PlantFCE

A fast, accurate, reliable, consistent, fully integrated and easy to use suite of tools for cost estimation.

[PlantFCE @PlantFCE]

Engineers often treat a PDF as a “picture” of a drawing.

But a PDF viewer doesn’t see a picture.

It sees objects, instructions, and layers much closer to how Excel sees cells, references, and formulas.

And this difference is the root of many surprises in P&ID digitisation and markup workflows.

Here’s a simple way to think about it 👇

When you edit a number in Excel, the chart updates — because the chart is linked to data behind the scenes.

A PDF works in a similar way. What you see is just the rendered result.

Underneath, the file may contain:
- A text object (“41-PT-102”)
- A polyline that only looks like a symbol
- An annotation layered on top
- A clipped region hiding another object
- Multiple overlapping instruction streams
- Or an image that was flattened from everything above

This means two PDFs that look identical to the human eye may behave completely differently when you try to read, extract, or modify them.

Thats’s why:

- A tag that looks editable sometimes isn’t.
- A symbol you erase still exists underneath.
- Markups appear or disappear depending on the viewer.
- Automation works perfectly on one P&ID and fails on another.

You’re not fighting the drawing — you’re fighting how the PDF describes the drawing to the viewer.

It’s not exactly “what you see is what you get”.

But as a mental model, it’s a good entry point into understanding why PDF behaviour can feel so unpredictable during engineering digitisation.

[PlantFCE @PlantFCE]

@law_ninja We do this with process plant engineering software.

[PlantFCE @PlantFCE]

going from P&ID to CAD and lists in hours 🔥 #engineering #processengineering

[PlantFCE @PlantFCE]

@hrishioa I wouldn't vibe a meal for my guests https://t.co/Ea9ps5ctzs

[PlantFCE @PlantFCE]

@ponnappa Well written and good insights.

Could you elaborate on why not to pivot to outcome-based billing.

We pivoted to outcome-based billing. The thinking is we still order from a restaurant when we have guests over though we all know how to cook well.

[PlantFCE @PlantFCE]

We also support Bluebeam workflows —
so teams can move from marked-up PDFs to structured data without retyping.
The PDF isn’t the problem.

Ignoring its structure is.

👉 https://t.co/TMozihfJh1

[PlantFCE @PlantFCE]

PDFs are trending again.
Most people are discovering that PDFs aren’t “just documents.”
Engineers have known this for years.
Especially anyone who works with P&IDs.

[PlantFCE @PlantFCE]

We built PIDtoExcel around this principle:

Don’t treat P&IDs as images.
Treat them as structured drawings.

Upload → Extract equipment/valves/instruments → Export structured Excel/CSV.

[PlantFCE @PlantFCE]

@ponnappa Well written and good insights.

Could you elaborate on why not to pivot to outcome-based billing.

We pivoted to outcome-based billing. The thinking is we still order from a restaurant when we have guests over though we all know how to cook well.

[PlantFCE @PlantFCE]

Diaphragm valves are versatile and highly reliable components in industrial systems, known for their simple operation and excellent flow control.

https://t.co/IiVGEl7hdf

[PlantFCE @PlantFCE]

@forgerezhang We did a small one for a process plant https://t.co/i0DP8vWG39

[PlantFCE @PlantFCE]

Built in 4 hours with the PlantFCE Model Builder 🤩

[PlantFCE @PlantFCE]

@natiakourdadze @EdouardSoutzo Thank you. This is precisely what we are targeting. A bundle of B2B tools aggregating $100-$350 a month.

[PlantFCE @PlantFCE]

Thanks for reading this thread! If you found it useful, give it a like and repost it ♥️

[PlantFCE @PlantFCE]

Digitizing P&IDs manually is a cumbersome process.

We automatically digitized 100 P&IDs in under 30 minutes.

This would save engineers weeks of time.

But how? 🧵

[PlantFCE @PlantFCE]

You can see the full P&ID digitization process here:

https://t.co/81BZCHjHyR