Beneath the surface: Better
cleanrooms through management
By Michael J. Mace, AIA, NCARB;
Michael K. Uyeda, AIA, NCARB; and
Larry R. Hardaway, PE
A decade ago, when every cleanroom comprised unique, custom-designed and -engineered systems from top to bottom, resolution of technical issues and challenges drove projects. Over the years, changes in manufacturing processes, the growing technical expertise of specialty A/E and construction firms, and the availability of modular cleanroom systems have reduced or eliminated many of these technical challenges. As a result, project management poses the most significant challenges in today’s cleanroom projects.
A successful project depends on effective strategies to manage these challenges—in particular, budget determination and adherence, site selection, and contracting structure.
Right on the money Over the past three decades, we have seen semiconductor plant construction double in cost with each process generation change. Previously this was offset by a lower cost per transistor on the devices and a market demand that justified the investment. Today manufacturers must consider the best use of their capital. The business plan assigns critical budgets for plant construction, process equipment, materials and labor cost, and product development cost—where the budgets must allow for the lifetime market value of the product—before embarking on a venture that will require several billion dollars. Once the plant construction budget has been assigned, it is imperative that the A/E team conform to budget limitations to support viability of the business plan.
A mechanical equipment room and support area are located under the fab floor at the Texas Instruments DMOS5 Wafer Fabrication Facility, Dallas. Photo: Nathan Shands. Click to enlarge.
Verifying a construction budget for a capital-intensive project requires a team that is knowledgeable in space management, programming of very advanced engineering systems, preconstruction estimating, and assigning realistic expectations. Once the owner has completed the business plan, it is important to begin with a formal programming exercise to confirm that the facility requirements support the budget. To accomplish this alignment, discussions require input from the owner’s in-house strategic planning group or from an A/E firm’s consultants. The discussion process will result in a document that identifies the owner’s needs, defines the goals, sets design criteria for the facility, and produces a management team consensus—all of which is consistent with the business plan.
In turn, this document enables accurate estimating of the cost to build the facility. It is essential for the owner to involve the construction estimator early—at the conceptual planning stage—to avoid the delays and costs associated with redesign. A knowledgeable estimator will draw from a database of similar projects in the same geographic area and trends in the construction market to provide accurate projections of the costs of each system and the overall project, and provide design alternatives.
The owner can then better understand the impact of design decisions on cost and develop realistic expectations for the level of quality to achieve within budget. Often, owners have an expectation of a level of quality—of architectural finishes, for example—that are out of reach of the budget. It is far more effective to integrate an achievable level of quality into the design at the outset than to try to cut costs later.
In addition to an accurate budget, this process also produces an integrated design and construction schedule. This is crucial to the success of any project, but especially a fast-track, design/build capital-intensive project where one month of production can equal the entire value of the plant construction cost.
Location, location, location Selecting the optimal site for any facility is very important, but particularly so for advanced technology facilities where often there exists international competition for the facility. Economic drivers and community incentives that influence site selection often overlook the geological requirements and high utility demands for water and power, thereby imposing difficult site design issues and scheduling issues that the A/E team must overcome.
The electrical power demand for plants using 50 to 100 megawatts of power requires that local utilities provide new high-voltage service, and purchase transformation and switchgear equipment that often requires a year to manufacture. The site can use several thousand gpm of water, which requires new municipal water lines and sanitary sewer service to not only be designed but installed within the project time frame. Often these improvements will involve local voter approval, public hearings, and governmental approval before developing the needed infrastructure. Site selection must involve an understanding of these issues to determine the viability of the site to support the plant needs. In addition, pre-approved permits with environmental agencies to determine the sensitivity of the site will be critical with sensitive locations. Traffic studies to determine the impact on existing transportation systems adjacent to the construction activities and completed plant also must be evaluated.
It is well worth the owner’s investment to engage an A/E firm to provide site due diligence consulting services before purchasing or leasing real estate for the facility. Site due diligence examines everything about the potential location, as well as comparable locations, to see what they have to offer the owner. This includes an assessment of the suitability of each site for this type of construction, utility capacities, economic incentives, and the experience of the permitting and inspection officials with this type of facility.
Sign here Although cleanroom systems themselves have become “modularized,” each facility remains unique. Thus, there are several contracting options for a cleanroom facility, which may include:
• Owner holds separate design and construction contracts, which is a traditional design and construction option.
• Owner hires a construction management (CM) firm, which manages the project and hires a general contractor (GC) or contractors to perform the construction, often for a guaranteed maximum price. Owner then hires a design team separately.
• Owner hires a design team and a construction team, which forms a design/build entity to both design and construct the project.
A bay cleanroom at Advanced Micro Devices Fab 25, Austin, Texas. Photo courtesy of PageSoutherlandPage.
Each contracting structure has pros and cons, depending on the nature of the project and the particular qualifications and experience of the project team members. For example, if the owner has an in-house facilities group of the size and breadth of experience required to manage such a project, the owner may prefer to hold and manage separate contracts. In other cases, the owner may prefer to rely on a contracting structure in which the design and construction firms are managed as a single entity, for example, under a CM contract or design/build contract, with a single point of responsibility.
The owner’s preference and level of comfort in managing a project and its contracting structure is the deciding factor in the project delivery method. Most owners who are in manufacturing are very sophisticated not only in their business and processes, but also in their project delivery methodologies. So most will have a preference already, which extends to the A/E firm they select to develop the design of the project.
Finally, successful cleanroom project management depends on effective team-building among the members of the project team—owner, A/E, CM or GC, and state and local regulatory and municipal authorities—each of whom plays a unique role in the development and completion of the project. The blending of the needs, desires, cultures, work ethics, personalities, languages, and even CADD standards of the project team is crucial to team-building. Inflexible company protocols and procedures can lead to misunderstandings, lack of communication, and poor delivery of the work-product. For instance, if an A/E firm cannot adjust communication processes and procedures to meet the owner’s unique internal communication protocols or efficiently utilize the owner’s CADD standards, team-building will be hindered.
As many of the technical challenges associated with cleanroom projects have been resolved over the past 10 to 15 years with the growth and evolution of this industry, project management has re-emerged as the key driver in the success of these projects. The A/E staff may well find themselves relying on more traditional skills such as communication and understanding of the owner’s needs and desires, code compliance, successful team-building, and good design vs. the technical aspects of particle counts and cleanroom classification.
Michael J. Mace, AIA, NCARB, is senior VP; Michael K. Uyeda, AIA, NCARB, is VP; and Larry R. Hardaway, PE, is senior VP of PageSoutherlandPage Architecture, Interiors and Consulting Engineering, Austin, Texas (www.pspaec.com). The authors have specialized experience in advanced technology design and are collaborating on Samsung’s new A2 Fab project in Austin.
