Data in: FieldFlo is not a standalone AI counter. It ingests from the tools your estimators already use — Bluebeam brings the measurements, the hazmat survey brings the material inventory. FieldFlo brings the intelligence that connects them.
Data Sources
Two data streams feed every estimate: the Bluebeam AI takeoff (plans-derived quantities) and the hazmat survey (ACM inventory, friability, and surveyor caveats). FieldFlo parses both, reconciles them, and flags divergences before scope inference begins.
BB
Bluebeam AI Takeoff
Plans-derived quantities · Auto-parsed via Bluebeam integration
✓ IMPORTED
Lincoln_Office_Building_Demo_v1.bfx
AI-measured quantities from plans
Floor tile (VAT)
12,400 SF
3 floors · room-by-room polygons
Pipe insulation
1,850 LF
Mixed dia. · mech rooms + above-ceiling
Spray fireproofing
8,600 SF
2nd floor structural steel
Pipe fittings (counted)
288 EA
Elbows, tees, valves, flanges
Bluebeam measured it. FieldFlo will validate it. Quantities are cross-checked against your historical project data for variance patterns and scope gaps before you proceed. If your past jobs ran consistently higher than these measurements, you'll see why on the next tab.
⚠
Hazmat Survey
AHERA-compliant ACM inventory · AI-extracted
✓ PARSED
Lincoln_Building_ACM_Survey_2026-05-10.pdf
Extracted ACM inventory
Material
Location
ACM %
Friable
Survey qty
9×9 VAT floor tile
Floors 1–3, all office spaces & corridors
7%
Non-friable
12,400 SF
Pipe insulation (woven)
Mech rooms + above-ceiling
⚠ Limited above-ceiling sampling
⚠ Limited above-ceiling sampling
16%
Friable
1,850 LF
Spray fireproofing
2nd floor structural steel, above T-bar ceiling
4%
Friable
8,600 SF
Pipe fittings (elbows, tees)
All mechanical spaces
18%
Friable
~280 EA
Surveyor note (AI-extracted): "Sampling was limited in above-ceiling areas on floors 2 and 3 due to access restrictions. Additional ACM may be present in mechanical chases and pipe runs above the T-bar ceiling grid."
This caveat triggers a scope warning — flagged in Tab 2 (Scope Inference) and auto-applied as a +10% quantity adjustment on pipe insulation in Tab 3 (Takeoff).
FieldFlo reconciliation — before scope inference begins
Bluebeam quantities vs. hazmat survey quantities vs. your historical patterns
✓ Quantities aligned
Bluebeam measurements match hazmat survey quantities on all 4 line items. Fitting count variance (288 vs. ~280 EA) is within tolerance — no action needed.
⚠ 2 survey gaps detected
Survey doesn't mention window caulking or door gaskets. Bluebeam had no markups for either — but your historical data shows these as high-probability ACM in 1968-era buildings. Flagged for review in Tab 2.
§ NESHAP threshold crossed
Pipe (1,850 LF), fireproofing (8,600 SF), and tile (12,400 SF) all exceed NESHAP thresholds. 10-day notification required. Auto-drafted and flagged — see Tab 2.
The wedge: A horizontal AI takeoff tool reads the survey and reports what it says. FieldFlo reads the survey and tells you what it doesn't say — based on what your last 14 projects in 1960s commercial construction actually contained.
Scope Inference
Survey received and read. AI cross-referenced against your firm's last 14 projects in 1960s-era commercial buildings. Below are the materials you'll likely encounter that the survey doesn't mention, plus regulatory thresholds this project crosses.
AI Findings — 6 items requiring estimator review
Grounded in your firm's 14 similar prior jobs · Last updated 2 minutes ago
HIGH CONFIDENCE
0 of 6 findings decided
0 accepted
0 modified
0 rejected
-
+Add: Mastic under floor tile — 12,600 SF9×9 VAT floor tile from 1968 construction always has cutback adhesive (black mastic) underneath. Removal rate is ~35 SF/hr — 4× slower than the tile itself. Missing this is the most common error on this work type.Source: 11 of your 11 prior projects with 9×9 VAT in 1960s buildings had positive mastic. Underbid risk if omitted: ~$30,000–$40,000.Modified: ·Rejected:Adjust the recommendationWhy are you rejecting this finding?Not applicable to this buildingAlready covered elsewhereWill confirm at site visitOwner confirmed not present✓ Accepted · added to bid✎ Modified✕ Rejected
-
!Survey gap: Window caulking not testedThe survey doesn't mention window caulking. In your last 14 projects with 1968-era construction, window caulking was positive for ACM in 11 of them (78%). Either: (a) add testing to scope, (b) include explicit exclusion language in the proposal.Recommendation: Exclude. Sample proposal language available.Modified: ·Rejected:Adjust the recommendationWhy are you rejecting this finding?Building was gut-renovated post-1990Already covered by GC scopeWill confirm at site visitOwner confirmed not present✓ Accepted · exclusion drafted✎ Modified✕ Rejected
-
!Survey gap: Door gaskets not mentionedSame era buildings: door gaskets positive in 9 of your 14 prior projects (64%). Recommend explicit exclusion if not in scope.Modified: ·Rejected:Adjust the recommendationWhy are you rejecting this finding?Doors already removedAlready covered by GC scopeWill confirm at site visitOwner confirmed not present✓ Accepted · exclusion drafted✎ Modified✕ Rejected
-
§Regulatory: NESHAP notification required (10-day)Project crosses NESHAP thresholds on three dimensions: 1,850 LF pipe insulation (threshold: 260 LF), 8,600 SF fireproofing (threshold: 160 SF), and 12,400 SF floor tile. NESHAP notification due 10 working days before start — schedule earliest start date as day 11 from contract award.Auto-drafted notification ready for review.Modified: ·Rejected:Adjust the recommendationNESHAP is a federal requirement and cannot be rejected. Use Modify to file emergency notification instead.✓ Accepted · notification queued✎ Modified✕ Rejected
-
↗Survey caveat: "Limited sample locations above ceilings"This phrase appeared in 3 of your last projects. Actual above-ceiling pipe quantities came in at 108%, 112%, and 115% of survey. Suggest a +10% takeoff adjustment on pipe insulation — applied automatically on Tab 2.Modified: ·Rejected:Adjust the quantity bufferApply % adjustment to pipe insulation1,850 LF survey → 2,035 LF (+10%) · shown in Takeoff tabWhy are you rejecting this adjustment?Surveyor had full ceiling accessUnit-price contract — protected on quantityBid is already padded by contingencyWill adjust after site visit✓ Accepted · adjustment applied✎ Modified✕ Rejected
-
+Add: Ceiling grid removal — 8,600 SFTo access spray fireproofing on structural steel, the 2nd floor ceiling grid must come down. Not in the survey, not in the spec — but mechanically required. This is included as a separate line item with a note for the GC.Your last 4 fireproofing projects all required this; none had it in the spec.Modified: ·Rejected:Adjust the recommendationWhy are you rejecting this finding?GC will handle grid removalCeiling grid already removedDemo contractor scopeWill confirm at site visit✓ Accepted · added to bid✎ Modified✕ Rejected
The wedge: Production rates are not generic industry numbers. Every rate below is grounded in your own prior projects. Click any rate to see exactly which jobs it came from.
Takeoff & Production Rates
Quantities adjusted from survey using your historical variance patterns. Production rates grounded in 11–14 of your firm's prior projects, with confidence intervals and outlier flags.
Scope item
Quantity
Adj.
Rate
Hrs
Floor tile — 9×9 VAT, 3 floors
Measured room-by-room from architectural plans
📐 Plans
12,600 SF
New qty:
SF
+1.6%
130 SF/hr
why?
97 hrs
›
Production rate: 130 SF/hr · floor tile, ride-on scraper
11 SIMILAR JOBS
Project
Substrate
Actual rate
Distribution
Henderson School (3 floors)
Aug 2024
Concrete + radiant outlier
105 SF/hr
Riverbend Medical Office
Mar 2025
Concrete
128 SF/hr
Old Main Library
Sep 2025
Concrete
135 SF/hr
Pinewood Plaza
Jan 2026
Concrete
142 SF/hr
Sterling Bank Tower
Mar 2026
Concrete
158 SF/hr
Recommendation: 130 SF/hr. Median of your last 11 jobs (105–158 SF/hr, σ = 16.4). The Henderson outlier was radiant-heating-embedded slab; Lincoln has no radiant heating per plans. Excluding that outlier, your average is 134 SF/hr — 130 used to remain conservative.
FieldFlo suggested
130 SF/hr
Your firm avg (11 jobs)
134 SF/hr
Your rate: SF/hr
Justification ★ required
Mastic — under all floor tile AI-added
Not in survey · Added automatically per scope inference
✦ AI-inferred
12,600 SF
New qty:
SF
+matched
35 SF/hr
why?
360 hrs
›
Production rate: 35 SF/hr · cutback mastic, chemical emulsifier
9 SIMILAR JOBS
Cutback mastic is the slowest line on this project and the most commonly underestimated. Your firm's average across 9 prior projects: 33 SF/hr, range 28–42. The Henderson School project ran 28 SF/hr — thicker mastic. For a moderate-mastic 1968 building, 35 SF/hr is the median. This single line item accounts for ~$21,000 of your labor cost.
FieldFlo suggested
35 SF/hr
Your firm avg (9 jobs)
33 SF/hr
Your rate: SF/hr
Justification ★ required
Pipe insulation — straight runs
Survey: 1,850 LF · Adjusted +10% for above-ceiling unknowns
🔍 Survey + adj.
2,035 LF
New qty:
LF
+10%
5 rate tiers
why?
600 · 860 · 575 LF + fittings
651 hrs
5 tiers combined
›
Pipe insulation: split into 5 rate tiers
14 SIMILAR JOBS
A single blended rate for pipe insulation is the most expensive estimating mistake in this work type. Your firm's data shows 5× variance by diameter and accessibility. Split applied automatically:
Tier
Quantity
Rate
Hours
Basement, floor-level, mixed dia.
600 LF
18 LF/hr
Above-ceiling, 2"–4" dia.
860 LF
12 LF/hr
Above-ceiling, 6"–8" dia.
575 LF
6 LF/hr
Standard fittings (elbows, tees)
300 EA
1.0 hr/EA
Complex fittings (valves, flanges)
75 EA
2.0 hr/EA
Spray fireproofing — 2nd floor ceiling
⏳ Provisional
Survey: 8,600 SF · Site visit required before finalizing
⚠ Pending site visit
8,600 SF
New qty:
SF
+0%
60/40 split
why?
~172 hrs
›
Spray fireproofing: 60% loosely bonded / 40% tightly bonded
SITE VISIT REQUIRED
The most variable rate on this project. Your last 8 fireproofing projects ran an average of 12% over estimate, with adhesion underestimation as the primary cause. The Loop tab will flag a recommended adjustment based on this pattern. Until you do the site visit, the 60/40 split is the median for 1968 construction.
Adhesion tier
SF
Rate
Hours
Loosely bonded (scrape + bag)
5,160 SF
90 SF/hr
57 hrs
Tightly bonded (chemical release)
3,440 SF
30 SF/hr
115 hrs ⚠
📋 Site visit checklist — confirm before locking this row
Adhesion test: 5 random pull-tests per 1,000 SF (record lb/SF)
Document substrate: concrete deck vs. metal deck (different release rates)
Note any prior disturbance areas (blisters, staining, prior repairs)
Confirm overhead access clearance (affects crew size and scaffolding cost)
Update 60/40 split in system after tests — row auto-recalculates
Current split
60% loose / 40% tight
Tight % (overrides)
hrs recalculate live
Tight bonded %: %
Justification ★ required
Ceiling grid — 2nd floor suspended AI-added Scope inferred →
Not in survey · Inferred from scope: FP removal exposes suspended grid requiring demo
✦ AI-inferred
2,400 SF
New qty:
SF
+matched
45 SF/hr
why?
53 hrs
›
Production rate: 45 SF/hr · suspended ceiling grid demo
6 SIMILAR JOBS
This row was auto-generated by scope inference. Fireproofing removal on the 2nd floor requires dismantling the suspended ceiling grid above the work zone — an item typically missed when estimating from survey alone. Your 6 comparable grid-demo jobs average 44 SF/hr (range 38–52). FieldFlo used 45 SF/hr as the conservative median. If the grid is already slated for demo under a separate contract, remove this row.
↩ Scope chain: Tab 2 (Scope Inference) detected suspended T-bar ceiling grid on 2nd floor via Bluebeam markup layer "A-Reflected Ceiling Plan." That detection triggered this row. View scope inference →
FieldFlo suggested
45 SF/hr
Your firm avg (6 jobs)
44 SF/hr
Your rate: SF/hr
Justification ★ required
The wedge: Modifiers compound multiplicatively, not additively. And "Occupied Building" isn't one modifier — it's four separate cost drivers. Missing any one of them is how the Cobalt Industries job ran $68K over.
Project Modifiers
Conditions detected from your data sources are pre-flagged. Toggle what applies and answer the sub-questions — bid updates in real time with correct compounding logic and your firm's own historical rates where they differ from defaults.
Contract & pricing conditions
Prevailing Wage / Davis-Bacon
Public sector or government-funded project
+19% on bid
Your firm avg on PW jobs: +21% (5 jobs)
Insurance-Referred
Adjuster involvement, Xactimate format required
+2–3% direct, margin compression risk
Your firm avg margin on ins. jobs: 6.2% vs 10% standard
Multi-Site Program
Part of a 4+ site portfolio with same GC
−5% blended (mobilization savings)
Your firm avg efficiency gain: −7% on site 3+
Emergency Response
T&M pricing, <48hr mobilization required
+30–50% on bid
Your firm avg on emer. jobs: +44% (3 jobs)
Override: Prevailing Wage multiplier
FieldFlo suggested
+19%
Your firm avg (5 PW jobs)
+21%
Your value:
% on labor
Justification ★ required
Override: Insurance-Referred overhead
FieldFlo suggested
+15%
Context
Includes Xactimate compliance overhead
Your value:
% on other costs
Justification ★ required
Override: Multi-Site discount
FieldFlo suggested
−5%
Your firm avg (site 3+)
−7%
Your value:
% blended (negative = discount)
Justification ★ required
Override: Emergency Response premium
FieldFlo suggested (firm avg)
+44%
Range observed (3 jobs)
+30% to +50%
Your value:
% on labor
Justification ★ required
Occupied building conditions
Occupied Building
Tenants or occupants present during work
+30% base on bid — answer sub-questions below for full picture
Your firm avg across occupied jobs: +34% — sub-conditions are why
Override: Occupied Building base multiplier
FieldFlo suggested
+30%
Your firm avg (occupied jobs)
+34%
Your base value:
% on labor (base only — sub-conditions add on top)
Justification ★ required
What does "occupied" mean on this job? Check all that apply.
Night / weekend shifts only
Access restricted to outside business hours — typically 6pm–6am weekdays or weekends
✓ Included in base +30%
Daily scaffold teardown required
Tenants or building management require all scaffolding cleared before business hours each day — adds setup/teardown labor every shift
+ $6,960 additional — NOT in base modifier
HVAC shutdown window constraints
Work must pause around HVAC schedule — creates forced idle time and affects containment pressure cycles
+ $3,200 scheduling overhead
Elevator / hoist access restricted
Material lifts limited to specific windows — crew must stage materials manually outside those windows, adding crew-hours per day
+ $3,500 staging overhead
⚠ Cobalt Industries pattern: In Jul 2025, the occupied modifier was on — but daily teardown wasn't checked. That alone added 120 unpriced hours (+$6,960). It was the single largest controllable miss on that job. View that record →
Site & access conditions
Healthcare / ICRA
Active patient care in adjacent areas
+20% on bid (ICRA Class II)
Your firm avg across HC jobs: +22% (3 jobs)
ICRA class
Radiant Heating in Slab
Embedded tubing in concrete — restricts tile scraper speed and blade pressure
Tile rate: 130 → 105 SF/hr (+$1,340 labor)
Henderson School ran 105 SF/hr vs 130 est. — +228 hrs, $13,200
Air Monitoring: Contractor-Provided
Owner is NOT providing CIH and air monitoring — contractor must supply
+$22,000 direct (CIH + equipment + sampling)
Lincoln metadata shows owner-provided — leave off unless confirmed otherwise
Phased Access
Project requires multiple separate mobilizations
Off — single mobilization
Click to set 2–3 phases
Each mob/demob adds $4,250 overhead — price it in
Override: Healthcare / ICRA multiplier
ICRA Class II suggested
+20%
Your firm avg (3 HC jobs)
+22%
Note: this overrides the ICRA class selector above. Use the selector for class-based adjustments; use this only if you have a project-specific rate.
Your value:
% on labor
Justification ★ required
Override: Radiant Heating labor penalty
FieldFlo suggested
+$1,340
Context (Henderson School)
+$13,200
Full slab radiant, 18,200 SF
Your value: $
direct labor
Justification ★ required
Override: Air Monitoring cost
FieldFlo standard
+$22,000
Includes
CIH time · equipment rental · sampling costs
Your value: $
direct cost
Justification ★ required
⚠ Compound effect: Prevailing Wage + Occupied. These don't add — they multiply. The night-shift premium applies to the already-elevated prevailing wage rate.
Naive: +19% (PW) + 30% (occ) = +49% | Correct: $58 × 1.345 × 1.20 × 1.10 → +56%
⚠ Compound effect: Prevailing Wage + Healthcare/ICRA. These also compound. ICRA decontamination protocols extend labor hours at the elevated PW rate — a spreadsheet adds them.
Naive: +19% + 20% = +39% | Correct: labor × 1.345 × 1.20 → +61% on labor line
⚠ Occupied is on — daily teardown is unchecked. This is the Cobalt pattern. If there's any chance of daily teardown requirements, check it now. It's easier to walk it back after the site visit than to eat the cost.
Direct labor (3,783 hrs)$219,414
Equipment$82,250
Materials$42,706
Waste disposal$27,030
Other direct$27,884
Direct cost subtotal$399,284
Overhead (8%)$31,943
Profit (10%)$43,123
Contingency (7%)$33,148
Final bid price$507,498
Base scenario · No modifiers active
The wedge — and the moat: Bluebeam, Togal, and STACK can show you AI takeoff. None of them can show you how your own estimates have performed and adjust the next bid based on what they learned. This is the loop.
The Loop · Your firm's estimating intelligence
Your fireproofing estimates have run 12% over for 8 projects in a row.
The pattern is statistically significant (p = 0.03). The root cause is consistent. We've adjusted your default assumptions for this project — but you have the last word.
Estimate vs. Actuals — Last 8 fireproofing projects
Variance in labor hours, sorted chronologically. Negative = under budget. Positive = over budget.
Variance attribution — Why the 12% gap exists
FieldFlo cross-references your daily field reports to attribute variance to specific causes.
Recommendation for Lincoln: shift assumed adhesion split from 60/40 → 65/35
Across your last 8 fireproofing projects, the actual loose/tight split has averaged 54/46 — meaning more "tightly bonded" material than your default assumption of 60/40. This adjustment alone moves the fireproofing labor estimate by +97 hours (+$5,626), which protects margin without inflating the bid uncompetitively. The pattern's p-value is 0.03.
Until you complete the site visit, this is FieldFlo's recommended starting assumption for this building era. After the site visit, the assumption will be locked or adjusted based on what you observe.
Until you complete the site visit, this is FieldFlo's recommended starting assumption for this building era. After the site visit, the assumption will be locked or adjusted based on what you observe.
Adhesion split actuals — last 8 fireproofing projects
| Project | Year built | Tight % (actual) | vs. 40% assumed | Labor delta |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eastlake Med Plaza | 1971 | +4 pts | +42 hrs | |
| Park Ave Tower | 1978 | +2 pts | +16 hrs | |
| Henderson School | 1968 | +16 pts | +134 hrs | |
| Civic Center West | 1972 | +4 pts | +31 hrs | |
| Cobalt Industries HQ | 1974 | +6 pts | +62 hrs | |
| Riverbend Medical | 2001 | +1 pt | +8 hrs | |
| Pinewood Plaza | 1969 | +14 pts | +112 hrs | |
| Sterling Bank Tower | 1975 | +3 pts | +31 hrs | |
| Average (8 jobs) | — | 46% tight | +6 pts | +55 hrs avg |
Every single job came in tighter than the 40% assumption. Pre-1970 construction (Henderson, Pinewood) runs significantly worse. The recommended 65/35 split reflects the 8-job trend adjusted for Lincoln's 1968 era.
Enter your own adhesion split
Loose bonded
%
/
%
must sum to 100
Adjust the split above to see the bid impact vs. the 60/40 base assumption.
Reason for override (optional — saved to audit trail)
Change Order defense — auto-drafted from your bid history
Every bid version is locked and reconciled against actuals. Takeoff diffs become CO defense language. When a GC disputes scope, the audit trail is one click away.
"On 2026-05-19 the GC issued Addendum #2 adding 300 LF of pipe insulation in the basement east mechanical alcove. Our base bid (v1, dated 2026-05-18) included 2,035 LF of pipe insulation. The labor and material impact of the additional 300 LF at our blended basement rate is $8,725. This is submitted as Change Order #1."
This is the moat. Every project Maria closes in FieldFlo makes the next estimate sharper. Bluebeam can ship Claude integration. They cannot ship your last 200 jobs — or version-control them across addenda.
More patterns from your last 24 months
Clearance failures spike 3× in occupied buildings — adding 2.4% to average labor
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT · p = 0.04
In your last 6 occupied-building jobs, clearance failures averaged 3.8 per project vs. 1.2 in vacant buildings. Root cause (from field reports): crew rushing final cleanup to meet tenant re-occupancy windows. Each failure averages 14 extra labor hours (re-clean, re-test, inspector coordination). Lincoln is listed as occupancy-unknown. If occupied, the Occupied modifier auto-applies — but this pattern suggests you may also want to build re-test time into the schedule buffer.
✓ Noted — added re-test buffer to schedule assumptions
Your mastic removal rate has drifted down 8% over 18 months — 38 → 35 SF/hr
RATE CREEP DETECTED
Across your 9 mastic projects, production rate has declined from 38 SF/hr (early jobs) to 35 SF/hr (recent). Likely explanation: your crew mix has shifted toward less-experienced workers, or you're encountering thicker/older adhesive in pre-1970 buildings. FieldFlo has already used 35 SF/hr as the conservative figure for Lincoln — but this trend suggests you should consider whether the rate will hold if the mastic is the heavily-applied type common in 1968 buildings.
✓ Flagged — will confirm mastic thickness at site visit