A cable schedule that still agrees with the maximum demand at Rev C.
Pump sizing in one engineer's workbook, duct sizing in another, cable sizing in a third inherited from someone's last company. Every fit-out, the same equipment loads are re-typed between them, rolled up by hand into the load schedules and the maximum demand, and submitted. Then the tenant layout changes — and by revision three the DB sheets and the incomer figure no longer agree. We build sizing tools where the load is entered once and every schedule downstream is generated.
Sound familiar?
The week, as it actually runs.
Sizing waits on personal sheets
The cable sizing workbook is one engineer's; the duct sheets are another's. When either is on site, sizing — and the quotation behind it — waits.
The same kW, typed four times
The equipment load goes into the cooling load calc, the cable calc, the DB schedule and the maximum demand — by hand, with four chances to diverge.
Schedules disagree by revision three
The DB sheets were revised; the roll-up was not. The maximum demand on the supply application no longer matches the schedules submitted behind it.
What we would build
What we would build: one model behind the schedule set.
M&E fit-out is not the work we came from, so we will say plainly what we can show: our own estimating engine and Quadron, our parametric CAD — both built in-house, both opened live on the first call. Parameters in, documents out, every number from deterministic code. An M&E sizing tool is the same pattern with your tables inside it: MS IEC 60364 derating factors, diversity factors, duct friction and fluid data — published in the tool, not buried in cell formulas nobody dares touch.
One validated tool — cable sizing that ends in the schedule, or a maximum demand builder that keeps every DB sheet and the incomer figure in one model — is Estimating & Engineering Software at RM 16,000, fixed. Acceptance is the Re-quote Test: past projects you choose, re-computed against what you actually submitted, with the tolerance agreed in writing before the build starts. If the calculations are sound and the leak is retyping between documents, one automated workflow is RM 8,000. Bring us your workbook and we will tell you which it is.
From the calculation library
One model behind every schedule — at every revision.
The ladder, in this room
What the three levels look like here.
Essential — RM 16,000
One engineer, one sizing tool. Loads in; the cable schedule with its derating trail and voltage drop out, in submission format. Proved against fit-outs you have already submitted.
Standard — RM 32,000
The whole design office in one model, with approval built in. Juniors add circuits, a senior signs off before the schedule set is issued, and every change flows up to the maximum demand.
Advanced — RM 80,000
Your main contractor logs in to the current schedule set — cable, DB and maximum demand at the same revision — instead of phoning to ask which PDF is the latest.
Start here
Bring us the workbook the sizing lives in.
Send one fit-out's schedule set — cable schedule, load schedules, maximum demand — and the workbooks that produced them. We'll walk the numbers from load to submission and tell you honestly whether one validated tool would pay for itself. The 20-minute review is free.
The workflow review is free, and you don't need to know the technical solution. Describe how the work happens today — that's the whole brief.