Centralized Engineering Platform

One system of record from enquiry to handover

● Workflow concept
04 / PLATFORM VISION

One platform. One project record. Zero re-typing.

Fan selection, quotations, drawings and project management today live in separate tools and inboxes.
This workflow shows them as modules of a single centralized platform, sharing one project record.

End-to-end workflow

Click any stage to see what happens there, who owns it and what the platform carries forward. Data entered once at enquiry flows through every later stage.

Tip: use “Simulate an order journey” to watch a sample enquiry travel through all six stages.

Type it once — watch it travel

The platform's core promise, animated: a specification entered at enquiry auto-fills the quotation, the drawing title block and the project plan. Press play.

Enquiry form · entered by Sales

 
 
 
 

Quotation · Q-1052-R1

Customer— auto-filled —
Duty point— auto-filled —
Fan model— from selection —

GA drawing · title block

Project— auto-filled —
Rated duty— auto-filled —
Design temp— auto-filled —

Project plan · PRJ-1052

Project— auto-filled —
Scope— from order —
Milestones— generated —
One entry, three documents — nobody re-typed the specification, so the quote, the drawing and the plan can never disagree.

Who works where — same record, different views

Each department keeps its own workspace, but everyone reads and writes the same central project record. No exports, no version confusion.

SALES APPLICATION ENGG. DRAWING OFFICE PROJECTS Log enquiryduty point · site · dates Select fanvalidated curves · rules Issue quotationcosting · margin · approvals GA drawing for approvalauto-filled from selection Production drawings · BOMrevision control built in Project planmilestones · owners Track to dispatchdocs · tests · handover Customer updatesstatus from live record CENTRAL PROJECT RECORD one source of truth · full audit trail
Dashed blue lines: every workspace reads from and writes to the same central record — the platform replaces email attachments and parallel spreadsheets, not people's judgment.
PLATFORM MODULES
◎

Fan Selection

  • Duty-point entry (airflow, pressure, temp)
  • Validated fan curves & catalog rules
  • Candidate comparison & sizing notes
  • Selection carried into quote & drawing
▤

Quotations

  • Costing & margin templates
  • Approval matrix before release
  • Revision history per customer
  • Quote converts to project on PO
✎

Drawings

  • GA drawing pack from the selection
  • Customer approval loop with status
  • Production drawings & BOM
  • Revision control, no duplicate files
⬢

Project Management

  • Milestones from order to dispatch
  • Owner & due date on every task
  • Document pack: tests, certificates
  • Handover registers the installed asset

Why centralize it

Typical state today versus the same work on one platform — the pitch in one picture.

⚠ TODAY — SCATTERED

  • Selection in one tool, quote in Excel, drawings on a shared drive, project status in email
  • Same specification re-typed three or four times
  • “Which revision did the customer approve?”
  • Status answers need phone calls and follow-ups
  • Knowledge leaves when a person leaves

ROI realization

An illustrative payback model — move the sliders to your own numbers. It counts only engineering/admin hours recovered; faster quotations and fewer drawing errors would add to this.

Demo assumptions, not a commercial estimate. Hours saved come from eliminating duplicate data entry across selection, quotation, drawings and project tracking.
Hours recovered / year—engineering & admin
Savings / year—at blended rate
Payback—months