There was plenty for industry delegates to celebrate at the recent Institute of Wood Science conference – and not just that the event marked the organisation’s “jubilee” 50th anniversary. The message from the impressive array of speakers was that, as far as architects and designers are concerned, timber is back in the mainstream as a building and manufacturing material. What is more, it is set to make even more headway thanks to the “sustainability agenda” embedded in construction and government circles.
However, there was also a strong element of “could do better” to go with the encouragement. Architects and designers want to use wood more widely and more ambitiously but, they say, in line with that, they need more technical back-up and specification data than ever – and they need it to be easy to access and understand. The timber industry also has to keep up with a fast-changing manufacturing and construction landscape. And it needs to get its message out to the corners of the building sector still holding out against using wood.
Material for the modern world
The conference, which had the theme “Wood – a modern material for a modern world”, started off with unmitigated good news from Amanda Baillieu, editor of RIBA Journal. Until recently, she said, architects generally regarded timber buildings as “folksy and retrogressive”.
“When we published a wood supplement in 1999, we found it difficult to find anything to feature except bespoke, highly crafted one-offs,” she said. “They weren’t much inspiration for practices working on small budgets, or young architects.”
The situation was partly down to the non-timber ethos of architectural education but, said Ms Baillieu, the timber industry took some of the blame too. “The feeling was that not enough high profile research was being done with wood and it was still losing the PR battle.”
The turnaround, when it came, was partly down to the rising importance of environmental issues, but was also led by some inspirational projects. Among these, Ms Baillieu highlighted Chetwood Associates’ design for a Sainsbury superstore in Greenwich. “Its use of cladding was not only eye-catching, it showed wood could exist comfortably in a modern retail environment,” she said.
Other landmarks included the famous Weald and Downland Museum gridshell by Edward Cullinan Architects. “In some respects this was an old-fashioned, handmade type of building,” said Ms Bailleu, “but it could only exist in the 21st century because of the use of computerised 3D modelling which allowed design complexity and helped develop a new approach with architect, engineer and contractor acting as a close team.”
In the following years, RIBA Journal featured a growing number of buildings which were “either current or future entries in the Wood Awards“. From being cautious about timber, architects began to embrace it and actually became “bored with hi-tech glass and steel”. “They limited freedom, whereas wood changed with age. Architects liked its unpredictability,” said Ms Baillieu.
And, she added, this sea change in perspectives isn’t over. “Architecture is now about much more inventive use of material and, according to the RIBA Journal barometer, timber will be very much part of this mix.”
There is also potentially good news from the UK furniture industry, according to designer and manufacturer Luke Hughes. While mass-market producers have suffered in the face of low-cost imports, the increasing affordability of advanced wood-processing technology is throwing a lifeline to small- to medium-sized manufacturers. “With CNC machines available at £15-20,000, we’re seeing a new conjunction of craft, industrial and computerised production at smaller businesses,” he said.
Technological advances
The technological advance of smaller manufacturers, he added, also has implications for architects, making more highly designed products more accessible. But this, in turn, puts more onus on the timber industry to provide them with the right technical and specification data.
“Timber hardly forms any part of their education,” he said. “We need to get them to workshops to learn about wood purchase, conversion, machining and storage.”
There is also, Mr Hughes added, a communication gap between the timber industry and furniture makers.
“For instance, in our work for the Supreme Court Library in Edinburgh we found it difficult to get anyone to commit on loading and deflection figures for the oak shelving and had a similar experience with the potential for movement in panelling we made for the theatre at Emmanuel College, Cambridge,” he said.
He ended by proposing an action plan for the timber industry to make the most of its potential in construction and manufacturing. This included delivering:
The architects and structural engineer who addressed the conference underlined the burgeoning enthusiasm of their professions for timber. But each also had recommendations on making it easier for them to use.
Rob Firman of Capita Percy Thomas, who worked on the Wales Millennium Centre, described how timber was central to the building’s identity. “We rejected anything indeterminate or nondescript like plastic,” he said. “We wanted natural, inherent colours, so the palette included slate, steel and timber. We used a range of native hardwoods inside, and the 10-storey external face was clad in waney edge Sitka spruce.”
In his experience, another obstacle to architects using wood is hostility from building contractors. “They’re risk averse and don’t trust its durability. They don’t want to use materials they fear won’t outlast them and they’re an audience the timber industry really needs to reach.”
Stuart Macalister, of Foster and Partners, who worked on the timber and ply-clad interiors of the Sage Gateshead auditorium, also reported trouble with builders. “At the Sage they felt wood was too fragile!”
Simon Smith of structural engineers Whitbybird highlighted that the lack of understanding of wood construction was resulting in over-specification and unnecessary regulation. “In particular there is the misconception about timber’s flammability and need for fire protection. I’d like to see an end to the stipulation on surface spread of flame treatment. They don’t have it in Germany. There the emphasis is on fire resistance built into the structure.”
The challenge of the future
Rounding off the conference looking at “The Future for Wood”, Dr Peter Bonfield, managing director of BRE‘s construction division, threw down a few more challenges for timber.
While architects might be a receptive audience for wood, he cautioned, other industries are also making concerted efforts to attract their attention, particularly in the field of ‘sustainable development’. This was highlighted at the BRE‘s Offsite 2005 exhibition which featured latest developments in “modern methods of construction” using timber frame, steel and concrete panel.
“I’m a timber man by background, but I was seriously impressed with the concrete house,” he said. “It used prefabricated, mortar-less panels that just slotted into place. The builders were comfortable with it and it was completed in 27 days. They really had their act together.”
The timber industry, said Dr Bonfield, also has to adapt to other demands being made of modern housing. One proposal is to “tag” building components to track them through recycling. And Microsoft is working with concrete specialists to embed IT services into their products. “With all these developments, you have to ask, ‘what does it mean for wood?'” he said.
The timber industry has the potential to “push all the right buttons” for modern construction and engineered wood products and other new timber technologies give it a further advantage. But more needs to be done, especially, said Dr Bonfield, echoing the sentiments of some of the other speakers, in developing a pool of wood science and technology information.
“We need an evidence base to exploit wood’s advantages and this deserves the collective support of the whole industry,” he said. “Some of the right things are being done now, but not enough. Don’t get left behind.”
