Vault backup 2025-07-17
This commit is contained in:
Vendored
+2
-1
@@ -6,5 +6,6 @@
|
||||
"showLineNumber": true,
|
||||
"autoPairMarkdown": false,
|
||||
"useTab": false,
|
||||
"alwaysUpdateLinks": true
|
||||
"alwaysUpdateLinks": true,
|
||||
"tabSize": 2
|
||||
}
|
||||
@@ -1,5 +0,0 @@
|
||||
# 2025-07-01
|
||||
|
||||
I take increasing issue with the common model
|
||||
of measuring operational success by negative overrun,
|
||||
as it is incompatible with the preferable target of estimate certainty.
|
||||
+1
-1
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ tags:
|
||||
---
|
||||
# AI in Estimating
|
||||
|
||||
Most estimators are already pigeon holed into poor SaaS like Accubid and the rest already,
|
||||
Most estimators are already pigeon-holed into poor SaaS like Accubid and the rest already,
|
||||
but the need to increase efficiency with AI will be the nail in the coffin.
|
||||
The myth that "full package" estimating software is most efficient
|
||||
will only be exacerbated by the inclusion of AI features
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ tags:
|
||||
|
||||
also "Modularization"
|
||||
|
||||
In construction estimating software,
|
||||
In [[construction-estimating-software]],
|
||||
[[assemblies]] are groups of material items
|
||||
representing a specific scope of work.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -9,6 +9,17 @@ That said, the correct answer is this.
|
||||
|
||||
> As detailed as possible, given required turnaround and available estimating resources.
|
||||
|
||||
%%
|
||||
TODO: This analysis is not much better than the common belief.
|
||||
A commonality of both is the implication that more time ought to be preferred,
|
||||
when the reality is that when considering larger organizational factors (strategy),
|
||||
ideal estimate certainty is likely far lower than most expect.
|
||||
|
||||
The *correct* correct answer involves optimizing for these factors:
|
||||
* value of increased bid certainty
|
||||
* value of increased estimate volume
|
||||
%%
|
||||
|
||||
An estimate's detail is irrelevant to its quality.
|
||||
A less detailed estimate is a more [[risk]]y bid,
|
||||
but **it is not the role of the estimator to determine acceptable risk**.
|
||||
@@ -33,3 +44,8 @@ $\frac{d\sigma}{dt}$
|
||||
|
||||
Time-saving strategies will overestimate or underestimate detailed takeoff
|
||||
depending on the assumptions used in their creation.
|
||||
|
||||
## Human Error
|
||||
|
||||
It is commonly understood that a "detailed takeoff"
|
||||
is more "accurate" than a square foot estimate.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -8,7 +8,8 @@ tags:
|
||||
|
||||
## My Memory
|
||||
|
||||
I have a family history of dementia and I am medically predisposed to transient forgetfulness.
|
||||
I have a family history of dementia,
|
||||
and I am medically predisposed to transient forgetfulness.
|
||||
Several times in my life I have found months/years old notes in my handwriting
|
||||
that I could not recall writing, on subjects I could not recall having ever understood.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -20,7 +21,8 @@ I'm not sure how much of this fear is real
|
||||
and how much is a subconscious ploy to justify not making the effort.
|
||||
|
||||
I project this insecurity on others strongly.
|
||||
I see the same signs in other people and it reminds me of my own weakness.
|
||||
I see the same signs in other people,
|
||||
and it reminds me of my own weakness.
|
||||
I get frustrated at others for not making efforts that I don't make myself.
|
||||
I don't use this notebook as often or as well as I should.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -44,7 +46,8 @@ My primary motivators are curiosity and stress.
|
||||
#### Curiosity
|
||||
|
||||
I find it very easy and natural to work on projects for extended, uninterrupted periods
|
||||
when I am investigating a new problem or a potential new way to solve a problem.
|
||||
when I am investigating a new problem,
|
||||
or a potential new way to solve a problem.
|
||||
|
||||
Because of this I often spend hours working on things
|
||||
that will not benefit me or anyone else.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -9,5 +9,5 @@
|
||||
|
||||
Breakdown selection is straightforward.
|
||||
|
||||
Still need a solution to select all takeoffs.
|
||||
To select all takeoffs:
|
||||
Get top left corner of pane, offset down and right.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
|
||||
# Project Info
|
||||
|
||||
Standardize formatting and input methods for common
|
||||
(mostly multi-family specific)
|
||||
project info, including:
|
||||
|
||||
* level names
|
||||
* area types by level
|
||||
* switchgear by level
|
||||
* feeders
|
||||
* from->to's with feeder tags
|
||||
* feeder tag definitions
|
||||
|
||||
To calculate regular quantities
|
||||
|
||||
* sleeving
|
||||
* conductor support
|
||||
@@ -9,10 +9,10 @@ All control methods are likely to appear in drawings.
|
||||
* Digital
|
||||
* Wireless
|
||||
|
||||
> [!info] "Local Control"
|
||||
> The term "local control only" is sometimes used to indicate no condiseration
|
||||
> for *any* lighting control beyond standard devices,
|
||||
> (with $Ds being the triac type)
|
||||
> [!info] "Local Control" as a PDI proposal qualification
|
||||
> The term "local control only" is sometimes used to indicate
|
||||
> no consideration for *any* lighting control beyond standard devices,
|
||||
> (with `$D`s being the triac type)
|
||||
> however, this phrasing is ambiguous and non-universal.
|
||||
> Confirm with the bid team on what must be included.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -1,8 +1,11 @@
|
||||
# Unit Takeoff
|
||||
|
||||
"Units" includes [hotel](#hotel) and [residential](#residential) spaces.
|
||||
|
||||
> [!tip] Preparing for Unit Takeoff
|
||||
Units generally have very little variation.
|
||||
I
|
||||
> Units generally have very little variation.
|
||||
> It is usually best to copy-paste takeoffs
|
||||
> rather than re-build them for each unit.
|
||||
|
||||
## Hotel
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -10,6 +13,11 @@ I
|
||||
> * Guestrooms
|
||||
> * Keys
|
||||
|
||||
> [!trivia]
|
||||
> The origin of the term "key" as a synonym of "hotel room"
|
||||
> ...
|
||||
> %% TODO: %%
|
||||
|
||||
## Residential
|
||||
|
||||
> [!info] Also Known As
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -51,6 +51,19 @@ but do not apply them consistently in practice.
|
||||
> Chapter 7 describes a study where experts
|
||||
> were shown to estimate risk differently for identical cases.
|
||||
|
||||
### Luck Looks Like Skill
|
||||
|
||||
> Chapter 7 p.154
|
||||
|
||||
Hubbard describes a study which concluded that,
|
||||
given the number of German pilots and their overall victory/defeat figures,
|
||||
there was a ~30% chance an individual would achieve The Red Baron's record
|
||||
_by luck alone_.
|
||||
|
||||
He later refers to the tendency to overvalue competence
|
||||
in the role of achieving improbable accomplishments
|
||||
as the "Red Baron effect".
|
||||
|
||||
## Mentioned Topics and Abbreviations
|
||||
|
||||
* Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)
|
||||
@@ -63,3 +76,29 @@ but do not apply them consistently in practice.
|
||||
* Loss-Exceedance Curve (LEC)
|
||||
* Risk Tolerance
|
||||
|
||||
## Critiques
|
||||
|
||||
### _Exsupero Ursus_
|
||||
|
||||
> Chapter 9 p.195
|
||||
|
||||
Hubbard uses _exsupero ursus_ to describe the tendency of his detractors
|
||||
to dismiss quantitative methods as inappropriate to their industry-specific risks.
|
||||
He provides another analogy in which one car is picked of two (ordinary) cars
|
||||
because the other car can't fly.
|
||||
Based on this strawman it is clear Hubbard believes his detractors are _correct_
|
||||
that qualitative methods can not capture the entire nuance of risk probability,
|
||||
but that they are failing to acknowledge that their preferred alternatives
|
||||
are not demonstrably more effective at doing so.
|
||||
The nuance Hubbard dismisses without addressing is the possibility of model _improvement_.
|
||||
A most competant detractor would be aware of the apparent contradiction
|
||||
but argue that their methods will eventually surpass quantitative methods
|
||||
if they are further developed.
|
||||
Such a position would additionally contextualize Hubbard's observations
|
||||
that detractors become emotional in their defense.
|
||||
To them, Hubbards methods represent an attractive short-term gain
|
||||
excluding a long-term payoff.
|
||||
|
||||
Hubbard's dismissal rubs me wrong
|
||||
because it reads exactly as he describes the "at least we're doing _something_" argument
|
||||
throughout the book and just pages earlier.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
|
||||
# The Purpose of Estimating
|
||||
|
||||
%% TODO: The content of this note is likely better put elsewhere %%
|
||||
|
||||
## The Purpose of Construction Cost Estimation
|
||||
|
||||
The purpose of [[construction-estimating]] in practice
|
||||
@@ -10,25 +12,33 @@ which would take far longer than allotted for bid,
|
||||
|
||||
* Determine feasibility of functional requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Type 2 Owners
|
||||
|
||||
For some owners, money is no object,
|
||||
and standardization is far more important
|
||||
than any potential construction savings.
|
||||
|
||||
These owners can be expected to decline every [[value-engineering]] option offered
|
||||
(see [[gold-plating]]).
|
||||
> [!info] Type 2 Owners
|
||||
> For some owners, money is no object,
|
||||
> and standardization is far more important
|
||||
> than any potential construction savings.
|
||||
>
|
||||
> These owners can be expected to decline every [[value-engineering]] option offered
|
||||
> (see [[gold-plating]]).
|
||||
|
||||
## For the Contractor
|
||||
|
||||
* Make profit to meet growth target
|
||||
* Secure work for current and projected employees (fill backlog)
|
||||
|
||||
%% TODO: "Determine the sale price of a service" %%
|
||||
|
||||
> [!aside]
|
||||
> I take increasing issue with the common model
|
||||
> of measuring operational success by negative overrun,
|
||||
> as it is incompatible with the preferable target of estimate certainty.
|
||||
|
||||
### The Role of the Estimator
|
||||
|
||||
The role of the estimator is to model the potential cost distribution of the project,
|
||||
taking actions to reduce the model's uncertainty.
|
||||
The progress of the estimator can be measured by $\frac{d\sigma}{dt}$
|
||||
|
||||
The effect of estimating methods can be represented as $d\sigma$,
|
||||
thus efficiency is $\frac{d\sigma}{dt}$.
|
||||
|
||||
### The Role of the Executive
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
id: risk-oriented-estimating
|
||||
aliases: []
|
||||
tags: []
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Risk Oriented Estimating
|
||||
|
||||
Risk-Oriented Estimating (ROE), is a methodology for [[construction-estimating]] which
|
||||
@@ -8,7 +14,7 @@ ROE leans heavily on [[expected-value-of-perfect-information]],
|
||||
which challenges the natural tendency to shy from uncertainty
|
||||
with the reality of the cost of certainty.
|
||||
|
||||
ROE does not endorse common shortcuts which round up to "cover" uncertainty,
|
||||
ROE does not endorse common shortcuts that round up to "cover" uncertainty,
|
||||
as these ultimately _increase_ risk by inflating the apparent project cost,
|
||||
increasing the probability of loss to a competitor.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -24,3 +30,4 @@ ROE prioritizes estimating tasks by their contribution to _cost certainty_.
|
||||
|
||||
ROE determines the appropriate level of [[estimating-detail]]
|
||||
given an organization's [[risk#Risk Tolerance]].
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
+4
-4
@@ -8,9 +8,9 @@ The field of strategy is concerned with the optimal solutions of problematic sce
|
||||
|
||||
Decision theory concerns
|
||||
|
||||
~~internal problems~~
|
||||
~~no competition~~
|
||||
~~internal optimization~~
|
||||
* ~~internal problems~~
|
||||
* ~~no competition~~
|
||||
* ~~internal optimization~~
|
||||
|
||||
### Game Theory
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ typical of construction project award.
|
||||
|
||||
## In Construction Contracting
|
||||
|
||||
**Executives** inform **Risk Tolerance**
|
||||
**Executives** inform **Risk Tolerance**,
|
||||
**Risk Tolerance** informs **Minimum Estimate Certainty**
|
||||
|
||||
### Bid Strategy
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user