76 lines
2.1 KiB
Markdown
76 lines
2.1 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
id: 2025-12-10T10:45:19-0500
|
|
title: 2025-12-10 10:45:19
|
|
tags:
|
|
- occupational/takeoff
|
|
- status/draft
|
|
- topic/ambiguity
|
|
- topic/transparency
|
|
daily: "[[2025-12-10]]"
|
|
---
|
|
# 2025-12-10 10:45:19
|
|
|
|
## ConEst Lighting Controls Meeting Notes
|
|
|
|
Related: [[lighting-controls-takeoff]]
|
|
|
|
### Minutes
|
|
|
|
2025-12-10 08:30--10:00
|
|
|
|
Objective: Discuss lighting control systems
|
|
|
|
***
|
|
|
|
A primary reason for the discussion was presented:
|
|
|
|
> [!example] ^ex
|
|
> While putting together a large garden style project
|
|
> [[pdi-bid-estimating|Bid]] received a quote for lighting control
|
|
> at over one million dollars.
|
|
> Believing it [[gold-plating|overengineered]],
|
|
> Bid proposed ~$150,000 for lighting control "per code".
|
|
> The contract was awarded on those terms.
|
|
> When the project team received a quote for a "per code" system,
|
|
> the total was ~$600,000.
|
|
|
|
***
|
|
|
|
Ultimately the responsibility is ConEst's
|
|
to resolve discrepancies between:
|
|
* applicable code
|
|
* design intent
|
|
* Bid proposal intent
|
|
* PDR quote intent
|
|
|
|
***
|
|
|
|
It was erroneously suggested that lighting control conductors
|
|
may be run with their circuit conductors if both are 600V insulated.[^1]
|
|
|
|
[^1]: This is a violation of [[nfpa-70_725_control-circuits#725.136(I) Other Applications.|NEC 725.136(I)(1)]].
|
|
See [[lighting-controls#0-10V Dimming|0-10V Dimming]].
|
|
|
|
### My Thoughts
|
|
|
|
The lighting control problem is misunderstood.
|
|
It's true that some technical training would be beneficial to ConEst estimators,
|
|
but root of the problem has nothing to do with lighting control.
|
|
|
|
When I heard [[#^ex]], where lighting control went wrong
|
|
and costed a job half a million in profit,
|
|
what I took away was that we sold high-risk scope
|
|
without knowing what was required _and without qualification_.
|
|
|
|
***
|
|
|
|
Others have suggested creating new assemblies grouped by manufacturer,
|
|
which I'm not a fan of.
|
|
While it's true that similar implementations
|
|
_are_ different between manufacturers,
|
|
the differences are trivial for our purposes.
|
|
More to the problem,
|
|
such an arrangement would inevitably lead to confusion
|
|
(i.e. taking off the wrong brand
|
|
because its contents happen to match better in a specific instance).
|