Q-Material Take Off

[ford347]

I have a project for a housing track that consists of four models, plus some options etc. We are the GC on the project and I would really like to start using the material take-off tool and the like to help out with construction admin and I have a few questions.

When drawing walls for instance, it seems you may have to get a little more detailed when it comes to wall types and how you draw them. For example, say you have a two story wall on a split level home and the first story roof butt's into that second story wall. When drawing that roof and using that second story wall as my boundary, finished sketch, I opted to have that roof cut geometry of that second story wall. This wall has stucco on the face. So if you look in section, the stucco is still on the wall in the attic space of the first story roof structure. Now, this would obviously produce inaccurate results in a material take off. So what are others doing. Should I split this wall and edit sketches to follow the roof pitch in this area so my materials come out correctly in the take-off schedule? It would seem that is the only way to do it. I guess I'm looking for some validation that this approach is correct, and if you want to start using the take-off tool, your going to have to come to terms with taking a more detailed approach to drawing.

I tend to get everything very close to accurate building conditions anyway, but something like this I may let go because you'll never see it. Taking the detailed approach in this scenario just seems to be quite cumbersome, especially if anything needed to change, you would have to go back and edit sketches on your walls etc.

Anyway, I would just like to know what others approach is to modeling their buildings when you are anticipating using the information for construction admin and hoping someone may have some standards they developed when taking this approach. Hope this made some sense. It'll kick off the discussion anyway.:?

Josh

[Justin Marchiel]

i think you got it exactly. if you want really acurate quantities, you need to model it really accurately. we use the takeoffs to be close for budget purposes. i have materials for different thickness gwb, plywood, studs, etc, so you can look at individual material quantities. But for us, it does not pay to model so accurately. if it is 95% correct and use filled regions or such to get the details look right, it saves us lots of time.

Justin my 2 cents

Justin

[jeff.95551]

I'm with Justin. Field construction isn't rocket science. We look at the takeoffs to check the subs and keep them honest, and to do 'gut' checks during design (if I'm using 20% less materials, it should follow that I'm saving $). We don't have it all tied to a cost database or anything, so it is still pretty rough. We do, however, try to keep things relatively accurate, more for our own peace of mind than anything else - part of thinking through the project. Parapet walls, for example, are different walls than the ones below - cavity walls show gyp one side, unless they're rated, etc.

All the same, I'd probably work with the construction guys (whoever is using the information), let them understand how much extra work it is, and figure out together what it's worth. If you've got an exceptionally forward-thinking superintendent or framer, it might be worth pushing the boundaries a bit - then share with us how it goes...

[ford347]

I'd like to put some thought into the approach. I am a rough framer myself, that's what makes the CD's so fun!....maybe that was the wrong word;)


We look at the takeoffs to check the subs and keep them honest, and to do 'gut' checks during design
This is what I'm after. Getting close to verify quantities from our major subs on the job, stucco, gyp. etc. I don't want to get so detailed that we start to work backwards! I really utilize the scheduling feature as is when it comes to all the building components, i.e. plumbing fixtures, elec. fixtures etc. this really helps out across the board during bidding and CA. It is all the materials that I need to come up with a compromise on. Basically, I'm always looking to get more organized and improve how i'm doing things. So outlining this approach ahead of time is what I'm after, even if i don't come up with much.


All the same, I'd probably work with the construction guys (whoever is using the information), let them understand how much extra work it is, and figure out together what it's worth. If you've got an exceptionally forward-thinking superintendent or framer, it might be worth pushing the boundaries a bit - then share with us how it goes...
I'd be happy to share the outcome and progress throughout. I'm pretty excited about stepping it up a notch as is everybody in our firm involved in this one. And if you guys have any other suggestions on the subject, suggest away!

Thanks a lot for your advise guys!

Josh

[jeff.95551]

It sounds like you are the right team to take this on. I was a GC/Architect for a long time pre-Revit, and the human factors were always the biggest problem. We'd design systems that actually saved labor and materials and time, and the subs would always go out of their way to poke holes in the ideas. We'd get them to go along with us, and they'd always be suprised in the end. The problem I could never get around - the more thinking I did for the trades-people, the less they'd do themselves. If I gave them accurate takeoffs, then they wouldn't even bother looking at the drawings, let alone really study them. Even with really high-quality trades-people, the only thing that seemed to consistently work was to challenge them on the price. Then all of a sudden they'll take the time to study the drawings - really think through the project as a challenge, and come back with thoughtful responses - many of which I'd planted in the drawings to start with. I loved building, but the hand-holding (both clients and trades) got really old after a while.

Good Luck!

[ford347]

Jeff,


The problem I could never get around - the more thinking I did for the trades-people, the less they'd do themselves
That's a good observation. I started 'drafting' when I used to work for my one of my partners building public schools. We were the rough framers on them. State work can get really detailed when it comes to the framing end of things. I started using autocad to do a lot of field drawings, i.e. complex rake walls, complex pre-cut I-jst rafter packages with all fixed pieces etc. I found that there were a few guys who really appreciated it, but for the most part, some of the great carpenters on the job found it to be an insult and stopped 'being carpenters'. So I found I really had to earn their trust over time and become extremely proactive.....get out there and put it together with them and just build a new relationship with our guys.

My point there is, I understand it's a challenge and I think as a team we're ready for this kind of thinking, since we have implemented this process now for about 2 years. But most of it has been internal, not a lot of sub-contractor information like you are talking about, so I'm sure we'll have a curve to deal with there as well. Thanks for your input!

Josh