world to advance local fabrication and locally sourced materials.
Post-tender activities:
When a facade contractor is appointed, and Newtecnic is reviewing submittals on behalf of the employer, shop drawings and associated structural and thermal calculations are evaluated. This task is undertaken by comparing submittals with the design drawings, structural and thermal calculations and associated specifications provided by Newtecnic in the tender package. Newtecnic expects from the contractor only the contractor’s own version of what was provided at tender. A proof-of-concept detailed design for the facade systems with associated structural calculations and environmental calculations will have been provided at tender. At the tender stage the bidding contractors can either follow those design principles, make use of the calculations, accordingly, or alternatively they can propose their own facade systems in their tender return. Newtecnic drawings and calculations can be used as the basis for the calculations submitted by the contractor; Newtecnic will use its own structural and environmental models and calculations to compare with those submitted by bidders. The successful bidder will have an additional layer of scrutiny for technical completeness before the contract is awarded.
Method statements submitted by the contractor are compared with the specification issued at the tender stage. Method stated are reviewed with the aim of them being adjusted by the successful bidder to suit project-specific requirements such as installation programme or facade system testing and procurement.
Material samples are one of the first items to be submitted by the contractor alongside shop drawings. Approved samples will be used in the first mock-up; typically, a connection at an intersection or corner, for example. Approval of the connection mock-up will be followed by a mock-up of a panel or part of a typical bay. That small-size mock-up may, when approved, be used to generate a performance testing mock-up if testing is required. Performance testing is usually required only if a non-standard system, or a system that has not been previously certified, has been proposed and accepted for use on the project. Alternatively, if the specific combination of components proposed with a standard system is not is not covered by the documentation provided at tender stage, then testing will be under be undertaken. However, testing procedures for any proposal are set out in Newtecnic tender documentation.
There are three functions of a performance mock-up; as a visual mock-up for sign-off by the design team, as a fabrication methodology mock-up as a demonstration of the assembly and installation methods proposed by the contractor, and as a performance test mock-up. Regarding fabrication and installation of the proposed facade systems, the contractor needs to assure themselves that their methodology will be successful; the performance mock-up is an ideal vehicle to check and improve their methods. In our experience mock-ups are often re-assembled as the contractor develops more cost-effective and time-effective ways of assembling and installing the facades used for testing; a benefit that is added to the method statement for project-wide fabrication and installation. The third use of the performance mock-up, for the testing itself, is usually carried out in a single day at the end of this development process. Newtecnic typically takes a role as a witness to those tests as well as checking documentation such as calibration certificates for the testing being used. Before testing, Newtecnic visits the factory where panels or site-assembled components are being made in order to check the materials and the assemblies, and to ensure that all components and assemblies are made as per the approved design. Completed components and assemblies are compared against the material samples and a small-scale mock-up of a corner or panel for example. The approved mock-ups are used as the benchmark for quality of assembly, and to ensure the same materials, finishes and colours are used in fabrication and manufacture. The installation would be something that Newtecnic would either have an engineer full time on site, or would have periodic checks, such as witnessing the first panel being installed. In addition, the first corner panel or the first floor-to-floor panel for example, are witnessed and reviewed. These visits are output as a series of reports on how closely the installation corresponded to the method statement previously submitted. Site inspections are usually limited to inspection for correct installation and accidental damage. The quality of workmanship of prefabricated elements or components is checked in the factory as it usually considered too late to make such checks on site. Factory visits are crucial for the success of the quality assurance / quality control (QA/QC) process. Newtecnic is ISO 9001 certified, and that certification for QA/QC is reflected in the requirements in the specification to be followed by fabricators and installers.
At close-out, the final inspection is usually the last of a series of inspections, with snagging already have been carried out with a photographic survey carried out on a regular basis. Reports, together with a corrective action plan would already be in place, such that all stakeholders complete the task to the standard agreed.
As-built drawings, together with maintenance manuals prepared by the contractor, are compared with what was approved at the shop drawing submittal stage. Shop drawings, which would have been approved before fabrication and fabrication commence, serve as a record of the contractor’s interpretation of the design documentation produced by Newtecnic and the design team. Consequently, as-built drawings should be as set out in the approved shop drawings, unless circumstances on site required a change that was agreed with stakeholders.
Re-use and recycle:
A major factor affecting the facade design of a mixed-use residential re-development scheme of 17 storeys is the need to coordinate closely with the planned interior spaces. The internal spaces often have different requirements from floor to floor, resulting in the facade needing to accommodate different performances through its height. An example is wind pressures in relation to natural ventilation, which vary through the height of a tall building, providing opportunities to optimise framing sizes and glass thicknesses across different facade areas while enabling controlled natural ventilation to internal spaces. Orientations of facade in relation to sun path and acoustic attenuation provide further opportunities for optimisation of effects of light and shadow internally, in addition to providing adequate daylight. Different requirements for sound insulation from floor to floor and associated thermal insulation provides opportunities to optimise performance while avoiding thermal bridging.
In addition to coordination with the spatial arrangement is coordination with the internal circulation. This requires an understanding of what is a ‘fully internal’ space and what is a ‘transition’ space. Staircases and internal ramps are often treated as semi-tempered transition spaces, while fully internal spaces may have lower levels of natural ventilation. The addition of floors to the top of the building may be complemented by creating, for example, double-height spaces at the mid-height of the building or additional space around the podium level. Regarding structural strategy, changes to the structure require close coordination with the potential strengthening of the existing structure while working with its existing structural behaviour. This task is carried out at Newtecnic with finite element analysis in order to establish not just whether the existing structure can accept the additional loads but what effect the new addition of floors will have on the overall stability and movements of the building. Any associated new movements will have an effect on the new facades, which may introduce some movements back into the structure of the building; new balconies are an example. The coordination between the expected behaviour of the structure as a result of the additional loads and the effects on the floors below for recladding will need to be taken into account. Coordination between primary structure and façade assemblies is an essential consideration.
Regarding environmental strategy, the existing building, probably with lower levels of thermal insulation than would be required today, are upgraded to meet contemporary standards, while avoiding interstitial condensation, providing further opportunities for the introduction of controlled natural ventilation.
The use of prefabricated facade panels instead of site-assembled facades could reduce the costs of installation while increasing build quality, depending on the numbers of ‘repeated’ panels. Repeated panels do not have to be the same size but they need to be made as a single system with variations in component only; changes of material add more cost than changes in panel size. This approach allows the design team to create facades with the required level of architectural flair which also adds value.
The organisation and detailing between the external envelope and floor plates needs to be closely coordinated in order to avoid the need for adding costs for cantilevered screeds that would fill the gap between the back of the facade and the edge of the floor slab. This close coordination can increase floor area without creating an interdependency between facade and interior finish. Items which might become interdependent, such as electrically opening windows at high level and the electrical supply needed, might be avoided, as requirements for both facade and for the use of internal space, could change in future years.
Other building elements such as the MEP installation are generally kept separate from the facade in order to allow the MEP to be to be upgraded and replaced independently, while still providing sufficient natural ventilation and air movement to avoid condensation within internal spaces. Coordination with MEP at roof level is an essential consideration as this where most of the mechanical and electrical equipment is typically located. The roof is also where sufficient space is needed for access and for equipment used for cleaning and maintenance of the building. Cleaning and maintenance is typically undertaken with jibs that are moved by hand around the edge of the roof, or alternatively with a machine that runs on a dedicated roof-top track. The ability to be able to repair parts of the facade using facade access equipment is increasingly important as this can become an expensive undertaking if the hoist equipment is not is not suited to lifting replacement facade components into place, such as double-glazed units. It can be impractical to move these components within the building itself. Typically, this issue is overcome by having smaller sized units which suits residential space but often does not suit commercial spaces, which might occupy lower floors, where larger glaze units are the norm.
Compliance monitoring during the construction phase is typically undertaken by Newtecnic with site-based testing of areas of facade. For example, tests for compliance with water penetration is often conducted over 10% of the facades. Air infiltration rates can be checked by setting a temporary plywood enclosure around parts of the facade internally, and testing to ensure that the installed facades comply with the performance required in the specification and achieved in the test mock-up. Newtecnic typically has an engineer on site whose role, similar to a clerk of works, is to check that the installation of all components and all related assemblies comply with the approved shop drawings, structural and environmental submittals, samples and mock-ups.
Re-cladding:
A report on existing buildings and their condition set outs what the current building facades comprise; what will be retained and what will be replaced. Retention and replacement options are set out to demonstrate what can be achieved and at what cost. A ‘baseline’ option might describe what is needed for a facade upgrade that changes as little as possible to achieve compliance with current Building Regulations and related standards, such as those of the NHBC. More ambitious options would set out the increase in performance and utility of facades that add value to internal spaces over that of the baseline option.
In order to understand the current condition of the facades, a schedule of condition is prepared as a report on the more detailed current performance and life expectancy of the existing facade assemblies. The report and schedule would be used to measure and quantify a ‘baseline’ upgrade in order to become compliant with current standards and regulations. The document is essential to being able to add value without going to an immediate facade replacement strategy. The report sets out what would need to be done to establish a baseline market value for the building facades as a result of the facades meeting current standards and regulations.
In addition, a report is prepared that describes what is provided by the current facade enclosure, and what is needed to be retained in a baseline upgrade, as a primary objective. A second objective is to determine would could be removed in a baseline upgrade that is no longer considered a benefit today, such as fully opening windows for example. This approach allows the value of both refurbished and replacement facades to be clearly determined. The report would describe, in both schedule and text form, a hierarchy of components and assemblies from the scale of complete bays down to infill panels, to glazed panels, supporting frames, external finishes and seals.
In addition, the life expectancy of currently installed components and assemblies can be compared to the value of both replacement components and their full replacement with alternative new facade systems. Comparative costs of maintenance of partially replaced systems and alternative new systems would reveal the lifecycle cost of each option put forward.
A range of options would be proposed, from partial replacement of facades to replacement, for example, of windows only or of opaque infill panels only. In addition to the cost, the associated time implications of partial replacement and alternatives for full replacement of facades would be set out. The disruption to building occupiers would be taken into account and be linked to a building management report that would be prepared by other stakeholders.
All reports and schedules are based on the performance of the existing facades that were determined when the building was constructed. This approach determines what performance criteria was applied at time of construction compared with that which would be expected today. Additional bodies have come into existence in recent years that have an influence over the required performance of facades, sometimes acting on behalf of parties seeking to purchase individual dwellings or groups of dwellings. In other words, the difference needs to be established between what would have been satisfactory when facades were installed and last maintained, and what is satisfactory for a replacement equivalent today. The difference in cost between what is there, and what would be replaced, can be understood clearly through the replacement options. This approach allows improvements in technical performance and utility to be assessed in relation to the addition of assemblies providing that are not present in the current facade assemblies. An example is an additional solar shade that is not part of the existing facade but which would provide a significant benefit for a baseline refurbishment. A similar example is a replacement glass that is more solar-efficient and thermally-efficient than the existing type. These reports provide a clear picture of options for refurbishment with associated considerations of cost and time.
The next step would be to arrange mock-ups from commercially available systems to be made available of review in order to show how they would be constructed and installed. This task is undertaken in order to communicate to all stakeholders what performance advantages are brought when compared with the existing facades, and how the options presented compare with other commercially available systems that are designed for coordination with a new structure rather than to be to be installed on an existing structure.
A quantification of movement and deflections, and expected tolerances, in the existing structure, would be described in the report in order to demonstrate that the options put would suit both the existing condition of the structure and the new external envelope. This condition may lean towards a site-based fabrication and installation approach rather than a fully prefabricated method of facade construction. In order to ensure that the required quality of construction is achieved with site-based methods, site inspections by Newtecnic become more significant than would be the case with prefabricated assemblies that can be checked before being assembled and installed in place.
Pre-tender activities:
1. At an early stage of the project the architectural intent and design criteria are reviewed by Newtecnic in order to harmonise design drawings and associated descriptions with the employer’s requirements and associated user requirements. A comparison is made between design proposals and six categories that may influence their design: Site context, spatial arrangement, internal circulation, structural strategy, environmental strategy and external envelope. The category of external envelope is wider than that of facades; roofs, terraces and basements being taken into account. An understanding of all six categories ensures that the design, and the associated technologies chosen, are compatible with each other.
2. This review forms the basis for developing a preliminary performance specification that complements both the employer’s/user requirements and the specific brief as interpreted in the spatial arrangement. The performance specification is also informed by satisfying the requirements of statutory bodies and organisations that form part of a chain of approvals; UK Building Regulations, NHBC, CWCT, BREEAM and the Eurocode are example components of this chain.
3. In addition to a review of the overall design through the general arrangement drawings and descriptions, the architectural intent of typical bays is reviewed as technical systems. This aim is achieved by generating a 3D model of a typical panel for each facade type. The 3D model provides an understanding of which principles are embedded in the design, how the design might be assembled, and how a panel or typical bay might be repeated economically around the building. This task aims to reduce the number of facade systems and panel forms in order to optimise their performance and reduce cost. The 3D models allow us to output rendered views in order to better understand the effects of light, shadow and daylight transmission.
4. We review anticipated thermal performance, ambient energy transmission and solar gain. This part of the review explores the use of external shading or the geometry of the of the facades in order to achieve the desired performance and effects created by the facades. All these studies allow a preliminary budget to be generated.
5. The use of construction tolerances at the junction between primary structure and the facades is addressed with a Newtecnic-generated finite element model of both facades and primary structure. Outputs from the model ensure that structure and facade meet economically by optimising embeds, making the fixings as efficient as possible and as easy to install as possible.
7. The setting-out of the facades of rectilinear forms is more straightforward than complex forms, and can be determined in plan and section, as is done the traditionally. When the geometry departs from the rectilinear and the vertical, the Newtecnic 3D models are linked to surveying stations on site in order to set out the building economically.
7. At the tender stage and tender evaluation stage, Newtecnic uses matrix spreadsheets in order to compare contractor proposals in a logical and consistent manner. Each matrix has a clear set of questions with a yes/no binary response from Newtecnic. Those questions used for the technical evaluation of tenders are usually made available to bidders beforehand. The technical offer may require a visit to the workshops and facilities proposed by a bidder, especially where the proposed supply chain is considered to be potentially fragile.
8. System drawings and associated structural and thermal calculations are usually submitted by competing bidders, as set out in the Newtecnic specification. This submission usually comprises a drawing in third angle projection for each of the facade systems with a simplified structural and thermal calculation to demonstrate the viability of their proposal. The technical submittals are reviewed by Newtecnic using finite element models, CFD models and thermal models already created as part of the design process.
