Update #2 to BIM and Electrical Estimating

I am now working on my first project with  requirements that a BIM model be provided by the electrical subcontractor. The project is not very large. It is a small piece of a much larger project, which I presume is why the model is required.

The BIM model is not for estimating. It is for project coordination, and must be integrated into the ”Consolidated” project model the construction manager is maintaining. The electrical contractor is required to include all conduit/cable bundles over 1″, all equipment and all light fixtures. The model must be done on the same software the construction manager is using.

This can be a considerable expense for a smaller contractor. He will have to hire or contract with someone experienced in BIM modeling on the required software. The modeler will have to own a copy of the software. The costs will continue for the duration of the project, as the model is updated with any changes.

So there you go small to medium electrical contractors. Large contractors with BIM modelers on-board may have an advantage when it comes to the cost of this requirement.

Should You Use Electrical Estimating Software (Part 3)

Organization is a very important key to error free estimates. Accurate estimating requires an organized and consistent approach to the takeoff. When using estimating software, your takeoff and input tend to become consistent in order to match the estimating system’s layout. For instance, to match my estimating system’s layout, I organize my outlet takeoff as follows:

            J-boxes

            LV outlets (data, tele, etc.)

            Motion sensors

            Switches

            Receptacles

 Organizing the takeoff to match the layout of the estimating saves keystrokes and encourages consistency.

 Organization can also be necessary to meet other necessities, such as the bid form, accounting or project management requirements. Estimating packages offer many ways to get and stay organized.

 Let’s consider the bid form first. Most small projects do not have complex bid forms. However, as you start doing larger work, you will begin to see more complexity in the bid forms. The bid form for an elementary school may require separate numbers for each building, looking like this:

            Bid Item 1 – Administration Building

            Bid Item 2 – Multi-Purpose Building

            Bid Item 3 – Kindergarten Building

            Bid Item 4 – Elementary Building 1

            Bid Item 5 – Elementary Building 2

            Bid Item 6 – Site

 The bid form requires that you complete an individual estimate for each of the above line items. If you are estimating by hand, this estimate would take 6 times longer than a lump sum estimate. Since a computer estimating system does the math for you, you save most of that time. The only extra work required over a lump sum estimate is making sure you input your takeoff in the proper phase.

 I may need to define what an estimating phase is for some of you. Phases are called many different things in the various estimating system available today. It may be a section, breakdown, level, etc. Quite simply, it is just a way to get a sub-total for a certain part of the work. As an example, ConEst has a 4 level phase tree. It looks like this.

            Phase

                        Sub-Phase

                                    Level 1

                                                Level 2

 You can make use of this 4 level phase tree any way you want. This may be where your company requirements come in. Let’s say that your company wants the estimate broken down by the system and plan sheet. The bid for the school would now be broken down like this:

             Bid Item 1 – Administration Building

                        Fixtures

                                    Dwg E100

                                     Dwg E101

                                    Dwg E102

                                    Dwg E103

                        Outlets

                                    Dwg E100

                                    Dwg E101

                                    Dwg E102

                                    Dwg E103                  

There are a lot of possibilities here. You can assume any title you want for each phase level. The following are the default phase tree names we use in ConEst.

            Phase – Bid Item

                        Sub Phase – Building or Area

                                    Level 1 – System

                                                Level 2 – Drawing Number

 Another type of organization these systems can provide is the availability of reports based on user defined sort keys. One example would be job costing. If your shop keeps track of field labor by categories like underground, rough-in, fixtures, etc, the estimating systems can be fine tuned to provide reports to meet these accounting requirements.

 That’s it till next time. Feel free to post any questions you may have.

Should You Use Electrical Estimating Software? (Part 2)

After saving time, the next thing that comes to mind is accuracy. Mistakes happen whether you are using a computer or doing things by hand. The computer however, does not make math errors. Consider the chaos of bid day. It is very likely that you will shift a decimal point or make a calculation error in your rush to complete the estimate and get your prices out. Inevitably, prices change, new quotes come in, or the boss wants the labor units changed. I have literally erased right thru a recap sheet because of the number of changes made on bid day. All this rush creates the perfect environment for human errors.

 Assuming you have not started procrastinating after getting a computer estimating system, bid morning comes and there is nothing to do but fine tune the estimate. The computer has done all the math. Changes are instant. Better pricing? New quotes? Changes from the boss? No problem. Now you have time to make some calls. Get  better prices. Find out if alternate fixture packages are out there. Sweet talk the GC’s. In  summary, you have time to concentrate on winning the bid.

 You can still make mistakes entering information into a computer. The saying is “Garbage In, Garbage Out”. Regarding accuracy, the point of using a computer is giving you the time to not be rushed. Remember from Part One of this post, time is saved because the computer explodes the assemblies, creates the listing, prices and labors the material, and does all the math. You are not rushed into making errors on bid day.

 In Part Three, we will discuss organization.

Should You Use Electrical Estimating Software? (Part 1)

I know that many of you have heard this discussion before. However, I have had many requests for this information lately, so here is my take on it.

 The first argument is time. I have often heard when teaching computerized estimating, “I can do it faster by hand”. This may seem true while learning and setting up a system. However, once a system has been learned, you will save about eight hours on a $250,000 estimate.

 You will not save time doing the takeoff (counting and measuring) the plans. Technology has done nothing for these activities, although several companies are working on it. You will save a tremendous amount of time after the takeoff is finished. Here is how it breaks down the paper way.

1. Explode all assemblies and list components on pricing sheets
2. Manually price all of the material
3. Manually labor all of the material
4. Extend the material and labor total for every line on the sheet
5. Total the material and labor columns for every price sheet
6. Have your math double checked by someone else
7. Transfer your totals to the recap sheet
8. Do all the math on the recap sheet
9. Make a quick review, and give it the boss for approval
10. Do all the math over every time a change is made

 When I was a junior estimator BC (before computers), this process took 4 people about 2 hours, or 8 hours total. Then a miracle happened. Jack McCormick came and demoed his electrical estimating system on the Apple II computer. The system performed the above referenced work in about 3 minutes. It only took that long because of how slow printers were at the time. The time savings allowed me more time to be competitive on bid day, and of course allowed me to complete more estimates than before.

 That’s it for part one. The next part will cover, well, I don’t know yet.

Update #1 to BIM and Electrical Estimating

I just finished reading a great article about estimating with BIM (Building Information Modeling). The link to the article is below.

http://www.aecbytes.com/buildingthefuture/2009/ModelBasedEstimating.html

I did however, have a problem with one of the statements made in the article. Consider the following:

“In addition to the cultural shift and “buy-in” challenge, there is also the question of who will pay for the transition from one software to another. Should it be the owner of the project interested in adopting model-based estimating or should it be the design-assist subcontractor, who will benefit from the set up repeatedly on other projects?”

Did you notice that the question did not include architects and engineers as possibilities to pay these costs? It struck a sour note with me, as designers are pushing more and more costs down to the subcontractor, mostly in the form of incomplete and poor quality documents.

This may be a moot point, since I do not believe that hard bid electrical contracts will ever see a BIM model in my lifetime. The question was accurately stated when it referred to “design-assist” subcontractors. Design-assist is the only area that I am aware of using BIM modeling at all, and then, only on the largest of projects.

If you are using BIM for anything, please make a comment. I would like to know if it is a benefit to your operation.

The Electrical Estimate From Hell

I actually started to write this earlier, and it turned into an angry rant. So I erased it and started over. Here you go.

We just finished the electrical estimate from hell. Even though I brought document quality issues up a few posts ago, I feel I need to revisit the issue. This project now tops my list of the worst set of drawings ever. There were 170 electrical sheets. They replaced 160 of the plan sheets to fix the holes and mistakes. They also issued over 100 answers to electrical question on 8-1/2″ x 11″ sheets.

The types of problems covered the entire spectrum possible errors. Here are just a few. 

• Detail symbols were missing in many places.
• The actual details referred to by the symbols were missing or wrong, such as a reference to a pole base that showed a manhole instead.
• Duct banks ended up with no connection to the destination.
• The duct bank details were missing many required conduits, but included conduits that needed to go in the opposite direction.
• The feeder schedules were missing many conduits called out in details or on floor plans.
• Conduits schedules specified feeders in the wrong building.
• The time allowed by the specifications for shutdowns were less than half of what was required.
• The specifications called for 24” of cover over duct banks. The detail called for 30”
• The drawings were not specific regarding encasement. This simple question was not answered till addendum 5, and the answer was to encase everything, including underslab and site lighting. This addendum was issued one week before the bid, and required changing over 1,000 lines of takeoff.
• Someone gave two different sets of switchgear the exact same name. They even confused themselves with this one, sending many feeders to the wrong building.
• Feeders were routed through completely blocked areas. The answer was figure it out yourself.

As an estimator, this kind of engineering and drafting raises a major concern for me. That is the cost of estimating. The document quality on the project near doubled the cost of this estimate. It went from about two hundred hours to three hundred and twenty five.

Does anybody have any insight about this trend towards poor engineering? It is showing up on all types of projects, large and small. I am starting my own research into what has changed in the design process. I will post new information as I get it. Please let me know what you find out.

Okanogan P.U.D. Office Building

$50.00 per square foot? For a commercial office building? You have to be kidding. Didn’t these projects used to run under $10.00 per square foot?

My point here is that square foot costing can be a very dangerous way to bid projects these days. One reason is that material and labor costs continue to increase rapidly. Another is the number and complexity of systems being stuffed in new buildings today. Here are some of the reasons this building was so expensive.

• A very expensive DALI lighting control system with daylight harvesting and dimming
• Two sidewalk and pavement snow melting systems
• A complete computer server room with two Liebert UPS systems
• An extensive data and telephone network

Early in my career, I estimated and managed a high end office building on the corner of Wilshire & La Cienega in Beverly Hills. The shell was a little over $3.00 per square foot. Even though it was in a high rent district, the building had nothing special in it. California codes did not require anything special. If we constructed that building today, it would include additional scope such as a tele/data network, code required energy management systems, ADA compliant life/safety systems and a security system with CCTV. Technology systems and code changes continue to add new costs to these buildings every year. 

I suggest you keep a log of the square foot and per unit costs for every project you bid and construct. If you must use square foot pricing for a budget or (heaven forbid) a contract estimate, tread carefully. Make sure that you analyze the scope of work closely before committing to anything.

Document Quality and Electrical Estimating

We completed an estimate recently for a truck stop. It contained numerous scope coordination problems. Consider this example. The homeruns from the fuel pumps for the various systems were indicated on a number of different plan sheets. Each plan sheet contradicted the next. One claimed that we were to install the conduit system complete in PVC 40. Another claimed that the fuel system contractor was installing all conduit to the fuel pumps. Yet another claimed that we were only responsible for stub outs from the fuel control desks. And a final note claimed that we were to extend the conduits to the fuel island in PVC 80.

We did eventually worked out the real scope. The point of this discussion however, is that we had to do it at all. This may be old news, but documents continue to get worse. Every once and a while, I think that they have gotten as bad as they can get. I am usually proved to be wrong fairly quickly.

 There are many impacts from this trend. Here are just a few:

• Estimates need to be prepared earlier, so that RFI’s can be submitted in a timely manner.
• Estimates take longer to prepare because of the time it takes to solve the problems on the drawings.
• You will be less certain that your competition is including the same scope you are. If you make a call on a problem and include the work in your scope, will the other bidders do the same?
• Your bid schedule may be affected by the addendum required to correct the problems.
• If the addendum does not extend the bid time, you may be working overtime to complete the estimate. This happened to me on the truck stop estimate. I worked over the weekend to complete the estimate for a Tuesday bid date. The project was postponed on Monday.
• If you win the project, will you have enough overhead and project management time to handle the clarification of the scope? It can be hard to recover this time in change orders.

I am very interested in hearing your thoughts on this matter. Is there anything we can do as estimators? I have heard that there are organizations working on national standards for electrical drawings. Is this true? Can they actually make a difference? I have more thoughts on this subject to be discussed in a future post (that is, if you do not bring them up in this discussion).

Auto Count Software for Electrical Estimating

I was asked my opinion regarding auto-counting software recently, so here it is. Specifically, I was asked about SureCount Symbol Recognition Software. This kind of software can automatically count the symbols on your drawings. It does so by asking you to select a symbol with your mouse. The program can then count every similar symbol on the page. Sounds great, doesn’t it. The reality is that this type of software has inherent limitations. Let’s look at them.

Say you select a duplex receptacle. The software then goes looking for every symbol that looks like it. But what if the branch conduit comes in from the left, instead of the right? What if some of the receptacles have background elements of the drawing showing through? The answer to this problem is a “tolerance” setting. The tolerance setting tells the software how much different the symbol can be, and still be counted. If you set the tolerance level @ 70%, then the symbols can be 30% different.

The tolerance settings can lead to false or missed counts. Consider this quote from the SureCount website. “When you use Auto-Count, you will want to visually check the drawing to ensure that all the correct symbols are marked”. That said, the software authors are continually improving the “intelligence” of the system. For instance, if you select a 2’ x 4’ fixture with the letter A on the upper right side, the software will find all of the fixtures, even if the letter A is in a different position.

There are also many strategies for getting around the technology’s limitations. Let’s say you are working on a set of drawings that use the same symbol for many different fixtures. The engineer has put notes on the drawings such as “The fixtures in this room are all type A3”. The software allows you to count the only symbols in that room.

Another strategy for dealing with similar symbols is this. Assume the drawings use the same symbol for most receptacles, with text to identify the differences, such as IG, GFI or WP. If you select and count the receptacles with text first, the software will not count them again.

I have been saying that this type of software is not ready for prime time for many years. That opinion is changing. If you are a little on the “techy” side, and like to figure out new software, auto-count software may be ready for you.

On-Screen Electrical Estimating – Chapter Two

As mentioned in my last post, here are some of my likes and dislikes regarding on-screen estimating. The likes are first.

• No Paper Handling – Some of our larger projects show up on a pallet. Even small project documents add up after awhile, requiring substantial space for archiving.
• A Minor Point – No more paper cuts.
• Faster Estimating - Time is saved during takeoff. When you click on an item, it is counted, highlighted, and listed in a takeoff. All this is done in one step, instead of three. It also eliminates data entry errors.
• Overlays – No more light tables. You can overlay any plan sheet (or portion of a plan sheet) on another plan sheet. Need to see where the homeruns go to on another floor. Just overlay the two floors. Got change orders? Overlay the new plan sheets over the original plan sheets, and the differences are clearly shown.
• Ergonomics – About 5 years ago, I started experiencing neck pain. The doctors concluded that over thirty years of looking down at a desk was starting to create damage. I was sent off to the chiropractor. I have been using an on-screen takeoff program for about eighteen months, and have not been to the chiropractor for about twelve months. Not looking down at a set of plans for eight hours a day has been very beneficial.
• Portability – I think my UPS driver is mad at me. He does not deliver here very often anymore. Being able to obtain and deliver documents with the Internet and email is a boon. It also makes collaboration on a project easier.
• Supplies – I think the local Staples Office Store manager is also mad at me. I no longer purchase box after box of highlighters and pencils.
• Advanced features – These programs all have special features that make estimating and plan handling easier. For instance, you can create a snapshot of a feeder schedule, and display it on a second screen while doing takeoff on your primary screen. Another is the ability to create bookmarks, which make it simple to move around large projects.
• Vision Issues – For those who need vision correction, the ability to set a monitor at a fixed distance makes it much easier to manage. You will no longer need to move closer or farther from the plans, put glasses on or off, or be adjusting to look over and under your bifocal line.
• It’s More Fun? – One of my estimators told me that working on-screen is more fun. Maybe I’ll get more work out of him. For a while.

Here is my dislike.

• Screen Size – These programs do work on smaller monitors. I currently use a 22″ wide screen monitor. The zoom and pan controls make it very easy to move around the documents on this screen. I am however, keeping an eye on large monitor prices, and will soon purchase a larger screen. It will probably be sized around 30″. Take note that large screen TV’s may not have a very high resolution for the PC input. I have seen 37″ TVs with only a 1366 x 768 resolution. By comparison, my 22″ monitor has a resolution of 1680 x 1050.

Well, that’s it folks. let me know wht you think.