The requirements for cleanrooms are changing faster than ever: new product lines, changing standards, company growth – anyone investing in cleanroom technology today must also think about tomorrow.
But which system is the right choice: classic cleanroom construction or a modular room-in-room system? As a technical salesperson at Schilling Engineering, I regularly experience the decisions faced by QM managers and engineers. This article takes an objective look at both approaches – with their strengths and limitations.
Conventional or modular - what does that actually mean?
A conventional cleanroom is permanently integrated into a building – the walls, ceilings and ventilation systems are permanently installed, similar to a normal room. A modular cleanroom, on the other hand, consists of prefabricated, standardized elements that can be put together like a modular system. A modular cleanroom is self-supporting and is set up as a room-in-room system in the production environment.
Why flexibility is becoming increasingly important in cleanroom planning
First of all, there is no one-size-fits-all “best” solution. The decision depends on your requirements. But one thing is clear: the days when a cleanroom did its job unchanged for 20 years are over.
We are seeing this particularly in pharmaceuticals, medical technology and semiconductor manufacturing:
- Faster product life cycles
- More frequent adjustments to GMP requirements
- Fluctuating production volumes
- New manufacturing processes that require different spatial concepts
If you rely on a rigid system here, you pay twice for each adjustment: once for the conversion itself and once for the production downtime.
Direct comparison: Conventional building vs. modular cleanroom
Criterion | Conventional construction | Modular room-in-room system |
Construction method | Permanently installed | Plug-in or modular construction |
Flexibility | Low – changes often require core construction measures and approvals | High – walls, doors and modules can be added to or rearranged |
Investment costs | Higher initial investment, material costs may be lower, changes often difficult to calculate | Moderate initial investment, predictable costs for subsequent adjustments |
Business interruption during conversions | Significant – conversion work can take weeks | Minimal – work often possible parallel to ongoing operations |
Expandability | Restricted – structural limits must be observed | Possible in stages – modules can be added as required |
Field of application | Highly specialized continuous processes | Variable product portfolios, growing production |
When modular systems show their strengths
Companies benefit from modular systems here in particular:
Dynamic production environments
- Are you planning different product lines or frequent product changes?
→ Quick adjustments to the room layout are possible.
Growing companies
- You don’t know today exactly how big the cleanroom will need to be in three years’ time?
→ Modular systems can be expanded step by step.
Rental buildings or temporary locations
- Your location does not allow extensive construction work?
→ Modules can be installed without leaving any residue and taken with you when you move.
Shorter installation times
- Is your time tight due to new product launches or legal deadlines?
→ Modular design enables fast implementation.
Where conventional construction methods score
Conventional cleanrooms have their justification, especially if:
- Processes and space requirements are highly specialized and stable in the long term
- High mechanical loads or exceptional ambient conditions are present
- Integration into existing building structures is required for architectural or structural reasons
Economic consideration: costs and flexibility
Modular systems:
- Slightly higher material costs in the short term
- In the medium term, you benefit from:
- Shorter construction times → faster start of production
- Less downtime for conversions
- Plannable costs for future adjustments
- Gradual investment instead of high initial load
Conventional construction:
- Higher initial investment
- Changes are usually expensive and time-consuming
What you should look out for
Questions that should be included in your decision:
- How likely are changes in the next 5-10 years? (product changes, volume increases, new processes)
- How critical is the start date for your project?
- Do you own or rent the property?
- Which purity classes do you need? (Some special applications have special requirements)
- How much budget is available for future adjustments?
- Are there any special mechanical or thermal loads?
The more points point to “flexibility is important”, the stronger the case for a modular system.
Conclusion
There is no one-size-fits-all winner between modular and conventional cleanrooms. The decision should be based on an honest analysis of your current and future requirements.
Modular room-in-room systems are the strategically better choice if flexibility, short implementation times and adaptability are business-critical for your company. The slightly higher material costs are usually more than offset by operational benefits.
Conventional construction methods are justified for highly specialized, long-term stable requirements and if you are sure that the next 15-20 years will not bring any significant changes.
My advice: Plan for uncertainty. Most companies underestimate how much their requirements will change in 5-10 years. Flexibility is no longer a convenience feature in cleanroom planning, but an economic risk factor.
At Schilling Engineering, we are happy to advise you on choosing the right cleanroom system for your requirements. Our experience in pharmaceuticals, medical technology and semiconductor production will help you to find the optimum solution, both economically and technically.
Contact us for a non-binding initial consultation – we look forward to exchanging ideas with you.
Head of Sales and Product Management
SCHILLING ENGINEERING GmbH
