The time to be unique, The burden to be unique
- When agreeing on the topic of our conversation today, you mentioned that recently your Institute has made some progress in addressing issues related to the design and construction of unique production facilities. Did you mean new developments "ADM SPECT" during the implementation of specific cases or creating of adequate to modern challenges of the normative base in this sphere has started, that is, that is actively lobbying for your professional community?
- It is about our growing experience in the creation of specific projects ultra-clean production areas. And the fact that the demand for such areas in domestic enterprises is increasing and, in accordance with the trends of Industry 4.0, will continue to grow. So, designing clean areas for technologies that come to us this year, we see a huge gap between them, in many aspects, from those technologies that were introduced in 2017 or even in 2018. That is the next generation of technologies, as well as the environments in which they operate. Already in 2018, we used ultra-clean environments that have a purity of 8 nines so-called N8 — is 99.9999 level of purity. For comparison: the domestic standard for ultra-clean environment is only five nines, i.e. the ultra-clean environment that we can produce Standards that will be N5. What does that say? Even if we buy the latest technological line and place it in the newly built shop, which provides the highest, in accordance with Russian State Standards, the degree of purification, this is not enough. This equipment now requires three orders of magnitude cleaner environments to produce world-class quality.
- How old is this GOST with the five nines?
- It was approved in 1989. And since then, in the field of electronics, mechanics, we have not appeared almost any new standard — to this day there are guided by the State Standards from 1989-91. And in many sections there are standards approved earlier — in the late 70s of the last century. And, as far as I know, only Skolkovo is free from the obligation to follow a separate Federal law, it can work to the highest international standards. And all other domestic developers and producers are obliged to work on Federal that in this case directly interferes with reduction of a technological gap between us and world leaders.
- It turns out that this is a regulatory lag!
- Absolutely! And in all environments in which high-precision products are created in the fields of microelectronics, microwave technology, precision machine tool building, pharmacology — in the air, water, we still have standards that doom products to a known lack of competitiveness. Take, for example, deionized water used in the production of microelectronics: in Russia, the highest class of this water corresponds to GOST “A” the level of requirements for water, which is now consumed by world manufacturers of microelectronics, is 1000 times higher. This means that our producers lag behind them 1000 times. Of course, the highest world standards are not yet needed in all sectors of our industry, but their absence in those segments that — at first at the turn of the new technological revolution practically block their development in Russia.
- And taking into account the development of additive and nanotechnologies, the emergence of an increasing number of cross-industry cases, this unique segment, I think, will expand further, the more. And what, in your opinion, can be done, and quickly enough, to reduce our lag in high-tech industries?
- I think that for such productions the most correct and most effective solution would be the expansion of part 1 of article 48 of the Town-Planning code, which is called "Unique technically difficult objects". It is unchanged from the end of the 1990s. In accordance with it, technically difficult is, for example, a pit under the Foundation depth of 15 meters, a span structure with a length of 100 meters. Yes, it is probably still quite difficult, but now it is definitely not unique. Designers from our and other companies can easily make all the necessary calculations on a 100-meter span quickly, accurately and efficiently using modern software. But to link entire floors of assistive technologies with such ultra-clear environments — this is not a linear task. Therefore, today it is already detrimental for the development of our industry to remain within the framework of only those objects that are specified in the normative documents of 20 years ago. It is time to expand this list to those parameters that exceed the highest in the available State Standards.
- Who should initiate and promote this decision? It seems that there are two relevant Federal ministries — the Ministry of Industry and Trade and the Ministry of Construction. However, as practice shows, the Ministry of Industry and Trade is mainly interested in the filling of shops, and the Ministry of Construction is traditionally more focused on the topics of housing and civil engineering. And the industrial construction, it turns out, falls into the formed gap between the priorities of the two ministries. So who should the builders of industrial facilities relay on? Your colleagues, with whom we had a chance to discuss this problem, propose to raise the issue of creating a profile department in one of the ministries.
- Topical issue. I would respond in the sense that it should be addressed through the cooperation of all stakeholders. After all, if we want to really develop the industry, we need industrial construction of the appropriate level. I think it would be possible to start with the creation of joint working groups under the study of specific solutions. And then, if this is not enough, you can think about creating a profile department.
As an engineer, it seems to me that in all cases the main thing is for the authorities to change their attitude to the issues of what capital construction projects should be recognized as unique today and the importance of such facilities for the domestic industry. And the projects of such facilities should be treated in a special way and in terms of time for design, and its cost. The presence of a technical customer in the implementation of such a project should be mandatory. In 2013, we adopted the relevant State Standard, but it is valid only in the framework of investment projects. That is, in fact, it turns out that if an investor invests in a commercial industrial project with his money, then he needs quality control, and if an industrial construction is initiated within the framework of a Federal target program, then it is possible to do with simplified mechanisms.
From the point of view of state interests, this is absurd: people's money is spent on state purposes, and the level of technical control is often actually reduced to finding the guilty after the fact — when they have already made a lot of mistakes. Who is the technical customer? This is a permanent qualified professional management of the construction process at all stages — from design to commissioning. And if there is no such at the facilities, the construction of which is invested by the state, then budget funds are not allocated for these purposes, so it is impossible to hire qualified personnel to manage the construction processes. It turns out a vicious circle: there is no current state Standard for the objects of the Federal program — accordingly, there is no budget for the technical customer's team, there are no funds — there is no proper control management.
- Moreover, if any of the directors of our corporation participating in the Federal program will hire this team, he will be required to impose a fine for misuse of funds!
- That is true! Let me repeat: we now have two main problems in the sphere of industrial construction, which in turn generate a number of derivatives. Firstly, unique and technically complex enterprises in Russia today de facto consist almost a very narrow sector and, largely due to the hopeless obsolescence — both economic and technological - standards for technological engineering do not meet modern requirements for such industries. Secondly, the Institute of technical customers does not operate at complex Federal objects. But it is one thing to build a typical residential house or, for example, a simple warehouse, but it is quite another when a room is being built for the most complex precision production, or for the production of high-tech products of the chemical industry, microelectronics, pharmaceuticals, etc. But as in the actual edition of the town-Planning code of the Russian Federation especially clean areas of the big area formally aren't recognized unique, there is a set of difficulties both at a stage of their design, and at a stage of construction and adjustment of the equipment. For example, if the object is not unique, it can easily refuse to include in its estimate the cost of the use of modern digital design tools…
- And this is despite the fact that in a number of leading economies at the state level, the use of the BIM is stimulated. There is no legislative ban on the state customer to make demands on certain methods or software. Therefore, even if a country has not yet adopted the application of BIM, in a particular competition this requirement can be put up for a specific project.
- BIM, of course, nowadays, is on everyone's lips, but in addition to it, there are design calculation programs that provide no less accuracy in the calculations, but for an ordinary building. Lets take, for example, one of the most important criteria for microelectronics — the coefficient of vibration resistance of the building, building`s oscillations and resonances. Constructors of civil buildings may not even know what it is, and for microelectronics it is a critical factor. Its simple software does not count, you need a specialized one. But to justify in the estimate the corresponding line of expenses for its acquisition, it is necessary that the object was recognized as unique that the need for its compliance with special criteria was accepted as a given. If there will be no such approach — there will not be a properly constructed industrial object for critical industries.
- As a result, there will be no import-substituting of avionics, and no modern domestic component and instrument base.
- Quite true. Let's imagine the situation: in the shop built according to our outdated State Standards, modern imported equipment which worth tens of millions of rubles per unit is installed — high-precision machines, expensive probe stations, lithographs and so on. All this equipment is equipped with built-in protection mechanisms, including from unacceptable environments. And when you try to run this equipment, its internal protection will work — it cannot be cheated, it reacts currently to invalid environment parameters. So the machines would not start. Of course, we may have craftsmen who can crack any defense, but what's the point? To release expensive hardware useless substandard, to translate this precious raw material?
Today, this problem already captures many equipment lines, a wide range of raw materials, including powders, gases, and suspensions. And all stages of production — from the manufacture of individual components and their testing to the Assembly of the finished product. If the entire technological chain, which can cover several enterprises, does not have a unified system of quality control of media, raw materials and materials, we will lose billions of rubles in case of failures and accidents of devices, the production technology of which virtually eliminates the possibility of a defect. But this is if the technology is unconditionally observed, including adequate environments providing for the operation of high-precision unique equipment.
- Andrej Mihajlovich, you and your teammate among your colleagues and partners have been fighting for the solution of this painful problem for years, drawing attention to it from all possible tribunes. How successful is it? Can we already talk about a certain changes in the structures of the executive power in the direction of making constructive decisions in this area?
- I say that on separate objects, where customers persistently defend our position, such decisions already were made last year. But we must understand that this is an exception, not a rule, not a systemic solution, which we are certainly trying to achieve. And the system solution in this case is the corresponding adjustments in the town planning code, which should give an incentive to the transition to a new level of the entire construction industry and the field of industrial buildings.
- As you know, in Soviet times, the equipment for the industrial site under construction was selected at the stage of development of project documentation. And today in commercial projects there is a tendency to return to this scheme. This helps to avoid significant material and time costs associated with the forced adjustments of the project at the stage of working documentation or even alterations at the construction stage, when it turns out that the parameters of the purchased equipment (size, weight, resistance to different environments) do not correspond to those stated in the project. It seems that this problem is also relevant for projects of unique industrial capital construction projects.
- The specificity of such objects is that at the time when the process equipment for future production is selected, this equipment has not yet been produced by the supplier. At an early stage of design the manufacturer define technical standards, detailed requirements that the environment in the shop and the equipment that will meet in three years, when the building will be built and everything will be ready for the installation of the production line, the production of which also takes about a year. They will come together in a single environment with common requirements. This is the current world practice, basically this is how the leading industrial companies of Germany, China, USA, Japan, and Taiwan build and equip their enterprises.
- And what about us?
- We can do that too, if we want. It is a matter of strategy chosen by the top management of the specific companies or corporations they belong to. The way world leaders do, of course, is time-consuming one. This is a full-fledged stage of work —to develop these mutual requirements, to set standards for new production at the pre-project stage, which will then be developed design and estimate documents and engineering solutions in the field of technological equipment. The problem is that Russian Industrialists often either underestimate the importance of the pre-project for the subsequent stages of creating new production, or simply try to save on it. Such savings of 2 — 3% usually goes sideways: the discrepancy between the initial parameters of the project and what is eventually obtained at the entrance, can be up to 15-20% of the cost of the entire project, and the price of forced rework is very high. In addition, you have to lose up to a year for the period of adaptation.
The increased speed of changes in technology also should be taken into account, especially in high-tech. For example, in Taiwan, the time to introduce technology and market new generation high-tech products has already been reduced to three years. What is new technology in the microelectronics industry? For example, in one of our current projects around the building where the products are produced, the construction of 11(!) buildings providing gas, water, electricity, cleaning of chemical discharges, etc. Modern production is like a pyramid, where a unit of complex technological equipment accounts for an average of three units of what can be called collateral. In English terminology, there is such a thing as fab, which means technological equipment that produces elements of the final product. Fab is an industrial "kitchen", which has its own analogues of microwave, stove, blender, etc, that is, everything that touches the hand of the "cook" who "bakes" details. And everything else is removed from the floor where the cooks are. And this is the rest — sub lab, that is, auxiliary technological equipment to ensure the operation of the main production lines. There can be several floors of sub labs in the shop, and that's not engineering and engineering equipment: heating systems, ventilation, cooling, etc take the other individual floors. And the cost sub labs may significantly exceed the cost of the entire "engineering" of the object. And the price of errors in the calculation of their areas, respectively, can be millions of dollars. As we are talking about ensuring of almost prohibitive degrees of accuracy.
- How can risks be minimize?
- With the help of pre-project assessment of the impact of environments. For example, in the production of microelectronics critical factor — the influence of the environment at the molecular level. Many of these media have an impact within a radius of just a few meters, in which case a few meters of distance should lie between generation and consumption. But from some factors of influence high-precision production will need to be removed for hundreds of meters, and even for kilometers. For example, there is equipment that is sensitive to vibrations caused by a train passing by railways five km from the plant or by an aircraft flying over the shop at an altitude of 2,000 meters. In order to avoid further problems with the quality of products manufactured on such equipment, it is necessary to identify all these risks at the stage of engineering surveys of environments. Institute "ADM Special Solutions and Technologies" has a wide range of devices that allow in the course of research at the stage of site selection to determine the principal possibility of placing specific high-precision production in these areas. And it happens: our experts make measurements, and over the head of the gloomy sky. The aircraft that are not visible, but our devices are tracking them.
Similarly, the level of molecular air pollution is detected. The site can be at first glance ideal — a wide field, nearby — no highways, no railways or planes flying overhead. But here in the technopark for five kilometers there is an enterprise of such a profile that if, God forbid, there will be an emission into the atmosphere of certain substances, it will immediately and irretrievably lead to the disrepair of all products and all equipment of the newly created modern production. And air filters here will not save, because dangerous for the production of air can still penetrate into the room, for example, together with an incoming employee, even dressed in a special suit. And if the dangerous components in this air react with the main technological process, the defect on the site can grow significantly, that is, the production becomes inefficient... Therefore, the pre-project assessment of the forecast of the impact of environments, production facilities, risk assessment, the consequences of possible force majeure or the cost of compensation materials is very important for proper decision-making.
- Is the obligation of such an audit introduced by a regulatory act, or is it at the discretion of the developer or contractor?
- Unfortunately, everything was done exactly the opposite: the mandatory phase of the feasibility study that existed in Soviet times was canceled. The development of the project was necessarily preceded by its feasibility study, an alternative choice of three sites for construction was carried out. But in the post-Soviet years it was canceled, should be they decided that it can be saved. As a result, the probability of errors in the choice of site has increased significantly.
- Now many of your colleagues are talking about the need to return to the three-stage design system.
- Usually this conclusion comes to those who have at least once stepped on the rake, going through the construction without a feasibility study. A huge number of mistakes were made, huge financial losses were incurred during the time when the technical re-equipment of enterprises did not require design and expert opinion. The simplest example: the company is faced with a choice — whether to demolish the old building of the shop, or to do overhaul and technically re-equip it. The building is capital, the foundation is strong, and utilities are okay. All these arguments are in favor of technical re-equipment. The shop is overhauled, the Foundation is strengthened, clean floors are poured, etc. Finally, new high-precision equipment is installed there, and its built-in protection refuses to include it: the electromagnetic background is unacceptably exceeded in the room. The search for the source of the problem begins, and it can be laid under the floor a hundred years ago and all forgotten cables, and a transformer substation ten meters from the shop. As a result, to get to these cables, to shift them or close them, you have to break everything that was done during the repair, or remove the ill-fated substation from behind the wall. That is, the cost is so much that it would be easier to build this shop again. Everyone who has gone through something like this, in one voice say that it is necessary to return the three-stage design system. Now more often use the terms "pre-project" or "basic design solutions" or "basic technological solutions", but the essence is the same: it is necessary to return the feasibility study of the project, taking into account the instrumental measurements and estimates, forecasts, including capex and opex, that is, operating costs. During the implementation of several of our recent projects, experts have made such forecasts for the period from 2019 to 2029. . In this range, it is still possible to estimate with sufficient accuracy how much these or other materials will cost, how the equipment will change, how the energy will change and make predictive calculations.
- There is also, for example, the problem of choosing a general contractor for the construction of unique objects. If the construction is carried out within the objects of the Federal program, the general contractor is selected according to the results of tenders, which are won by the company that offered to manage for the minimum price and in the shortest possible time. And then everyone has to adjust to the actual technical capabilities of the winner, very modest as a rule.
- If the technical complexity was directly spelled out in the design task and in the technological requirements, respectively, as part of the tender documentation, it would have cut off a large number of those wishing to win the tender by dumping. In the meantime, in this tender documentation we have to write: water — according to GOST, gases — according to GOST, etc. And in another way, otherwise, they say, what are the foundation you set excessive requirements, why do you set very high standards for the contestants? It is the same with the technical customer, who did not put the object under construction in the framework of the Federal program. The essence of the technical customer — a professional third-party control and organization of processes that provide the organization selected on a competitive basis. The task is to implement the project as efficiently as possible and as quickly as possible. And its work is evaluated in terms of the efficiency of the design and construction processes.
I have already said a year and a half ago in an interview with your publication and now I am ready to repeat: the development of the Russian Federation as an industrial power, primarily in such innovative areas as microelectronics and instrument engineering, as well as the main direction for the digitalization of the economy, based on its own modern component and instrument base, requires the following steps:
• Inclusion in article 48.1. "Especially dangerous, technically difficult and unique objects" of the town-planning code of the Russian Federation of concept of especially pure production rooms (ISO 1-5) as technically difficult or unique objects of capital construction.
• Creation of a regulatory framework for the design and construction of high-clean (purity class ISO-5 and above) production objects for the microelectronic and instrument-making industry and its allocation in a separate specialized set of rules. Its harmonization with modern foreign standards of industry organizations and associations.
So, summing up, I repeat: the relevant regulatory framework for the design and construction of unique and technically complex buildings, the organization of construction processes and control over them by the technical customer, the return of the feasibility study is today three critical conditions for ensuring the effectiveness of the latest technologies used in innovative sectors of our industry. In the end, to ensure the competitiveness of their products in the world market.