The fact that successful contractors do not tolerate waste almost goes without saying. Why, then, would a firm tolerate an estimator spending 20 hours to complete a what could be a 10 hour task -- or ignore the ability to quantify the contract amount 5 or 10 times faster with a CAD-based takeoff tool than on paper? Often, management feels unequipped to deal with productivity issues, or is too busy to investigate claims that sound as far-fetched as a 90% reduction in takeoff time.

Let’s look at the time lost during the estimating process that could be removed using CAD takeoff tools. In keeping our discussion in the context of the real construction world, it should be said that:

• an installer who spends 2 hours to complete a 1 hour work package will be immediately corrected
• even a company truck driver who occasionally takes twice the expected time to deliver a shipment will be dealt with sooner than later.

Instead of focusing on “best case” usage scenarios, we’ll look at a mainstream pre-engineered example from a conservative financial perspective. In the case of of duplex receptacles, the estimator equipped with CAD takeoff tools would:

1. Start by “windowing” (encircling) the applicable interior areas of the building, and link all of the duplex symbols found to a 20A 125V SG DUP REC FLUSH assembly in his estimating software. Result: 643 duplexes are instantly colored as counted. Time spent: 4 minutes, compared with 15 minutes if the same task were to be done on a paper drawing. Visual effect: many duplexes remain obviously uncounted, indicated by the distinct color of the counted duplexes.
2. He/she then windows several of the building perimeter walls, and instructs the system to link all of these duplex symbols to a 20A 125V DUP REC SURFACE assembly. Result: 168 more duplexes are colored as counted. Time spent: 3 minutes, compared with 5 minutes performing the same task on a paper drawing. Visual effect: some duplexes still remain uncounted.
3. He proceeds to “cherry-pick” 13 of the remaining duplexes, linking them to an assembly of 20A 125V SG IG REC FLUSH. Time spent: 3 minutes, compared with the same time performing this task on a paper drawing. Visual effect: only a few duplexes indicate as uncounted.
4. Then, after a review, the estimator makes the decision to quantify all remaining duplexes as a 20A 125V SG GFI REC FLUSH, instructing the CAD takeoff application to do exactly that. Result: all remaining duplexes (19 more) are colored as counted. Time spent: 2 minutes, compared with 4 minutes performing the same task on a paper drawing. Visual effect: all duplexes now show as counted.
5. The final visual review (when the estimator asks, “is this task really complete before I go onto the next one?”), takes 0 minutes in CAD because the color tool is “crystal clear,” but 4 minutes on paper, spent scrutinizing the less obvious human markings for thoroughness.  

The total work quantified was 843 duplexes, which were colored and sent to the company estimating database for price extension. This work took 31 minutes by hand plus normal work interruptions; whereas the same work in CAD takes 12 minutes plus proportionally fewer interruptions. Perhaps more importantly, the tool is able to guarantee that the quantity results are equal to what the designer inserted in the drawing. Such accuracy cannot be expected in the world of paper media.

In the case of drawings which are designed or detailed by the contractor, it is more convenient to place the symbols with distinct names, which in effect pre-specifies the different job assemblies (although the symbols do not visually appear any different from each other). In this manner, the above scenario would be quantified in approx. 5 minutes, resulting in quantification 10 times faster than paper.

Some contractors are unaware that a CAD takeoff system also has the ability to measure branch, feeders, cabling, special raceways or ductwork on pre-engineered drawings. The tool provides the ability to measure routings whether diagonal (like slab work) or perpendicular (in walls or on walls), and to add the exact amount of rise and drop desired on each end. This is much faster than a human using a “wheel” on paper, attempting to keep at right angles to building lines, and also eliminates the guesswork of rolling “approximately this much” past each end for the up/down. Here again are the results from a pre-engineered scenario:

1. The estimator starts by cherry-picking the branch homerun destinations, linking them to an assembly of 1/2" EMT 5/12 KON-CLIP, with an appropriate rise and drop for each homerun. Result: 776 feet measured. Visual effect: only the homeruns have been colored as measured.
2. He/she then cherry-picks (or windows) the remaining occurrences of 1/2" EMT 5/12 METAL STUD (non-homeruns). Result: 551 more feet measured.
3. He then windows the areas of circuitry desired to be measured as 1/2" EMT 4/12 METAL STUD. Result: 819 feet measured. Visual effect: a significant amount of circuitry obviously remains unmeasured, indicated by the color of the measured circuitry.
4. He then chooses other large areas of circuitry as 1/2" EMT 4/12 KON-CLIP, with an adder which allows for routing into the ceiling (7’ rise and 7’ drop). Result: 1,064 feet measured. Visual effect: much circuitry still remains unmeasured.

1. After visually reviewing, the estimator decides to measure all remaining circuitry as 1/2" EMT 3/12 METAL STUD, with a rise/drop for in-the-wall routing, which he specifies as 18” on each end. Result: 4,637 feet measured. Visual effect: out of several hundred circuit segments, it is clear that not a single piece of circuitry remains unmeasured.

The total work accomplished was 7,847 feet of branch quantified, colored and sent to the job database for price extension. This work would have taken 64 minutes by hand (plus normal interruptions); whereas the work by CAD took 31 minutes (plus fewer interruptions).

In a common scenario using drawings designed or redesigned by the contractor, it is more practical to use names for circuitry configurations, such as 3#12, 4#12, etc., which pre-specifies the different job assemblies for the circuitry. In this manner, the above scenario would be quantified in approx. 12 minutes, resulting in quantification 5 times faster than paper.

When dealing with poorly or partially designed drawings, the human simply takes the same actions which he/she would on a corresponding paper drawing of the same design quality, yet still with increased speed and greater accuracy than possible on paper. Additionally, when changes occur to the design, the estimator instantly knows whether or not any added symbols or routings have already been quantified, solely by observing the takeoff color of the added objects.

While a recent Contractor Profile study by Electrical Contractor magazine shows that CAD usage has more than doubled in our industry in the last 2 years, many do not realize that tools such as CAD takeoff systems are largely responsible for this trend. CAD quantification also provides the means to apply specifications-driven takeoffs, meaning that near-identical work packages or installation conditions can now be saved and applied as “templates” for application to new or similar projects produced by the same designer or specifier.

Lastly, those firms engaged in proactive project management also use these tools to obtain progress drawings and/or to track progress estimates in order to more effectively prevent job losses -- and to more accurately forecast job profitability.

For information on Accubid’s CAD-based estimating solutions, phone 1-800-ACCUBID (222-8243) or visit www.accubid.com.