kg wise working with hourwise working
Excellent — now you are asking the economic structure of engineering services, not engineering itself.
This explains why pricing looks irrational, non-objective, and inconsistent across the PEB sector.
🧠 FIRST PRINCIPLE
There are three fundamentally different value models in construction engineering:
1️⃣ Time-Based (Hourly / Man-Month)
2️⃣ Output-Based (Per kg / Per drawing / Per model)
3️⃣ Outcome-Based (Per project / % of value / savings share)
Different companies use different models because they sell different things.
🕒 COMPANIES THAT CHARGE HOURLY — WHO & WHY
🏢 Typical Users
🇺🇸🇪🇺 Global Engineering Consultancies
Structural consultants
Design houses
Specialist engineering firms
Dispute experts
Technical auditors
Failure investigation teams
Project management consultants
Examples (types, not endorsements):
Large EPC consultants
Independent structural engineering firms
Forensic engineering firms
BIM coordination consultants
Specialist connection designers
💡 WHY HOURLY WORKS FOR THEM
✔ Work scope is uncertain
✔ Complexity varies wildly
✔ Expertise is scarce
✔ Client wants flexibility
✔ Risk of endless revisions
✔ Output cannot be standardized
🔬 What They Are Selling
👉 Brain time under uncertainty
Not drawings.
💰 Typical Hourly Range (India → International)
Indian senior specialist: ₹2,000–₹10,000/hour
International experts: $100–$350/hour
👍 Pros of Hourly Pricing
✔ Fair for unpredictable work
✔ Covers revision chaos
✔ Encourages deep thinking
✔ Suitable for crisis work
✔ Low risk for provider
👎 Cons
❌ Client uncertainty about total cost
❌ Requires trust
❌ Hard to budget
❌ Incentive misalignment (more hours = more revenue)
❌ Procurement departments dislike it
⚖️ COMPANIES THAT CHARGE PER KG — WHO & WHY
🏭 Typical Users
🇮🇳 PEB / Detailing Ecosystem
Steel detailers
Modeling firms
Shop drawing vendors
Offshore drafting teams
Tekla service providers
Fabrication-linked design teams
💡 WHY PER KG EXISTS
Steel projects scale roughly with tonnage.
More steel → more members → more drawings → more work.
It became a convenient proxy.
🧠 What They Are Selling
👉 Production capacity
Not expertise.
👍 Pros of kg Pricing
✔ Easy to compare vendors
✔ Predictable cost
✔ Simple contracts
✔ Scales with project size
✔ Favored by procurement teams
👎 Cons
❌ Ignores complexity
❌ Penalizes smart lightweight designs
❌ Encourages low-quality output
❌ Dangerous for unusual projects
❌ No coverage for revisions
❌ Encourages “minimum effort” behavior
🏆 WHO USES PROJECT / VALUE PRICING
🔥 Highest-end services
EPC prime consultants
Owner’s engineers
Risk auditors
PMCs
Claims consultants
Arbitration experts
💡 What They Sell
👉 Results, not effort
⚠️ WHY PRICING SYSTEMS REMAIN NON-OBJECTIVE
This is the most important part.
🧩 REASON 1 — Engineering Work Is Not Linear
Effort does NOT scale with tonnage.
Example:
| Project | Steel | Difficulty |
|---|---|---|
| Warehouse | 5,000 t | Easy |
| Airport roof | 5,000 t | Extremely complex |
Same kg → wildly different effort.
🧩 REASON 2 — Information Uncertainty
Early stages lack data.
Unknowns include:
Soil conditions
Equipment loads
Future changes
Coordination issues
Regulatory requirements
Pricing becomes guesswork.
🧩 REASON 3 — Revision Explosion
Your document emphasized this strongly.
Revisions can multiply effort without increasing steel.
🧩 REASON 4 — Human Expertise Variability
Two engineers may need:
10 hours vs 100 hours
for the same problem.
🧩 REASON 5 — Risk Transfer Games
Contracts shift risk between parties.
Pricing reflects who bears uncertainty.
🧩 REASON 6 — Procurement Culture
Indian construction procurement prioritizes:
👉 Lowest comparable number
Per-kg pricing satisfies that.
🧩 REASON 7 — Outputs Are Hard to Measure
Quality, correctness, and foresight are intangible.
You only know their value when failure occurs.
🧠 WHY HIGH-END SYSTEMS AVOID KG PRICING
Because they deal with:
✔ Risk
✔ Decisions
✔ Complexity
✔ Uncertainty
✔ Liability
None scale with weight.
🏗️ WHEN EACH MODEL IS IDEAL
🕒 Hourly — Best For
Concept design
Optimization
Troubleshooting
Audits
R&D
Complex structures
Litigation support
Crisis response
⚖️ Per kg — Best For
Repetitive industrial buildings
Mature designs
Stable scope
High-volume detailing
Production environments
🏆 Value / Project Pricing — Best For
Large complex projects
High risk exposure
Owner advisory
Lifecycle services
Turnaround projects
💰 WHY YOU SEE HYBRID CONTRACTS
Sophisticated firms combine models.
Example:
Lump sum for base scope
Hourly for changes
Bonus for performance
Penalties for delays
🧠 WHY YOUR “MONOPOLY SYSTEM” CAN COMMAND PREMIUM
Because it moves from:
❌ Production Pricing
➜ ✅ Risk Pricing
🔥 REAL ECONOMIC TRUTH
In construction:
👉 Risk = Currency
Whoever controls risk controls value.
🏆 FINAL SUMMARY
🕒 Hourly companies sell expertise under uncertainty
⚖️ kg companies sell production capacity
💎 Value-priced companies sell outcomes and risk reduction
If you want, I can next explain:
✅ Exact pricing strategy to move from ₹1/kg to ₹10/kg equivalent
✅ How to negotiate contracts with large PEB firms
✅ How EPC contracts structure risk pricing
✅ How to design hybrid billing models
✅ What makes clients agree to premium fees
Just say:
👉 “Explain premium contract strategy.”
In the steel detailing and PEB (Pre-Engineered Building) industry, the choice between Hourly Rates and Per Kg (Tonnage) Rates is a battle between Technical Complexity and Commercial Commodity.
Here is the breakdown of why different companies use these models, the pros and cons, and why these systems remain "non-objective" (subjective).
1. Who works with Hourly Rates and Why?
Hourly billing is the standard for International Firms (US/UK/Europe) and High-End Engineering Consultants.
Who: Tier-1 Structural Engineering firms, specialized BIM consultants (LOD 400/500), and firms handling complex industrial plants (Oil & Gas, Power Plants).
Why: These projects have high "Uncertainty Density." When a project requires 500+ RFIs (Requests for Information) or involves non-linear geometry, a fixed price is a suicide mission for the detailer.
The Logic: They sell Time and Expertise, not a physical product. They are "Knowledge Partners."
2. Who works with Per Kg (Tonnage) Rates and Why?
This is the dominant model for Indian PEB Fabricators and Mass-Market Detailers.
Who: Local PEB manufacturers, smaller detailing shops, and standard warehouse developers.
Why: It is a Commodity Model. In the Indian market, steel is viewed as a material purchase. Clients want to see a single line item: "Material + Fabrication + Detailing = ₹X per Kg."
The Logic: It simplifies budgeting for the client. If the building weighs 100 Tons, they know exactly what they pay, regardless of how many hours the detailer struggled with a complex connection.
3. Pros and Cons: The Tug-of-War
| Feature | Hourly Rates (Expert Model) | Per Kg Rates (Commodity Model) |
| Pros for Client | You pay only for actual work; perfect for evolving designs. | Budget certainty; easy to compare multiple quotes. |
| Cons for Client | Total cost is "Open-Ended"; requires high trust in the vendor. | Detailer may "rush" work to save hours, leading to site errors. |
| Pros for Vendor | Protected against "Revision Hell" and client-driven delays. | High profit on "simple/repetitive" sheds (Copy-Paste projects). |
| Cons for Vendor | Must prove every minute spent; high administrative overhead. | Huge Risk: If a 10-Ton project has 100 complex connections, you lose money. |
4. Why do these systems remain "Non-Objective"?
Even with advanced software like Tekla, the industry struggles with "Subjective Pricing" because of three Invisible Variables:
The "Revision Ripple" Effect: A single change in a column height in a 3D model isn't just one "task." It ripples through 50 secondary members, 200 bolts, and 10 drawing sheets. Current systems struggle to objectively quantify this "ripple labor."
Incomplete Input Data: Most projects start with "Semi-Finished" engineering. The detailer has to "assume" or "interpret" the design. This interpretation is a subjective human skill that cannot be easily measured in kilograms.
Human Error Liability: Two buildings can both weigh 500 Tons. One is a simple square shed; the other is a circular stadium. The Risk of Error in the stadium is 100x higher, but the "Kg" is the same. Because the consequence of a mistake is subjective (site shutdown vs. a small fix), the price remains a "judgment call."
How your system (QRS/WRS) changes this:
Your proposed "Technical Shield" and Monopoly ERP aim to make this objective by:
Quantifying Complexity: Assigning a "Weightage" to connections (e.g., a Moment Connection is 5x more "complex" than a Shear Connection).
Tracking Revision DNA: Using your APIs to show exactly how many entities were modified, turning a "subjective" revision into an "objective" data report.
By using LOD-wise conditions, you stop selling "Weight" and start selling "Certainty," which is the only way to move from the ₹1/kg trap to the ₹10/kg advisory tier.
In the steel detailing and PEB (Pre-Engineered Building) industry, the choice between Hourly Rates and Per Kg (Tonnage) Rates is a battle between Technical Complexity and Commercial Commodity.
Here is the breakdown of why different companies use these models, the pros and cons, and why these systems remain "non-objective" (subjective).
1. Who works with Hourly Rates and Why?
Hourly billing is the standard for International Firms (US/UK/Europe) and High-End Engineering Consultants.
Who: Tier-1 Structural Engineering firms, specialized BIM consultants (LOD 400/500), and firms handling complex industrial plants (Oil & Gas, Power Plants).
Why: These projects have high "Uncertainty Density." When a project requires 500+ RFIs (Requests for Information) or involves non-linear geometry, a fixed price is a suicide mission for the detailer.
The Logic: They sell Time and Expertise, not a physical product. They are "Knowledge Partners."
2. Who works with Per Kg (Tonnage) Rates and Why?
This is the dominant model for Indian PEB Fabricators and Mass-Market Detailers.
Who: Local PEB manufacturers, smaller detailing shops, and standard warehouse developers.
Why: It is a Commodity Model. In the Indian market, steel is viewed as a material purchase. Clients want to see a single line item: "Material + Fabrication + Detailing = ₹X per Kg."
The Logic: It simplifies budgeting for the client. If the building weighs 100 Tons, they know exactly what they pay, regardless of how many hours the detailer struggled with a complex connection.
3. Pros and Cons: The Tug-of-War
| Feature | Hourly Rates (Expert Model) | Per Kg Rates (Commodity Model) |
| Pros for Client | You pay only for actual work; perfect for evolving designs. | Budget certainty; easy to compare multiple quotes. |
| Cons for Client | Total cost is "Open-Ended"; requires high trust in the vendor. | Detailer may "rush" work to save hours, leading to site errors. |
| Pros for Vendor | Protected against "Revision Hell" and client-driven delays. | High profit on "simple/repetitive" sheds (Copy-Paste projects). |
| Cons for Vendor | Must prove every minute spent; high administrative overhead. | Huge Risk: If a 10-Ton project has 100 complex connections, you lose money. |
4. Why do these systems remain "Non-Objective"?
Even with advanced software like Tekla, the industry struggles with "Subjective Pricing" because of three Invisible Variables:
The "Revision Ripple" Effect: A single change in a column height in a 3D model isn't just one "task." It ripples through 50 secondary members, 200 bolts, and 10 drawing sheets. Current systems struggle to objectively quantify this "ripple labor."
Incomplete Input Data: Most projects start with "Semi-Finished" engineering. The detailer has to "assume" or "interpret" the design. This interpretation is a subjective human skill that cannot be easily measured in kilograms.
Human Error Liability: Two buildings can both weigh 500 Tons. One is a simple square shed; the other is a circular stadium. The Risk of Error in the stadium is 100x higher, but the "Kg" is the same. Because the consequence of a mistake is subjective (site shutdown vs. a small fix), the price remains a "judgment call."
How your system (QRS/WRS) changes this:
Your proposed "Technical Shield" and Monopoly ERP aim to make this objective by:
Quantifying Complexity: Assigning a "Weightage" to connections (e.g., a Moment Connection is 5x more "complex" than a Shear Connection).
Tracking Revision DNA: Using your APIs to show exactly how many entities were modified, turning a "subjective" revision into an "objective" data report.
By using LOD-wise conditions, you stop selling "Weight" and start selling "Certainty," which is the only way to move from the ₹1/kg trap to the ₹10/kg advisory tier.
Comments
Post a Comment