One project. Several plants. One standard.
An open initiative for the compatibility of modular structures in Kazakhstan and Central Asia. Different manufacturers should be able to produce compatible modules: not a single design, but a common language of geometry, connection details, interfaces, quality and documentation.
The market needs compatibility, not uniformity
We are not proposing to make all buildings identical. Architecture, facades, layouts and purpose remain free. But the details that gain no value from constant reinvention are worth making compatible.
Main principle
Standardize the interfaces. Keep the architecture free.
A client should be able to expand a facility, replace an individual module or procure the next phase from another qualified manufacturer without completely redesigning the project. For this, modules from different manufacturers must match not only in external dimensions but also in internal floor and ceiling levels, so that a single building has no steps, no differing ceilings and no misaligned corridors.
What we propose to unify first
Seventeen items that most often create incompatibility, rework and unnecessary revisions. The list is open for discussion in the working group.
- Base module lengths
- Module widths
- External height
- Finished floor level
- Finished ceiling level
- Height of top and bottom frames
- Mating planes
- Door and corridor axes
- Connection details between modules
- Lifting points
- Electrical service entries
- Water and sewerage
- Ventilation interfaces
- Stairs, landings, canopies
- Standard materials and fasteners
- Marking system
- Quality control and tolerances
- Digital product passport
Compatibility families instead of one universal size
We are not proposing to artificially impose one size on the entire market. Compatibility families are more practical: within a family, modules from different manufacturers join up in dimensions, levels and axes. The starting point for discussion is the size range that INTERMODULE already produces in series.
| Parameter | Values | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| Width | 2 435 mm; 2 990 mm | 2 435 mm without a special transport permit; 2 990 mm is an oversize load |
| Corridor module width | 2 000 mm (also 2 435 / 2 990) | clear passage width is checked against evacuation requirements |
| Length | 2 435 / 4 885 / 6 055 / 7 335 / 12 000 mm | a fixed range of values, not a continuous range |
| Internal height | 2 340 / 2 540 / 2 700 / 3 000 mm | external from 2 600 mm |
| Floor and ceiling levels, frame heights, mating planes | subject of the working group | these are what determine joining within a building |
The standard turns the market into a distributed production network
A single plant in Kazakhstan may physically be unable to produce 450 modules on a short schedule. With a common standard, the order is split: plant A builds part of the accommodation modules, plant B another part, plant C the sanitary blocks, plant D the admin and welfare blocks (ABK) and service facilities. On site, everything is assembled into a single compatible facility.
Common specification
Shared interface drawings, dimensions, tolerances and permitted materials.
Parallel production
Several qualified plants produce their batches simultaneously.
Common control
Uniform quality control, marking and a digital passport for every module.
One facility
On site, the batches from different manufacturers are assembled into one compatible building.
Compete on quality and efficiency. Cooperate on capacity.
This uses the combined production capacity of the region instead of depending on a single plant.
Take part in developing a compatibility standard for modular construction
The working group brings together manufacturers, design engineers, clients and general contractors around the practical tasks of the industry. Here you can flag real constraints, propose technical solutions and take part in shaping approaches that will benefit the market as a whole.
Record production capabilities
Which dimensions, tolerances, connections and technological solutions can be unified without losing production efficiency?
Define design interfaces
Which joints, input data and requirements most often lead to rework, extra approvals and repeat revisions?
Formulate practical requirements
Which compatibility, schedule, installation and operation problems should be ruled out already at the specification and procurement stage?
What participants get
Access to working versions of materials, typical approaches and discussion outcomes, plus the opportunity to propose solutions and take part in shaping requirements that can simplify the design, production, procurement and installation of modular facilities.