81 lines
1.5 KiB
Markdown
81 lines
1.5 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
id:
|
|
aliases: []
|
|
tags:
|
|
- topic/estimating
|
|
- topic/software
|
|
- type/philosophy
|
|
---
|
|
# Construction Estimating Software
|
|
|
|
## Why Not Excel?
|
|
|
|
### "Spreadsheet Syndrome"
|
|
|
|
Organizations are often hesitant to use excel for complex calculations due to:
|
|
|
|
* perceived risk of programming errors
|
|
* belief that specialized software is inherently superior
|
|
|
|
#### Rebuttal
|
|
|
|
* Estimating software is doing very simple math under the hood.
|
|
* Commercial software is not without risk of bugs.
|
|
* Existing implementations hardly qualify as specialized.
|
|
|
|
The idea that specialized software ought to be preferred over monolith spreadsheets is well-founded,
|
|
however, it is the case with construction estimating software
|
|
that the proprietary options are functionally identical to a particularly involved workbook,
|
|
except that they can not be modified to fit new use-cases.
|
|
|
|
### Material Pricing
|
|
|
|
Apps generally assume users will utilize material pricing services like Supplier Xchange for precise pricing.
|
|
|
|
## A Minimal Implementation
|
|
|
|
1. Resolve Takeoffs
|
|
2. Extend Items
|
|
3. Labor Extension
|
|
|
|
Suppose a minimal
|
|
|
|
```json
|
|
[
|
|
{
|
|
"type": "takeoff",
|
|
"attributes": {
|
|
"length": 20
|
|
},
|
|
"assemblies": [
|
|
{
|
|
"item": "EMT Conduit",
|
|
"factor": 1
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"item": "EMT Connector",
|
|
"factor": 1
|
|
},
|
|
]
|
|
}
|
|
]
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
```json
|
|
{
|
|
"attributes": {
|
|
},
|
|
"products": [
|
|
{
|
|
"manufacturer": ""
|
|
}
|
|
]
|
|
}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Innovative Concepts
|
|
|
|
* [[estimating-as-code]]
|
|
* [[estimating-ergonomics]]
|
|
* [[estimating-dimensionality]]
|