vault backup: 2026-02-25 08:15:32

2026-02-25 08:15:32 -05:00
parent e0220c26cb
commit 84c8c76ccb
61 changed files with 926 additions and 989 deletions
@@ -10,141 +10,3 @@ tags:
 dg-publish: true
 ---
 # 2025-11-10
 # 2025-11-10 06:53:??
 _Monday Morning Before Work_
 #original-format/typewritten-print #topic/mindfulness
 I've been trying to be alone with my thoughts more
 recently. It's almost bizarre how working in silence
 for an hour makes the thought of music or an audiobook
 seem overstimulating, It feels right, though.
 To want to converse with myself rather than let my
 superego be drowned out by appealing sounds or a
 fantasy story I've already heard, or obscure facts
 about a game I've never played and never will.
 I still relapse, of course, a lifetime (albeit
 a short one) of unhealthy interaction with computers
 will do that, but I'm making quick progress.
 I watched a video yesterday that suggested that
 it might be my growing understanding of computers
 rather than my self discipline that's lead to this
 change in the dynamic between me and them. That,
 in understanding _how_ they function, I've turned
 them from _devices_ into _things_, which lack
 the mystical allure of the former. Whatever
 the reason, it's good progress as far
 as I'm concerned. It feels good to be introspective
 and to have time to build skills people care about,
 like music and style and... birdwatching...
 # 2025-11-10 10:40:??
 #topic/estimating #occupational #original-format/digital-text
 A significant change from Ace to PDI in my mentality during takeoff
 is that I now tend to expect that (within reason)
 "holes" in takeoff scripts are _intentional omissions_,
 not holes in cost coverage.
 # 2025-11-10 11:14:??
 #occupational/takeoff #original-format/digital-text
 I was updating my notes,
 filling in gaps in scripts based on Joel's,
 when I noticed a strange paragraph:
 > [!quote] `OneNote`/`Joel Take-off`/`Misc. Notes`
 > Drop Down Ceilings vs. GWB (Gypsum Wall Boards)
 >
 > Drop down ceiling is technically "Exposed" (the real term should be accessable),
 > so Romex and SER is not permited. Will need to use MC.
 >
 > > [!image]
 > > ### 334.12 Uses Not Permitted.
 > >
 > > #### 334.12(A) Types NM and NMC.
 > >
 > > Types NM and NMC cables shall not be permitted as follows:
 > >
 > > 1. In any dwelling or structure not specifically
 > >   permitted in 334.10(1), (2), (3)
 > > 
 > > 2. ==Exposed in dropped or suspended ceilings==
 > >   in other than one- and two-family and multifamily dwellings
 This analysis of 334.12(A)(2) is flawed.
 Based on the [[nfpa-70_100_definitions|Article 100]] definitions
 of [[nfpa-70_100_definitions#Exposed (as applied to wiring methods).|exposed]]
 and [[nfpa-70_100_definitions#Dwelling, Multifamily.|dwelling]],
 [[nfpa-70_334_nm-cable#334.12(A) Types NM and NMC.|334.12(A)(2)]]
 can be paraphrased as follows:
 > [!cite] NEC 334.12(A)(2), pp.
 > Types NM and NMC cable are not permitted to be installed
 > in accessible spaces above suspended ceilings,
 > _except in buildings containing one or more dwelling units._
 The prohibition of 334.12(A)(2) _never_ applies to apartments or condos,
 And only applies to hotels and dormitories on a basis of AHJ interpretation
 (See [[multi-family-dwellings#Are Hotels Multifamily Dwellings?]]).
 It's unclear to me if this a genuine misunderstanding
 or just a [[heuristics|rule of thumb]] to cover the case
 that guestrooms are not interpreted to be dwelling units.
 If it's the latter, I believe it's far too conservative
 to be used whole-cloth on all estimates.
 # 2025-11-10 15:15:??
 ### "Feeder"
 #topic/construction/electrical #original-format/digital-text
 The NEC definition of feeder is quite strict.
 I'm certain I misuse it frequently.
 ![[nfpa-70_100_definitions#Feeder.]]
 It _does not_ include power conductors to
 [[nfpa-70_100_definitions#Utilization Equipment.|utilization equipment]],
 those are [[nfpa-70_100_definitions#Branch Circuit.|branch circuit]] conductors.
 # 2025-11-10 20:00:??
 _Monday Evening, Before Bed_
 #topic/estimating #occupational #original-format/typewritten-print
 Today while (a peer) and I were walking, he asked
 me what I thought of his qualities as an estimator.
 I told him I think he has the right of it, that having beliefs
 about what's correct that don't change just because
 a senior says they should, is a good sign.
 I can't remember now if I knew it before today,
 but my relationship with Dale, my former manager,
 while never "good", was much improved when I started
 pushing back on his direction and feedback. I became
 an estimator, where before I was just someone who
 could estimate for him. He hated it, and let me know,
 but I never felt more sure of my position.
 Estimating is not a field where you get ahead
 by being more technically skilled or efficient.
 You distinguish yourself by convincing your superiors
 that you understand the objective and how to achieve
 it. The best estimators---as measured by compensation
 package---are not doing takeoff, they're
 telling other estimators what to take off and how.
 Conquer your self-doubt. Tell your boss they're
 wrong and stupid and they should feel bad. Profit.
@@ -10,56 +10,3 @@ tags:
 dg-publish: true
 ---
 # 2025-11-11
 # 2025-11-11 06:06:??
 _Tuesday Morning, Before Work_
 #topic/estimating #original-format/typewritten-print
 One of the most appealing aspects of estimating
 to me is the dynamic we have with our employers.
 my experience was at Ace that estimators act like,
 and are treated like good artists, like loveable
 little scamps who always get into trouble, but
 you keep them around because they do good work.
 There was no other position with a similar reputation.
 I attribute this strange relationship to two
 facts of our role:
 1. Estimating provides executives with a service,
    one that they could almost do without, but that they
    understand the value of paying for.
 2. Estimating is just math-heavy enough that it
    seems like magic to the uninitiated.
 In these ways we're actually more like court
 wizards than artists, which is an understandably
 desirable position.
 # 2025-11-11 14:41:??
 #topic/estimating #topic/transparency #original-format/digital-text 
 I just saw a post on a construction estimators forum
 from a user lamenting that their coworkers and customers
 largely do not understand the difference between markup and margin.
 It made me remember the micro-debates about that I would have with Dale
 every time we were closing out an estimate.
 This is the example I would always give
 while trying to explain it to him.
 ![[markup-vs-margin#Markup vs. Margin]]
 ***
 The user also stated that they would prefer to list overhead and profit
 separately from scope line item costs,
 but that their customers push back when they try.
 I'm not sure where they got this preference.
 Sure that would be more "transparent",
 but it's at odds with the purpose of a breakdown.
@@ -10,66 +10,3 @@ tags:
 dg-publish: true
 ---
 # 2025-11-13
 # 2025-11-13 08:03:??
 #topic/hobbies/writing
 I was thinking about recent critiques of my writing style
 and how they don't really apply to my speech,
 even though I don't imagine myself approaching them differently.
 I imagine I _would_ speak like I write,
 but that to use the same constructions
 would require a level of forethought
 that I'm not capable of under the pressure of conversation.
 # 2025-11-13 08:19:??
 #topic/estimating #occupational
 I'm still working on articulating
 my main difficulty in the transition
 from Ace to PDI estimating.
 At a high level,
 it's that our process is built on _instrumental_ methods,
 but that it is frequently judged from a _realist_ perspective.
 See [[realism-vs-instrumentalism]].
 There may be a more accurate way to state this.
 [[2025-11-10#2025-11-10 11 14]] may be an example of a similar issue,
 where instrumental methods are presented as if they were realist,
 causing confusion when the methods are,
 as judged from a realist perspective, wrong.
 ## 2025-11-13 ??:??:??
 #occupational
 ### Questions for Bid Estimators
 Questions for [[pdi-estimating#Bid Estimating|PDI Bid Estimators]].
 #### Exclusions
 When we send proposals with significant exclusions
 (no lighting control, no demo, no submetering,
 even when designed and shown on drawings):
 Is there a conversation happening with our customers
 before they receive our proposal?
 Is it clear they understand what we're excluding?
 # 2025-11-13 20:41:??
 #topic/hobbies/shorthand
 I've decided I've considered learning [[shorthand]]
 enough times independently
 that I would likely benefit from it.
 I added [[leslie-et-al_1968_gregg-notehand|a book]]
 on [[shorthand#Gregg Notehand|Gregg Notehand]]
 to my calibre library.
@@ -10,81 +10,3 @@ tags:
 dg-publish: true
 ---
 # 2025-12-02
 # 2025-12-02 10:40:??
 #topic/construction/electrical
 > [!cite] [Hysteresis - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysteresis)
 > **Hysteresis** is the dependence of the state of a system on its history.
 > For example, a [magnet](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnet "Magnet")
 > may have more than one possible
 > [magnetic moment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_moment "Magnetic moment")
 > in a given [magnetic field](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_field "Magnetic field"),
 > depending on how the field changed in the past.
 > Such a system is called **hysteretic**.
 ![[alternating-current#Ferroelectric Hysteresis]]
 # 2025-12-02 10:57:??
 ### Set Notation Example
 Let $A$ and $B$ be sets
 sharing some but not all elements.
 * $A \cap B \neq \varnothing$:
    "The intersection of $A$ and $B$ is nonempty"
    (They share at least one element).
 * $A \not\subseteq B$:
    "$A$ is not a subset of $B$"
    ($A$ has at least one element not in $B$).
    Equivalent to $A \setminus B \neq \varnothing$.
 * $B \not\subseteq A$:
    "$B$ is not a subset of $A$"
    ($B$ has at least one element not in $A$).
    Equivalent to $B \setminus A \neq \varnothing$.
 # 2025-12-02 13:20:??
 ### Panel Schedule Relationship Diagram
 #### Sections
 A panelboard with multiple sections
 may or may not have multiple schedules.
 `PANEL A1 SEC 1`
 #### Typical Schedules
 Schedules may be typical of multiple panelboards
 `PANEL H(2-6)`
 # 2025-12-02 15:35:??
 ### Bluebeam Model Context Protocol Tools
 * add_view_port
 * color_process_analyze
 * color_process_modify
 * count
 * create_bookmarks
 * create_markup_thumbnail
 * get_markup_state
 * get_page_count
 * get_page_information
 * list_markups_in_pdf
 * list_state_models_in_pdf
 * list_studio_projects
 * list_studio_sessions
 * open_file
 * redact
 * save_as_text
 * search_and_markup
 * set_markup_property
 * set_markup_state
 * set_page_labels
 * stamp
 * studio_project_search
@@ -10,15 +10,3 @@ tags:
 dg-publish: true
 ---
 # 2025-12-16
 # 2025-12-16 09:20:52
 [Probability Management](https://www.probabilitymanagement.org/)
 [Handbook of Decision Analysis | Wiley Online Books](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/book/10.1002/9781118515853)
 # 2025-12-16 20:04:??
 ### Metalog Distributions
 [Metalog Distributions]http://www.metalogdistributions.com/home.html)
@@ -10,85 +10,3 @@ tags:
 dg-publish: true
 ---
 # 2025-12-17
 # 2025-12-17 05:39:??
 One aspect of estimating that I find most interesting,
 but that is criminally understudied,
 is the effect of building dimensions
 (footprint shape, floor area, stories, height)
 on total cost.
 Unfortunately, lack of interest in the subject extends beyond estimating.
 Discourse on spatial data seems to fall into one of two bins:
 * civil engineering
 * n-dimensional mathematics[^1]
 neither are readily applicable to building construction.
 [^1]: worse still, the "space" studied in such disciplines is
    [vector space](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vector_space)
    where "distance" is a measure of similarity
    and physical geometry is rarely considered.
 Of the two, pure math would be be preferred---
 being generally more rigorous---
 but the first bin far outweighs the second.
 See the difference in content from
 [geostatistics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geostatistics)
 to the conceivably far more broad
 [spatial statistics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spatial_statistics).
 > [!quote] [Geographic data and information](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geographic_data_and_information)
 > **Spatial data** or **spatial information** is broader class of data
 > whose geometry is relevant
 > but it is not necessarily [georeferenced](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georeferenced "Georeferenced"),
 > such as in computer-aided design (CAD),
 > see [geometric modeling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometric_modeling "Geometric modeling").
 ### Ambiguity
 New Note: [[ambiguity]]
 # 2025-12-17 12:32:??
 #topic/ambiguity
 A while ago I heard a minor coding influencer lament
 that frameworks, packages, and tools
 often have ridiculous sounding names[^2]
 when, he suggests, they ought to just be called what they do.
 [^2]: `bubble-tea` and `ratatui`
    (libraries for creating CLI's) come to my mind
 Unfortunately some people and organizations agree with him,
 giving us terms which mean both something very general
 and something very specific.[^3]
 [^3]: [[project-management-tm|"Project Management"]]
    was my go to example, but weak
    because it's difficult for me to articulate
    the difference from construction project management
    especially to someone unfamiliar with the specifics of either.
 For lack of a better term I've been thinking of this as an SEO problem,
 but the bigger problem is that it invites [[ambiguity#Category Mistake|Category Mistake]],
 whereby the ignorant listener associates traits unique to the example
 to all things that the name could describe.
 I thought to finally write about this problem
 while researching [[lighting-controls#Protocols|lighting control protocols]].
 The two most dominant examples:
 * [[lighting-controls#^dali|"Digital Addressable Lighting Interface (DALI)"]]
 * [[lighting-controls#^dmx|"Digital Multiplex (DMX)"]]
 while notably different in topology,
 could both be described accurately with the other's name.
 > It is possible to avoid this problem
 > without the effort necessary to come up with a clever name.
 > Just stick an arbitrary, but reasonably unique word
 > in front of the generic description.
 > A person's name ("John's Digital Addressable Lighting Interface (JDALI)")
 > or your favorite animal ("Heron Digital Multiplex (HDMX)") are good options.
@@ -10,58 +10,3 @@ tags:
 dg-publish: true
 ---
 # 2025-12-18
 # 2025-12-18 08:32:18
 [[uncertainty-in-construction-estimating]]
 # 2025-12-18 10:38:??
 #topic/meta
 I definitively think my new approach
 of putting nascent ideas in [[periodic-notes|daily notes]]
 rather than separate fleeting notes
 is superior.
 The unfortunate reality is I'll never look at most of them again,
 so better that they don't crowd out my main notes.
 # 2025-12-18 14:18:??
 ### Estimating Golf
 What interests me most in [[construction-estimating]]
 is an idea you might call "estimating golf":
 the goal is to produce a satisfactory[^1] estimate,
 but the estimator can not view the project documents
 and must instead ask questions about the job
 (answerable in a sentence or less)
 of a neutral party ("the reader").
 The estimator fails if the estimate is unsatisfactory[^1],
 but otherwise is scored by number of questions asked.
 [^1]: satisfactory in terms of accuracy and precision,
    according to the standards of the organization.
    a control estimate must be prepared accordingly
    by a neutral party ("the control").
 You could further imagine different brackets
 for required accuracy and precision,
 whether organization historicals are freely available
 or must be questioned like project details.
 The most interesting part of this problem is choosing when to stop,
 since it requires one to estimate their certainty of their estimate.
 # 2025-12-18 15:22:??
 PDI has moved up the schedule to transition to Accubid Anywhere
 and will be signing a contract with Trimble in late January.
 [Drawer AI | Automated Electrical Takeoff & Estimating](https://drawer.ai/)
 # 2025-12-18 15:30:??
 [Kip (unit) - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kip_\(unit\))
 [Construction Cost Estimating](https://www.quantity-takeoff.com/index.htm)
@@ -10,31 +10,3 @@ tags:
 dg-publish: true
 ---
 # 2025-12-19
 # 2025-12-19 06:22:??
 [[music-theory-as-code]]
 # 2025-12-19 10:44:??
 #occupational/takeoff
 > [!quote] Art Baldwin 2025-12-19, in reference to Howard University East Towers (pp.)
 > When using PVC slab box assemblies where substantial insulation
 > (e.g mineral wool, spray foam) is to be applied,
 > add extension rings to compensate for the thickness
 # 2025-12-19 10:44:??
 #occupational/takeoff
 This week (2025w51)
 William Bonn, as part of [[units-takeoff]] for Howard University East Towers,
 used an `Area` "Typical - Unit Balconies" for `Phase` "UNIT - RESIDENTIAL" takeoff.
 Our senior Joel Jansen approved of the method.
 I'd like to use the method tentatively for takeoff strictly typical of all units
 (e.g. master switches, MSDE's, etc.),
 but there is potential for significant efficiency gains
 in treating units like panelboards in [[switchgear-takeoff]]:
 picking one unit type to be typical of many nearly identical types.
@@ -10,32 +10,3 @@ tags:
 dg-publish: true
 ---
 # 2026-01-02
 # 2026-01-02 10:10:18
 ### Harborside Plaza 4
 #### TODO
 * [ ] [[electrical-takeoff|Electrical]]
 * [x] [[telecom-takeoff#Backbone Riser|Telecom Backbone]]
 * [x] [[distributed-antenna-systems-takeoff|DAS]]
 # 2026-01-02 19:21:??
 Without apparent prompt I was reminded of a practical joke
 that my fellow apprentice Joe used to play often
 that never failed to get a laugh out of me:
 Mid-conversation Joe would stop suddenly,
 search in his pockets or tool belt,
 pull out a random object (usually his lineman's pliers),
 and act as if he had received a phone call on it.
 Often the other party had apparently dialed in error,
 and Joe would say, "Hello?... Hello?"
 before deciding they'd hung up.
 Other times he'd step away (only one step)
 and have whole conversations.
 Try as I might have,
 I could never pull it off like he could.
@@ -10,117 +10,3 @@ tags:
 dg-publish: true
 ---
 # 2026-01-06
 # 2026-01-06 07:47:??
 ### _Let Them Theory_ Theory
 1. Person habitually engages in toxic behavior
    which they consciously believe to be benevolent
 2. Person recognizes that when they stop engaging in said toxic behavior,
    others appreciate it
 3. Person feels that they are doing a service
    by not engaging in said toxic behavior
 # 2026-01-06 10:00:??
 Paraphrased Teams conversation with a peer
 about [[distribution-designations#Terminations]].
 Peer's messages are in block quotes.
 ***
 > Good morning!
 > Do you add branch terminations to panelboards?
 > If so, how does your 'distribution' section looks?
 Morning! Yes to the first question, ? to the second
 > As all panelboards on a job don't have the same size/# of terminations,
 > I assume you would have a plethora of same size boards in the job, with different terms.
 > How do you list them?
 |     | Designation                   | Status | Quantity |
 | --- | ----------------------------- | ------ | -------- |
 | 1   | Generator - 350kW, Diesel     |        | 1        |
 | 2   | Generator - 2000kW, Diesel    |        | 1        |
 | 3   | ATS - 200A                    |        | 2        |
 | 4   | ATS - 250A                    |        | 1        |
 | 5   | ATS - 400A                    |        | 2        |
 | 6   | ATS - 600A                    |        | 2        |
 | 7   | ATS - 800A                    |        | 1        |
 | 8   | ATS - 1000A                   |        | 1        |
 | 9   | Panelboard - 50A, 1-Section   |        | 1        |
 | 10  | Panelboard - 100A, 1-Section  |        | 18       |
 | 11  | Panelboard - 125A, 1-Section  |        | 26       |
 | 12  | Panelboard - 150A, 1-Section  |        | 2        |
 | 13  | Panelboard - 225A, 1-Section  |        | 11       |
 | 14  | Panelboard - 225A, 2-Section  |        | 5        |
 | 15  | Panelboard - 400A, 1-Section  |        | 2        |
 | 16  | Panelboard - 400A, 2-Section  |        | 3        |
 | 17  | Panelboard - 400A, 3-Section  |        | 5        |
 | 18  | Panelboard - 600A, 2-Section  |        | 1        |
 | 19  | Panelboard - 800A, 1-Section  |        | 1        |
 | 20  | Panelboard - 1200A, 1-Section |        | 2        |
 | 21  | Panelboard - 1200A, 2-Section |        | 1        |
 | 22  | Panelboard - 3000A, 1-Section |        | 1        |
 | 23  | CT Cabinet                    |        |          |
 | 24  | Power Monitor                 |        | 82       |
 | 25  | SPD/TVSS                      |        | 2        |
 > Ah, so you just chuck in a lot # of terms per board and call it good?
 Essentially.
 Ben's direction was to pick a schedule
 on the upper end of terms for each size panel
 to be representative of the rest.
 At my old place I would have made a designation for each panel,
 I'm not upset to leave that behind.
 I see no reason you couldn't just make each size once
 and keep it in a temp job.
 I would, but I usually extract the schedules anyway
 so I just use the actual average.
 > Thank you for that.
 > Joel wagged his finger at me about missing terms this morning---
 > I wanted to see how it's preferred.
 > I was told terms are captured by feeders/mech connections
 > and have never added them to panelboards.
 >
 > That would be the best way, finding the actual average.
 The mech connection assemblies have the load side term,
 the feeder assemblies have both sides,
 the branch assemblies don't have either,
 that's why he got you, I think.
 I don't think my way is best
 unless you already have all the circuits in a big table for other reasons.
 Lot of effort for a marginal increase in certainty above a heuristic like Ben's.
 I'm working on a job Noah started now,
 he made certain panels separate from what I assume is the average
 and labeled them with the name of the panel.
 If I had a job where some were significantly more full than others
 I _might_ do something similar,
 but I'd probably name them
 "... 1-Section, ~25% Fill"/"... 1-Section, ~75% Fill" instead.
 But that's a lot of mental overhead.
 # 2026-01-06 10:57:??
 Tracking contractor growth by project square footage
 rather than contract value dollars.
 Account for market shifts and regional differences.
 Problematic for other than new residential construction.
 Do you count site area?
 Out of contract building area for renovations?
 Maybe the sum of in-contract building area and other areas prorated somehow.
 Seems imminently gameable.
 See [[incentives#Perverse Incentive]]
 and [[estimating-culture#Incentives]].
@@ -10,125 +10,3 @@ tags:
 dg-publish: true
 ---
 # 2026-01-07
 # 2026-01-07 06:41:??
 > [!quote] _The Shadow of the Torturer_, Chapter 17: "The Challenge"
 > No intellect is needed to see those figures who wait beyond the void of death---
 > every child is aware of them, blazing with glories dark or bright,
 > wrapped in authority older than the universe.
 > They are the stuff of our earliest dreams, as of our dying visions.
 > Rightly we feel our lives guided by them,
 > and rightly too we feel how little we matter to them,
 > the builders of the unimaginable,
 > the fighters of wars beyond the totality of existence.
 >
 > The difficulty lies in learning that we ourselves encompass forces equally great.
 > We say, "I will," and "I will not," and imagine ourselves
 > (though we obey the orders of some prosaic person every day) our own masters,
 > when the truth is that our masters are sleeping.
 > One wakes within us and we are ridden like beasts,
 > though the rider is but some hitherto unguessed part of ourselves.
 # 2026-01-07 10:03:??
 At Ace, "residential" always meant single-family/duplex construction,
 but I think now we were the outliers.
 # 2026-01-07 10:05:??
 See [[pdi-breakdowns#Location]].
 I have---for some time now---
 been trying to figure out the purpose of the non-system breakdowns.
 [[location-vs-scope]]
 Perhaps there is another dichotomy
 in that an estimator may use the area classifications of the design
 or according to their own understanding of each term.
 For lack of a better example,
 whether a "101 - KITCHEN", without provisions for cooking,
 would be broken down under "Kitchen".
 # 2026-01-07 10:42:??
 When I got to work today Art admonished a fellow estimator
 for not uploading _all_ of a project's drawings,
 even those they did not intend to take off, to Trimble Connect.
 Art suggested that the estimator should upload all the drawings,
 but only add them to LiveCount as needed.
 I take issue with the suggestion on principle
 since doing so would not benefit the estimator or their senior
 (if they aren't added, the estimator can do nothing with them),
 but would require not-insignificant effort.
 Effort that would ultimately benefit no one:---
 Trimble Connect's ham-fisted approach to version control
 means that the fewer times it must be used, the better.
 > I'm currently dealing with the headache of an estimate
 > where such caution was not applied.
 The probability that any construction will be performed
 according the drawings that we take off
 (or even their immediate successors)
 I suspect is slim to zero.
 That Ops would have the patience to add the revisions,
 fighting with Trimble Connect as they would be,
 I suspect is even less.
 > On my current project, after trying in vain to play by Trimble's rules,
 > I started by deleting all the drawings I could
 > (those without takeoff associated with them)
 > then reuploaded the revised set.
 > I'm confident that this would be the dominant strategy.
 ***
 It's curious to me that the possibility of scope revisions
 doesn't seem to be at the front of every estimator's mind
 when doing takeoff or considering process changes,
 like it was for my mentors and peers at Ace.
 # 2026-01-07 12:13:??
 #occupational #topic/estimating #topic/organization
 Just now Jorge admonished another peer
 for using insulated wire for pool bonding,
 his rational was flawed beyond saving
 (something about the difference between bonding and grounding),
 but stemmed from a frustratingly common misunderstanding
 that our Accubid assemblies are intended to be an accurate list
 of the material to be installed.
 They are not.
 If they were intended to be accurate,
 there would need to be several times as many.
 They are a compromise between accuracy and estimator effort.
 It should be assumed that for common scope,
 at least one assembly should be acceptable as-is.
 Pool bonding is required for at least a quarter of our jobs.
 We have no bonding assemblies with bare wire.
 Therefore it must be assumed that it was determined
 that it would be acceptable to represent bare wire bonding with insulated wire items,
 because otherwise it would be necessary to have double the assemblies,
 or to expect estimators to substitute each size of wire
 everywhere bare was necessary.
 See [[realism-vs-instrumentalism]].
 # 2026-01-07 16:03:??
 #occupational #topic/estimating #topic/organization
 There is a palpable animosity for [[pdi-estimating#Bid Estimating|Bid]]
 in [[pdi-estimating#Construction Estimating (ConEst)|ConEst]],
 stemming---I believe---from an lack of buy-in on Bid's part.
 Their lack is easily explained by their [[estimating-culture#Incentives|incentive structure]]:
 Since throughput is systematically prioritized over accuracy,
 ConEst has a strictly antagonistic role
 because it slows down the bid process.
@@ -10,46 +10,3 @@ tags:
 dg-publish: true
 ---
 # 2026-01-08
 # 2026-01-08 13:33:34
 ### 2100 Crystal Drive Takeoff Review
 #### Generators
 > [!failure]
 > Generators were erroneously broken down in switchgear.
 [[switchgear-takeoff#Generator|Generator]]
 #### Switchgear
 Switchgear cost comp
 "\\EgnyteDrive\Shared\Estimating\11 Bid Estimating Spreadsheets\Switchgear Pricing Tool Version 2 (2.02.2024) (Template) - Copy.xls"
 Includes
 * submetering
 * coordination study
 #### Composite Cleanup
 1 day per week
 $$
 \text{Average Weeks Per Month} =
 $$
 > It occurs to me I don't know all the rules of our calendar
 > [Gregorian calendar - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregorian_calendar)
 #### Temp Power
 $10,000 per [[heavy-equipment#Swing Stage Scaffolding|swing stage]]
 [[temp-power-takeoff]]
 #### Unit Typicals
 I asked Joel about using unit typicals as described in
 [[2025-12-19#2025-12-19 10:44]].
 He stated that would be acceptable.
@@ -10,105 +10,3 @@ tags:
 dg-publish: true
 ---
 # 2026-01-09
 # 2026-01-09 10:00:03
 ### 2100 Crystal Drive
 `#600 ? WHITE ?` had incorrect sort codes.
 #### Lighting Control
 I took off lighting per plans (E510)
 in spite of proposal stating "local control".
 Will have to be changed.
 #### Labor Factor
 Fire Alarm
 Switchgear
 Feeders
 Subfeeds
 Corridors
 Amenity
 Retail
 Units
 #### Fixtures
 > [!failure]
 > Several fixtures were erroneously based on NM cable.
 I built some fixtures with \#12/3 in areas with emergency lighting
 to be an unswitched hot.
 Joel is having me change them to \#12/2.
 #### Units
 > [!failure]
 > One unit type typical was missing `Area` quantities.
 > Another had no takeoff.
 #### Labor Plan
 $$
 \mathbb{E}\left[\frac{\text{Hours Per Unit}}{\text{Openings Per Unit}}\right] \approx .75~\text{Hours Per Opening}
 $$
 High Rise .110--.120 hr/sqft
 # 2026-01-09 12:00:??
 $$
 \begin{gather*}
 \frac{146097}{400} = 365.2425~\text{Days Per Year} \
 \frac{20871}{400} = 52.1775~\text{Weeks Per Year} \
 \frac{6957}{1600} = 4.348125~\text{Weeks Per Month}
 \end{gather*}
 $$
 $$
 \frac{365.2425~\text{Days Per Year}}{7~\text{Days Per Week}}
 = 52.1775~\text{Weeks Per Year}
 $$
 $$
 \frac{52.1775~\text{Weeks Per Year}}{12~\text{Months Per Year}}
 = 4.348125~\text{Weeks Per Month}
 $$
 # 2026-01-09 14:45:??
 [[bid-price-modeling]]
 Suppose a true cost model,
 accounting for all relevant information available at time $t$.
 $C(t)$ returns a distribution whose [scale](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scale_parameter)
 decreases with $t$, and $C(0)$ maps to a single value.
 $t>0$ is time until the final payment.
 > ![250](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/89/Log-normal-pdfs.png/960px-Log-normal-pdfs.png)
 >
 > Figure: lognormal distributions with the same [location](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Location_parameter)
 > varied by [scale](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scale_parameter).
 # 2026-01-09 16:28:??
 ### Occam's razor
 > [!info] Also Known As
 > * the principle of parsimony
 > * the law of parsimony
 recommends searching for explanations constructed with the smallest possible set of elements.
 Attributed to William of Ockham, 14th-century English philosopher and theologian.
 > _Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem_
 > ("Entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity")
 > "Of two competing theories, the simpler explanation is to be preferred."
 > [!quote] [[klugman-et-al_2019_loss-models#4.2 The Role of Parameters]]
 > The principle of parsimony states that the simplest model
 > that adequately reflects reality should be used.
@@ -10,61 +10,3 @@ tags:
 dg-publish: true
 ---
 # 2026-01-11
 # 2026-01-11 09:00:??
 [[2026-01-09#2026-01-09 14:45]]
 [[bid-price-modeling]]
 [[decrease-in-sigma]]
 # 2026-01-11 11:00:??
 ![[favorite-quotes#"It Takes an Engineer to Build a Bridge that Barely Stands"]]
 The value that estimators provide for a contractor
 is in modeling project cost.
 If the goal were simply to present a number the cost will not exceed,
 than anyone could be an estimator.
 If the goal were only to present a reasonably accurate figure,
 with no other constraints,
 then there are few who in the world who couldn't,
 given infinite time for a single bid.
 The _true_ value of an estimator, then,
 is in their ability to model project cost _efficiently_, that is,
 to achieve _acceptable_ accuracy and precision as quickly as possible,---
 much as the engineer's is in building a bridge that _meets_ the requirements
 as cheaply as possible.
 Estimating "as accurately as possible"
 is akin to building a bridge "as strong as possible";
 it sounds nice, but ignores the actual objective of _optimal cost-efficiency_.
 I think that most estimators believe this to be the case,
 but, whatever they believe in mind, they believe in practice
 that the goal is to model cost as accurately and precisely as possible,
 _given the time allowed for bid_.
 Estimates tend always to take exactly as many weeks as until the bid due date,
 even those of significantly different turnaround but equal scope and complexity.
 This behavior is objectionable,
 since if an acceptable estimate _could_ be provided in two weeks,
 it is not cost-effective[^1] to allow it to take four.[^2]
 [^1]: "Cost" referring both to estimator salaries and the opportunity cost of declined bids.
 [^2]: Supposing a contractor maintained a modern portfolio theory styled record of estimates
    including pending bids, and projects ongoing and completed
    (each with confidence estimates),
    uncorrupted by [[estimating-culture#Incentives|perverse incentives]],
    they may have reasonable basis to set sliding standards for estimate precision
    to be specifically determined at consideration of the opportunity for bid
    according to current climate (i.e. their transient risk appetite).
    I believe my use of the absolute is still fair:
    No contractor is doing that, so they lack a competent measure of risk tolerance
    besides continuing to tolerate what they have historically.
 > [!important]
 > Objectionable as it is,
 > it is to be expected that estimators will use all time allowed them
 > when the standards for _acceptability_ are inadequately defined.
@@ -10,14 +10,3 @@ tags:
 dg-publish: true
 ---
 # 2026-01-15
 # 2026-01-15 08:11:10
 Follow-up to [[2026-01-12#2026-01-12 12:23|2026-01-12 12:23]]
 Left Apartment at 05:30, at terminal around 06:10.
 # 2026-01-15 08:15:??
 [[2025-11-13#2025-11-13 08:19]]
 I spoke to a peer about this yesterday.
@@ -158,10 +158,13 @@ Separate these fixtures by labor, not length
 B - Surface (Tape) = 1.0hr (0-17ft) - MC #12 40ft
 _
 *** Interior Amenity ***
-IA - Surface (Tape) = 1.0hr (0-17ft) - MC+LV #12 40ft
+IA - Surface (Tape) = 1.0hr (00-17ft) - MC+LV #12 40ft
 IA - Surface (Tape) = 2.0hr (18-29ft) - MC+LV #12 40ft
 IA - Surface (Tape) = 3.0hr (30-41ft) - MC+LV #12 40ft
 IA - Surface (Tape) = 4.0hr (42-53ft) - MC+LV #12 40ft
 IA - Surface (Tape) = 5.0hr (54-65ft) - MC+LV #12 40ft
 IA - Surface (Tape) = 6.0hr (66-77ft) - MC+LV #12 40ft
 IA - Surface (Tape) = 7.0hr (78-89ft) - MC+LV #12 40ft
 ```
 ## Recessed
@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
 # 2025-11-10 06:53:??
 _Monday Morning Before Work_
 #original-format/typewritten-print #topic/mindfulness
 I've been trying to be alone with my thoughts more
 recently. It's almost bizarre how working in silence
 for an hour makes the thought of music or an audiobook
 seem overstimulating, It feels right, though.
 To want to converse with myself rather than let my
 superego be drowned out by appealing sounds or a
 fantasy story I've already heard, or obscure facts
 about a game I've never played and never will.
 I still relapse, of course, a lifetime (albeit
 a short one) of unhealthy interaction with computers
 will do that, but I'm making quick progress.
 I watched a video yesterday that suggested that
 it might be my growing understanding of computers
 rather than my self discipline that's lead to this
 change in the dynamic between me and them. That,
 in understanding _how_ they function, I've turned
 them from _devices_ into _things_, which lack
 the mystical allure of the former. Whatever
 the reason, it's good progress as far
 as I'm concerned. It feels good to be introspective
 and to have time to build skills people care about,
 like music and style and... birdwatching...
@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
 # 2025-11-10 10:40:??
 #topic/estimating #occupational #original-format/digital-text
 A significant change from Ace to PDI in my mentality during takeoff
 is that I now tend to expect that (within reason)
 "holes" in takeoff scripts are _intentional omissions_,
 not holes in cost coverage.
@@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
 # 2025-11-10 11:14:??
 #occupational/takeoff #original-format/digital-text
 I was updating my notes,
 filling in gaps in scripts based on Joel's,
 when I noticed a strange paragraph:
 > [!quote] `OneNote`/`Joel Take-off`/`Misc. Notes`
 > Drop Down Ceilings vs. GWB (Gypsum Wall Boards)
 >
 > Drop down ceiling is technically "Exposed" (the real term should be accessable),
 > so Romex and SER is not permited. Will need to use MC.
 >
 > > [!image]
 > > ### 334.12 Uses Not Permitted.
 > >
 > > #### 334.12(A) Types NM and NMC.
 > >
 > > Types NM and NMC cables shall not be permitted as follows:
 > >
 > > 1. In any dwelling or structure not specifically
 > >   permitted in 334.10(1), (2), (3)
 > > 
 > > 2. ==Exposed in dropped or suspended ceilings==
 > >   in other than one- and two-family and multifamily dwellings
 This analysis of 334.12(A)(2) is flawed.
 Based on the [[nfpa-70_100_definitions|Article 100]] definitions
 of [[nfpa-70_100_definitions#Exposed (as applied to wiring methods).|exposed]]
 and [[nfpa-70_100_definitions#Dwelling, Multifamily.|dwelling]],
 [[nfpa-70_334_nm-cable#334.12(A) Types NM and NMC.|334.12(A)(2)]]
 can be paraphrased as follows:
 > [!cite] NEC 334.12(A)(2), pp.
 > Types NM and NMC cable are not permitted to be installed
 > in accessible spaces above suspended ceilings,
 > _except in buildings containing one or more dwelling units._
 The prohibition of 334.12(A)(2) _never_ applies to apartments or condos,
 And only applies to hotels and dormitories on a basis of AHJ interpretation
 (See [[multi-family-dwellings#Are Hotels Multifamily Dwellings?]]).
 It's unclear to me if this a genuine misunderstanding
 or just a [[heuristics|rule of thumb]] to cover the case
 that guestrooms are not interpreted to be dwelling units.
 If it's the latter, I believe it's far too conservative
 to be used whole-cloth on all estimates.
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
 # 2025-11-10 15:15:??
 ### "Feeder"
 #topic/construction/electrical #original-format/digital-text
 The NEC definition of feeder is quite strict.
 I'm certain I misuse it frequently.
 ![[nfpa-70_100_definitions#Feeder.]]
 It _does not_ include power conductors to
 [[nfpa-70_100_definitions#Utilization Equipment.|utilization equipment]],
 those are [[nfpa-70_100_definitions#Branch Circuit.|branch circuit]] conductors.
@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
 # 2025-11-10 20:00:??
 _Monday Evening, Before Bed_
 #topic/estimating #occupational #original-format/typewritten-print
 Today while (a peer) and I were walking, he asked
 me what I thought of his qualities as an estimator.
 I told him I think he has the right of it, that having beliefs
 about what's correct that don't change just because
 a senior says they should, is a good sign.
 I can't remember now if I knew it before today,
 but my relationship with Dale, my former manager,
 while never "good", was much improved when I started
 pushing back on his direction and feedback. I became
 an estimator, where before I was just someone who
 could estimate for him. He hated it, and let me know,
 but I never felt more sure of my position.
 Estimating is not a field where you get ahead
 by being more technically skilled or efficient.
 You distinguish yourself by convincing your superiors
 that you understand the objective and how to achieve
 it. The best estimators---as measured by compensation
 package---are not doing takeoff, they're
 telling other estimators what to take off and how.
 Conquer your self-doubt. Tell your boss they're
 wrong and stupid and they should feel bad. Profit.
@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
 # 2025-11-11 06:06:??
 _Tuesday Morning, Before Work_
 #topic/estimating #original-format/typewritten-print
 One of the most appealing aspects of estimating
 to me is the dynamic we have with our employers.
 my experience was at Ace that estimators act like,
 and are treated like good artists, like loveable
 little scamps who always get into trouble, but
 you keep them around because they do good work.
 There was no other position with a similar reputation.
 I attribute this strange relationship to two
 facts of our role:
 1. Estimating provides executives with a service,
    one that they could almost do without, but that they
    understand the value of paying for.
 2. Estimating is just math-heavy enough that it
    seems like magic to the uninitiated.
 In these ways we're actually more like court
 wizards than artists, which is an understandably
 desirable position.
@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
 # 2025-11-11 14:41:??
 #topic/estimating #topic/transparency #original-format/digital-text 
 I just saw a post on a construction estimators forum
 from a user lamenting that their coworkers and customers
 largely do not understand the difference between markup and margin.
 It made me remember the micro-debates about that I would have with Dale
 every time we were closing out an estimate.
 This is the example I would always give
 while trying to explain it to him.
 ![[markup-vs-margin#Markup vs. Margin]]
 ***
 The user also stated that they would prefer to list overhead and profit
 separately from scope line item costs,
 but that their customers push back when they try.
 I'm not sure where they got this preference.
 Sure that would be more "transparent",
 but it's at odds with the purpose of a breakdown.
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
 # 2025-11-13 08:03:??
 #topic/hobbies/writing
 I was thinking about recent critiques of my writing style
 and how they don't really apply to my speech,
 even though I don't imagine myself approaching them differently.
 I imagine I _would_ speak like I write,
 but that to use the same constructions
 would require a level of forethought
 that I'm not capable of under the pressure of conversation.
@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
 # 2025-11-13 08:19:??
 #topic/estimating #occupational
 I'm still working on articulating
 my main difficulty in the transition
 from Ace to PDI estimating.
 At a high level,
 it's that our process is built on _instrumental_ methods,
 but that it is frequently judged from a _realist_ perspective.
 See [[realism-vs-instrumentalism]].
 There may be a more accurate way to state this.
 [[2025-11-10#2025-11-10 11 14]] may be an example of a similar issue,
 where instrumental methods are presented as if they were realist,
 causing confusion when the methods are,
 as judged from a realist perspective, wrong.
 ## 2025-11-13 ??:??:??
 #occupational
 ### Questions for Bid Estimators
 Questions for [[pdi-estimating#Bid Estimating|PDI Bid Estimators]].
 #### Exclusions
 When we send proposals with significant exclusions
 (no lighting control, no demo, no submetering,
 even when designed and shown on drawings):
 Is there a conversation happening with our customers
 before they receive our proposal?
 Is it clear they understand what we're excluding?
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
 # 2025-11-13 20:41:??
 #topic/hobbies/shorthand
 I've decided I've considered learning [[shorthand]]
 enough times independently
 that I would likely benefit from it.
 I added [[leslie-et-al_1968_gregg-notehand|a book]]
 on [[shorthand#Gregg Notehand|Gregg Notehand]]
 to my calibre library.
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
 # 2025-12-02 10:40:??
 #topic/construction/electrical
 > [!cite] [Hysteresis - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysteresis)
 > **Hysteresis** is the dependence of the state of a system on its history.
 > For example, a [magnet](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnet "Magnet")
 > may have more than one possible
 > [magnetic moment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_moment "Magnetic moment")
 > in a given [magnetic field](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_field "Magnetic field"),
 > depending on how the field changed in the past.
 > Such a system is called **hysteretic**.
 ![[alternating-current#Ferroelectric Hysteresis]]
@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
 # 2025-12-02 10:57:??
 ### Set Notation Example
 Let $A$ and $B$ be sets
 sharing some but not all elements.
 * $A \cap B \neq \varnothing$:
    "The intersection of $A$ and $B$ is nonempty"
    (They share at least one element).
 * $A \not\subseteq B$:
    "$A$ is not a subset of $B$"
    ($A$ has at least one element not in $B$).
    Equivalent to $A \setminus B \neq \varnothing$.
 * $B \not\subseteq A$:
    "$B$ is not a subset of $A$"
    ($B$ has at least one element not in $A$).
    Equivalent to $B \setminus A \neq \varnothing$.
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
 # 2025-12-02 13:20:??
 ### Panel Schedule Relationship Diagram
 #### Sections
 A panelboard with multiple sections
 may or may not have multiple schedules.
 `PANEL A1 SEC 1`
 #### Typical Schedules
 Schedules may be typical of multiple panelboards
 `PANEL H(2-6)`
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
 # 2025-12-16 09:20:52
 [Probability Management](https://www.probabilitymanagement.org/)
 [Handbook of Decision Analysis | Wiley Online Books](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/book/10.1002/9781118515853)
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
 # 2025-12-16 20:04:??
 ### Metalog Distributions
 [Metalog Distributions]http://www.metalogdistributions.com/home.html)
@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
 # 2025-12-17 05:39:??
 One aspect of estimating that I find most interesting,
 but that is criminally understudied,
 is the effect of building dimensions
 (footprint shape, floor area, stories, height)
 on total cost.
 Unfortunately, lack of interest in the subject extends beyond estimating.
 Discourse on spatial data seems to fall into one of two bins:
 * civil engineering
 * n-dimensional mathematics[^1]
 neither are readily applicable to building construction.
 [^1]: worse still, the "space" studied in such disciplines is
    [vector space](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vector_space)
    where "distance" is a measure of similarity
    and physical geometry is rarely considered.
 Of the two, pure math would be be preferred---
 being generally more rigorous---
 but the first bin far outweighs the second.
 See the difference in content from
 [geostatistics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geostatistics)
 to the conceivably far more broad
 [spatial statistics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spatial_statistics).
 > [!quote] [Geographic data and information](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geographic_data_and_information)
 > **Spatial data** or **spatial information** is broader class of data
 > whose geometry is relevant
 > but it is not necessarily [georeferenced](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georeferenced "Georeferenced"),
 > such as in computer-aided design (CAD),
 > see [geometric modeling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometric_modeling "Geometric modeling").
 ### Ambiguity
 New Note: [[ambiguity]]
@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
 # 2025-12-17 12:32:??
 #topic/ambiguity
 A while ago I heard a minor coding influencer lament
 that frameworks, packages, and tools
 often have ridiculous sounding names[^2]
 when, he suggests, they ought to just be called what they do.
 [^2]: `bubble-tea` and `ratatui`
    (libraries for creating CLI's) come to my mind
 Unfortunately some people and organizations agree with him,
 giving us terms which mean both something very general
 and something very specific.[^3]
 [^3]: [[project-management-tm|"Project Management"]]
    was my go to example, but weak
    because it's difficult for me to articulate
    the difference from construction project management
    especially to someone unfamiliar with the specifics of either.
 For lack of a better term I've been thinking of this as an SEO problem,
 but the bigger problem is that it invites [[ambiguity#Category Mistake|Category Mistake]],
 whereby the ignorant listener associates traits unique to the example
 to all things that the name could describe.
 I thought to finally write about this problem
 while researching [[lighting-controls#Protocols|lighting control protocols]].
 The two most dominant examples:
 * [[lighting-controls#^dali|"Digital Addressable Lighting Interface (DALI)"]]
 * [[lighting-controls#^dmx|"Digital Multiplex (DMX)"]]
 while notably different in topology,
 could both be described accurately with the other's name.
 > It is possible to avoid this problem
 > without the effort necessary to come up with a clever name.
 > Just stick an arbitrary, but reasonably unique word
 > in front of the generic description.
 > A person's name ("John's Digital Addressable Lighting Interface (JDALI)")
 > or your favorite animal ("Heron Digital Multiplex (HDMX)") are good options.
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
 # 2025-12-18 08:32:18
 [[uncertainty-in-construction-estimating]]
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
 # 2025-12-18 10:38:??
 #topic/meta
 I definitively think my new approach
 of putting nascent ideas in [[periodic-notes|daily notes]]
 rather than separate fleeting notes
 is superior.
 The unfortunate reality is I'll never look at most of them again,
 so better that they don't crowd out my main notes.
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
 # 2025-12-18 14:18:??
 ### Estimating Golf
 What interests me most in [[construction-estimating]]
 is an idea you might call "estimating golf":
 the goal is to produce a satisfactory[^1] estimate,
 but the estimator can not view the project documents
 and must instead ask questions about the job
 (answerable in a sentence or less)
 of a neutral party ("the reader").
 The estimator fails if the estimate is unsatisfactory[^1],
 but otherwise is scored by number of questions asked.
 [^1]: satisfactory in terms of accuracy and precision,
    according to the standards of the organization.
    a control estimate must be prepared accordingly
    by a neutral party ("the control").
 You could further imagine different brackets
 for required accuracy and precision,
 whether organization historicals are freely available
 or must be questioned like project details.
 The most interesting part of this problem is choosing when to stop,
 since it requires one to estimate their certainty of their estimate.
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
 # 2025-12-18 15:22:??
 PDI has moved up the schedule to transition to Accubid Anywhere
 and will be signing a contract with Trimble in late January.
 [Drawer AI | Automated Electrical Takeoff & Estimating](https://drawer.ai/)
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
 # 2025-12-18 15:30:??
 [Kip (unit) - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kip_\(unit\))
 [Construction Cost Estimating](https://www.quantity-takeoff.com/index.htm)
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
 # 2025-12-19 10:44:??
 #occupational/takeoff
 > [!quote] Art Baldwin 2025-12-19, in reference to Howard University East Towers (pp.)
 > When using PVC slab box assemblies where substantial insulation
 > (e.g mineral wool, spray foam) is to be applied,
 > add extension rings to compensate for the thickness
 # 2025-12-19 10:44:??
 #occupational/takeoff
 > [!quote] Art Baldwin 2025-12-19, in reference to Howard University East Towers (pp.)
 > When using PVC slab box assemblies where substantial insulation
 > (e.g mineral wool, spray foam) is to be applied,
 > add extension rings to compensate for the thickness
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
 # 2025-12-19 10:44:??
 #occupational/takeoff
 This week (2025w51)
 William Bonn, as part of [[units-takeoff]] for Howard University East Towers,
 used an `Area` "Typical - Unit Balconies" for `Phase` "UNIT - RESIDENTIAL" takeoff.
 Our senior Joel Jansen approved of the method.
 I'd like to use the method tentatively for takeoff strictly typical of all units
 (e.g. master switches, MSDE's, etc.),
 but there is potential for significant efficiency gains
 in treating units like panelboards in [[switchgear-takeoff]]:
 picking one unit type to be typical of many nearly identical types.
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
 # 2026-01-02 10:10:18
 ### Harborside Plaza 4
 #### TODO
 * [ ] [[electrical-takeoff|Electrical]]
 * [x] [[telecom-takeoff#Backbone Riser|Telecom Backbone]]
 * [x] [[distributed-antenna-systems-takeoff|DAS]]
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
 # 2026-01-02 19:21:??
 Without apparent prompt I was reminded of a practical joke
 that my fellow apprentice Joe used to play often
 that never failed to get a laugh out of me:
 Mid-conversation Joe would stop suddenly,
 search in his pockets or tool belt,
 pull out a random object (usually his lineman's pliers),
 and act as if he had received a phone call on it.
 Often the other party had apparently dialed in error,
 and Joe would say, "Hello?... Hello?"
 before deciding they'd hung up.
 Other times he'd step away (only one step)
 and have whole conversations.
 Try as I might have,
 I could never pull it off like he could.
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
 # 2026-01-06 07:47:??
 ### _Let Them Theory_ Theory
 1. Person habitually engages in toxic behavior
    which they consciously believe to be benevolent
 2. Person recognizes that when they stop engaging in said toxic behavior,
    others appreciate it
 3. Person feels that they are doing a service
    by not engaging in said toxic behavior
@@ -0,0 +1,84 @@
 # 2026-01-06 10:00:??
 Paraphrased Teams conversation with a peer
 about [[distribution-designations#Terminations]].
 Peer's messages are in block quotes.
 ***
 > Good morning!
 > Do you add branch terminations to panelboards?
 > If so, how does your 'distribution' section looks?
 Morning! Yes to the first question, ? to the second
 > As all panelboards on a job don't have the same size/# of terminations,
 > I assume you would have a plethora of same size boards in the job, with different terms.
 > How do you list them?
 |     | Designation                   | Status | Quantity |
 | --- | ----------------------------- | ------ | -------- |
 | 1   | Generator - 350kW, Diesel     |        | 1        |
 | 2   | Generator - 2000kW, Diesel    |        | 1        |
 | 3   | ATS - 200A                    |        | 2        |
 | 4   | ATS - 250A                    |        | 1        |
 | 5   | ATS - 400A                    |        | 2        |
 | 6   | ATS - 600A                    |        | 2        |
 | 7   | ATS - 800A                    |        | 1        |
 | 8   | ATS - 1000A                   |        | 1        |
 | 9   | Panelboard - 50A, 1-Section   |        | 1        |
 | 10  | Panelboard - 100A, 1-Section  |        | 18       |
 | 11  | Panelboard - 125A, 1-Section  |        | 26       |
 | 12  | Panelboard - 150A, 1-Section  |        | 2        |
 | 13  | Panelboard - 225A, 1-Section  |        | 11       |
 | 14  | Panelboard - 225A, 2-Section  |        | 5        |
 | 15  | Panelboard - 400A, 1-Section  |        | 2        |
 | 16  | Panelboard - 400A, 2-Section  |        | 3        |
 | 17  | Panelboard - 400A, 3-Section  |        | 5        |
 | 18  | Panelboard - 600A, 2-Section  |        | 1        |
 | 19  | Panelboard - 800A, 1-Section  |        | 1        |
 | 20  | Panelboard - 1200A, 1-Section |        | 2        |
 | 21  | Panelboard - 1200A, 2-Section |        | 1        |
 | 22  | Panelboard - 3000A, 1-Section |        | 1        |
 | 23  | CT Cabinet                    |        |          |
 | 24  | Power Monitor                 |        | 82       |
 | 25  | SPD/TVSS                      |        | 2        |
 > Ah, so you just chuck in a lot # of terms per board and call it good?
 Essentially.
 Ben's direction was to pick a schedule
 on the upper end of terms for each size panel
 to be representative of the rest.
 At my old place I would have made a designation for each panel,
 I'm not upset to leave that behind.
 I see no reason you couldn't just make each size once
 and keep it in a temp job.
 I would, but I usually extract the schedules anyway
 so I just use the actual average.
 > Thank you for that.
 > Joel wagged his finger at me about missing terms this morning---
 > I wanted to see how it's preferred.
 > I was told terms are captured by feeders/mech connections
 > and have never added them to panelboards.
 >
 > That would be the best way, finding the actual average.
 The mech connection assemblies have the load side term,
 the feeder assemblies have both sides,
 the branch assemblies don't have either,
 that's why he got you, I think.
 I don't think my way is best
 unless you already have all the circuits in a big table for other reasons.
 Lot of effort for a marginal increase in certainty above a heuristic like Ben's.
 I'm working on a job Noah started now,
 he made certain panels separate from what I assume is the average
 and labeled them with the name of the panel.
 If I had a job where some were significantly more full than others
 I _might_ do something similar,
 but I'd probably name them
 "... 1-Section, ~25% Fill"/"... 1-Section, ~75% Fill" instead.
 But that's a lot of mental overhead.
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
 # 2026-01-06 10:57:??
 Tracking contractor growth by project square footage
 rather than contract value dollars.
 Account for market shifts and regional differences.
 Problematic for other than new residential construction.
 Do you count site area?
 Out of contract building area for renovations?
 Maybe the sum of in-contract building area and other areas prorated somehow.
 Seems imminently gameable.
 See [[incentives#Perverse Incentive]]
 and [[estimating-culture#Incentives]].
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
 # 2026-01-07 06:41:??
 > [!quote] _The Shadow of the Torturer_, Chapter 17: "The Challenge"
 > No intellect is needed to see those figures who wait beyond the void of death---
 > every child is aware of them, blazing with glories dark or bright,
 > wrapped in authority older than the universe.
 > They are the stuff of our earliest dreams, as of our dying visions.
 > Rightly we feel our lives guided by them,
 > and rightly too we feel how little we matter to them,
 > the builders of the unimaginable,
 > the fighters of wars beyond the totality of existence.
 >
 > The difficulty lies in learning that we ourselves encompass forces equally great.
 > We say, "I will," and "I will not," and imagine ourselves
 > (though we obey the orders of some prosaic person every day) our own masters,
 > when the truth is that our masters are sleeping.
 > One wakes within us and we are ridden like beasts,
 > though the rider is but some hitherto unguessed part of ourselves.
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
 # 2026-01-07 10:03:??
 At Ace, "residential" always meant single-family/duplex construction,
 but I think now we were the outliers.
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
 # 2026-01-07 10:05:??
 See [[pdi-breakdowns#Location]].
 I have---for some time now---
 been trying to figure out the purpose of the non-system breakdowns.
 [[location-vs-scope]]
 Perhaps there is another dichotomy
 in that an estimator may use the area classifications of the design
 or according to their own understanding of each term.
 For lack of a better example,
 whether a "101 - KITCHEN", without provisions for cooking,
 would be broken down under "Kitchen".
@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
 # 2026-01-07 10:42:??
 When I got to work today Art admonished a fellow estimator
 for not uploading _all_ of a project's drawings,
 even those they did not intend to take off, to Trimble Connect.
 Art suggested that the estimator should upload all the drawings,
 but only add them to LiveCount as needed.
 I take issue with the suggestion on principle
 since doing so would not benefit the estimator or their senior
 (if they aren't added, the estimator can do nothing with them),
 but would require not-insignificant effort.
 Effort that would ultimately benefit no one:---
 Trimble Connect's ham-fisted approach to version control
 means that the fewer times it must be used, the better.
 > I'm currently dealing with the headache of an estimate
 > where such caution was not applied.
 The probability that any construction will be performed
 according the drawings that we take off
 (or even their immediate successors)
 I suspect is slim to zero.
 That Ops would have the patience to add the revisions,
 fighting with Trimble Connect as they would be,
 I suspect is even less.
 > On my current project, after trying in vain to play by Trimble's rules,
 > I started by deleting all the drawings I could
 > (those without takeoff associated with them)
 > then reuploaded the revised set.
 > I'm confident that this would be the dominant strategy.
 ***
 It's curious to me that the possibility of scope revisions
 doesn't seem to be at the front of every estimator's mind
 when doing takeoff or considering process changes,
 like it was for my mentors and peers at Ace.
@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
 # 2026-01-07 12:13:??
 #occupational #topic/estimating #topic/organization
 Just now Jorge admonished another peer
 for using insulated wire for pool bonding,
 his rational was flawed beyond saving
 (something about the difference between bonding and grounding),
 but stemmed from a frustratingly common misunderstanding
 that our Accubid assemblies are intended to be an accurate list
 of the material to be installed.
 They are not.
 If they were intended to be accurate,
 there would need to be several times as many.
 They are a compromise between accuracy and estimator effort.
 It should be assumed that for common scope,
 at least one assembly should be acceptable as-is.
 Pool bonding is required for at least a quarter of our jobs.
 We have no bonding assemblies with bare wire.
 Therefore it must be assumed that it was determined
 that it would be acceptable to represent bare wire bonding with insulated wire items,
 because otherwise it would be necessary to have double the assemblies,
 or to expect estimators to substitute each size of wire
 everywhere bare was necessary.
 See [[realism-vs-instrumentalism]].
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
 # 2026-01-07 16:03:??
 #occupational #topic/estimating #topic/organization
 There is a palpable animosity for [[pdi-estimating#Bid Estimating|Bid]]
 in [[pdi-estimating#Construction Estimating (ConEst)|ConEst]],
 stemming---I believe---from an lack of buy-in on Bid's part.
 Their lack is easily explained by their [[estimating-culture#Incentives|incentive structure]]:
 Since throughput is systematically prioritized over accuracy,
 ConEst has a strictly antagonistic role
 because it slows down the bid process.
@@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
 # 2026-01-08 13:33:34
 ### 2100 Crystal Drive Takeoff Review
 #### Generators
 > [!failure]
 > Generators were erroneously broken down in switchgear.
 [[switchgear-takeoff#Generator|Generator]]
 #### Switchgear
 Switchgear cost comp
 "\\EgnyteDrive\Shared\Estimating\11 Bid Estimating Spreadsheets\Switchgear Pricing Tool Version 2 (2.02.2024) (Template) - Copy.xls"
 Includes
 * submetering
 * coordination study
 #### Composite Cleanup
 1 day per week
 $$
 \text{Average Weeks Per Month} =
 $$
 > It occurs to me I don't know all the rules of our calendar
 > [Gregorian calendar - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregorian_calendar)
 #### Temp Power
 $10,000 per [[heavy-equipment#Swing Stage Scaffolding|swing stage]]
 [[temp-power-takeoff]]
 #### Unit Typicals
 I asked Joel about using unit typicals as described in
 [[2025-12-19#2025-12-19 10:44]].
 He stated that would be acceptable.
@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
 # 2026-01-09 10:00:03
 ### 2100 Crystal Drive
 `#600 ? WHITE ?` had incorrect sort codes.
 #### Lighting Control
 I took off lighting per plans (E510)
 in spite of proposal stating "local control".
 Will have to be changed.
 #### Labor Factor
 Fire Alarm
 Switchgear
 Feeders
 Subfeeds
 Corridors
 Amenity
 Retail
 Units
 #### Fixtures
 > [!failure]
 > Several fixtures were erroneously based on NM cable.
 I built some fixtures with \#12/3 in areas with emergency lighting
 to be an unswitched hot.
 Joel is having me change them to \#12/2.
 #### Units
 > [!failure]
 > One unit type typical was missing `Area` quantities.
 > Another had no takeoff.
 #### Labor Plan
 $$
 \mathbb{E}\left[\frac{\text{Hours Per Unit}}{\text{Openings Per Unit}}\right] \approx .75~\text{Hours Per Opening}
 $$
 High Rise .110--.120 hr/sqft
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
 # 2026-01-09 12:00:??
 $$
 \begin{gather*}
 \frac{146097}{400} = 365.2425~\text{Days Per Year} \
 \frac{20871}{400} = 52.1775~\text{Weeks Per Year} \
 \frac{6957}{1600} = 4.348125~\text{Weeks Per Month}
 \end{gather*}
 $$
 $$
 \frac{365.2425~\text{Days Per Year}}{7~\text{Days Per Week}}
 = 52.1775~\text{Weeks Per Year}
 $$
 $$
 \frac{52.1775~\text{Weeks Per Year}}{12~\text{Months Per Year}}
 = 4.348125~\text{Weeks Per Month}
 $$
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
 # 2026-01-09 14:45:??
 [[bid-price-modeling]]
 Suppose a true cost model,
 accounting for all relevant information available at time $t$.
 $C(t)$ returns a distribution whose [scale](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scale_parameter)
 decreases with $t$, and $C(0)$ maps to a single value.
 $t>0$ is time until the final payment.
 > ![250](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/89/Log-normal-pdfs.png/960px-Log-normal-pdfs.png)
 >
 > Figure: lognormal distributions with the same [location](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Location_parameter)
 > varied by [scale](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scale_parameter).
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
 # 2026-01-09 16:28:??
 ### Occam's razor
 > [!info] Also Known As
 > * the principle of parsimony
 > * the law of parsimony
 recommends searching for explanations constructed with the smallest possible set of elements.
 Attributed to William of Ockham, 14th-century English philosopher and theologian.
 > _Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem_
 > ("Entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity")
 > "Of two competing theories, the simpler explanation is to be preferred."
 > [!quote] [[klugman-et-al_2019_loss-models#4.2 The Role of Parameters]]
 > The principle of parsimony states that the simplest model
 > that adequately reflects reality should be used.
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
 # 2026-01-11 09:00:??
 [[2026-01-09#2026-01-09 14:45]]
 [[bid-price-modeling]]
 [[decrease-in-sigma]]
@@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
 # 2026-01-11 11:00:??
 ![[favorite-quotes#"It Takes an Engineer to Build a Bridge that Barely Stands"]]
 The value that estimators provide for a contractor
 is in modeling project cost.
 If the goal were simply to present a number the cost will not exceed,
 than anyone could be an estimator.
 If the goal were only to present a reasonably accurate figure,
 with no other constraints,
 then there are few who in the world who couldn't,
 given infinite time for a single bid.
 The _true_ value of an estimator, then,
 is in their ability to model project cost _efficiently_, that is,
 to achieve _acceptable_ accuracy and precision as quickly as possible,---
 much as the engineer's is in building a bridge that _meets_ the requirements
 as cheaply as possible.
 Estimating "as accurately as possible"
 is akin to building a bridge "as strong as possible";
 it sounds nice, but ignores the actual objective of _optimal cost-efficiency_.
 I think that most estimators believe this to be the case,
 but, whatever they believe in mind, they believe in practice
 that the goal is to model cost as accurately and precisely as possible,
 _given the time allowed for bid_.
 Estimates tend always to take exactly as many weeks as until the bid due date,
 even those of significantly different turnaround but equal scope and complexity.
 This behavior is objectionable,
 since if an acceptable estimate _could_ be provided in two weeks,
 it is not cost-effective[^1] to allow it to take four.[^2]
 [^1]: "Cost" referring both to estimator salaries and the opportunity cost of declined bids.
 [^2]: Supposing a contractor maintained a modern portfolio theory styled record of estimates
    including pending bids, and projects ongoing and completed
    (each with confidence estimates),
    uncorrupted by [[estimating-culture#Incentives|perverse incentives]],
    they may have reasonable basis to set sliding standards for estimate precision
    to be specifically determined at consideration of the opportunity for bid
    according to current climate (i.e. their transient risk appetite).
    I believe my use of the absolute is still fair:
    No contractor is doing that, so they lack a competent measure of risk tolerance
    besides continuing to tolerate what they have historically.
 > [!important]
 > Objectionable as it is,
 > it is to be expected that estimators will use all time allowed them
 > when the standards for _acceptability_ are inadequately defined.
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
 # 2026-01-15 08:11:10
 Follow-up to [[2026-01-12#2026-01-12 12:23|2026-01-12 12:23]]
 Left Apartment at 05:30, at terminal around 06:10.
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
 # 2026-01-15 08:15:??
 [[2025-11-13#2025-11-13 08:19]]
 I spoke to a peer about this yesterday.
		`@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@`
							`# 2025-12-18 08:32:18`

							`[[uncertainty-in-construction-estimating]]`