How I handle hundreds of thousands of steel stud/track material inputs in STACK
This was a problem I ran into when I first started building out my item and assembly library, so I wanted to share the solution that worked for me.
For context, we do metal stud framing and drywall for small to medium sized commercial projects. Most jobs have 10 to 20 different wall types, each with different heights and stud specifications such as gauge, web size, flange size, coating, and punch type.
At first, I assumed I needed to create items for every possible stud variation. Then I stepped back and did the math.
Take studs ranging from lengths of 8 feet to 24 feet, which is 17 possible lengths. Web sizes from 1 5/8 inch up to 14 inch. Flange sizes from 1 5/8 inch up to 3 inch. Gauges such as 25, 22, 20, 18, and 16. Coatings like G30, G60, and G90. Then add punch or no punch.
Even conservatively, if you assume 17 lengths, 9 common web sizes, 4 flange sizes, 5 gauges, 3 coatings, and 2 punch options, that equals 17 × 9 × 4 × 5 × 3 × 2 = 18,360 combinations. And that is being conservative.
If you consider that web and flange sizes can vary in small increments across their ranges, you can easily get into the hundreds of thousands of possible combinations. In one rough scenario, the math pushes past 600,000 variants.
Clearly, building that out as individual items or assemblies inside STACK would be unmanageable.
So instead of trying to model every combination as a separate item, I stepped back and looked at how studs are actually standardized. Metal studs follow naming conventions defined by SFIA and AISI.
For example, 362S162-33 breaks down as 362 meaning 3.62 inch web depth, commonly referred to as 3 5/8, S meaning stud, 162 meaning 1.62 inch flange, and 33 meaning mil thickness, approximately 20 gauge.
Another example, 600S200-54, means 600 is a 6 inch web depth, S is stud, 200 is a 2.00 inch flange, and 54 is mil thickness, approximately 16 gauge.
That single designation already captures web depth, flange size, and thickness in a standardized way that suppliers also use.
Once I realized that the naming convention already encodes the material information, the solution became simple. Instead of creating thousands of items, I use the standardized stud designation as the takeoff name. So my takeoffs might be named 362S162-33 or 600S200-54.
The takeoff name defines the material type. Then inside my wall assembly, I only rely on two key variables: stud height and stud spacing. The takeoff name identifies the stud specification, the assembly converts measured linear footage into stud and track quantities, and the items handle the cost.
This allows me to generate accurate material quantities and pricing for each wall type without exploding my item and assembly library.
Sometimes the best way to be efficient is to change how you look at the problem. It would be great to have every possible material variation fully built out and priced inside STACK, but at some point the juice just is not worth the squeeze.
Let me know what you think of this solution!
Commentaires
From an efficiency stand point, I feel like this is the way to go! Chance CBC
Chance CBC this is a really smart way to approach it 👏
There is absolutely nothing wrong with your method. If you are generating accurate quantities and pricing while saving time, that is what matters most. STACK is a very flexible tool, and there are multiple ways to structure your library depending on your workflow. The key is building a system that works for your team and is sustainable long term.
One small recommendation I would add:
Be sure to save your takeoffs to your library by clicking the three dots on the takeoff and selecting the save option. This allows you to reuse the same stud designation without recreating it each time. It also preserves the name and color, which keeps your takeoffs consistent across projects and speeds up your process.
You can learn more about saving and managing takeoffs in the Takeoff Library here:
https://support.stackct.com/hc/en-us/articles/47345131049875-Takeoff-Library
Over time, you will likely find that out of those 18,000 potential combinations, you consistently use only a fraction of them. That insight can help guide you in deciding whether it makes sense to formally build out certain high use studs as items later on. There is no need to overbuild everything upfront.
Also, keep in mind that if you do decide to expand your item list in the future, you can mass import items using our import template, which makes scaling much easier. You can learn more about that process here:
https://support.stackct.com/hc/en-us/articles/47345369918355-Import-My-Items-to-STACK
I hope this is helpful. I would love to hear your thoughts.
Vous devez vous connecter pour laisser un commentaire.