← Projects & Physics

REVIEW RECORD · 29 OCTOBER 2026

What has been checked.

The retained arithmetic agrees with independent calculations. The drawings still have gaps, and the support examples do not establish installation safety.

14project records19source sheets reviewed90retained component records28fixed rows missing mass inputs

What the check establishes

All 90 retained component records were recomputed from their transcribed rectangles or polygons, using exact inch conversion, stated thickness and stated density. CSV quantities agree. These records represent 100 copies, but alternative sheets and different jobs must not be added into one job total. Project 10 has one additional visual-only estimated top.

All 90 support examples satisfy force and moment balance. Checks also covered 79 earlier editable records, 14 closed preview meshes and 150 sample slab layouts. A mathematically balanced model can still be based on the wrong dimensions or supports.

Gross means before openings. Sink and electrical templates, radii and joint overlaps have not been deducted from the fixed tables. This may overstate self-weight, but it does not make a strength check conservative: a cutout can weaken the stone and move its centre of mass.

The underlying source has 32 records without enough mass inputs. Four Project 1 values are separately labeled estimates, leaving 28 blank fixed rows. Blanks mean missing information, not zero. Support pages use stated scenario assumptions, so their masses can differ from the fixed tables.

What changed in this review

No retained drawing dimension or job mass was silently invented or replaced. The 68-inch Project 10 top remains a visual estimate without a load calculation. Product-family and comparison densities remain estimates.

Internal links, fragment targets, local assets, JSON/CSV downloads and JavaScript syntax are checked separately before publication. External source availability is reported below rather than assumed.

Project-by-project notes

Visual review used the supplied paper images, not a site visit or a calibrated measurement. Small fractions and crossed handwriting can remain ambiguous.

PROJECT 01

Kitchen, vanities and desks ↗

Compared with the source

  • Both A/B sheets inspected; 46.75 × 126.875 L envelope with 25.25 top arm and 22.5 leg checked.
  • Upper panels, vanities and desk dimensions compared to each sheet; A/B are not proven distinct jobs.

Still needs confirmation

  • Confirm whether A/B are alternate revisions or separate units before any combined job total.
  • Confirm middle vanity material and actual slab thickness, not built-up edge height.
  • T9002 lower-desk identity/density remains unknown; four displayed masses are explicit scenarios.
  • Several kitchen, TV/backsplash and profiled-panel records omitted from grouped view because outlines are unresolved.
  • Sink A/B/C/D legend describes nominal fixtures; verify actual cutting templates.

PROJECT 02

Kitchen surfaces and side panels ↗

Compared with the source

  • 99 × 36.75 L, 28-inch return and 25.75-inch main depth compared to paper.
  • 60.25 × 32 main rectangle; two 50 × 32 side panels; FOUR 32 × 11.25 strips and one 31.75 × 7 strip all preserved.

Still needs confirmation

  • Confirm opening shape, exact dimensions, corner radii and placement before net area deduction.
  • Pencil nesting sketches are repeat views, not extra pieces.
  • Crossed edge circles are fabrication symbols, not circular holes.

PROJECT 03

Two small surfaces, one incomplete run ↗

Compared with the source

  • 25.5 × 15 detached counter and 31.125 × 15.5 desk match retained rectangles.
  • 129.375 × 27.375 main counter is only an envelope; missing front-step dimensions prevent an exact model.

Still needs confirmation

  • Thickness mark visually appears to read 3 cm; existing transcription deliberately leaves it null because handwriting is partly obscured. Ask for confirmation, or explicitly label 30 mm as a tentative drawing reading.
  • Main stepped counter needs missing step/arm depth dimensions.
  • Nominal 29.75 × 15.75 U/M sink, 1-inch radius must be checked against cutting template.

PROJECT 04

Desk and backsplash in Primordia ↗

Compared with the source

  • Desk 74 × 13, nominal 30 mm; backsplash 74 × 20.75, explicitly 20 mm; both match drawing.
  • Caesarstone 4043 Primordia identity is user-confirmed.

Still needs confirmation

  • 152.875 overall stepped main countertop and 98 × 40 rounded island are unresolved contours, not verified rectangles.
  • Island curved end, notch detail and backsplash sill dimensions require clarification before full modelling.
  • Do not treat four burner symbols as stone cutouts; actual appliance opening needs template.

PROJECT 05

Waterfall island and related stonework ↗

Compared with the source

  • Main 99.125 × 25.25 counter and 29.25 × 25.25 detached counter checked.
  • Island finished top 97.5 × 60 and two 60 × 35.5 waterfall faces preserved; nominal 96-inch body is different from finished top.
  • Right profiled-panel span 59.625 + 24 + 9 = 92.625 and raised panel 28.875 + 31 + 35 = 94.875 close arithmetically.
  • Basement Kasa2205 is a separate material from TCE4047.

Still needs confirmation

  • Main C-run and basement stepped counter need inside widths; no whole-job total.
  • Upstairs vanity depths have ambiguous 22.125 versus 22.25 readings and local 0.25 steps; keep tentative.
  • Right-hand outlet panels lack a confirmed material/thickness association.
  • Right lower small panel height 21.125 is a tentative handwritten reading.
  • Waterfall corner overlaps and thickness allowances need confirmation; do not sum nominal faces into net installed volume without a joint detail.
  • Actual sink/electrical cutout templates unavailable.

PROJECT 06

Vanities and shaped wall panels ↗

Compared with the source

  • Lower-middle 30.125 + 30 + 27.375 = 87.5 raised wall panel checked.
  • Five vanity widths 64.25, 52.5, 58.25, 43.875, 73.125 and first three paired wall panel widths checked.
  • Countertops use 30 mm and wall panel group uses 20 mm, per drawing group notes.

Still needs confirmation

  • Main kitchen upper runs and several profiled right-hand panels remain unresolved outside grouped display.
  • Undermount sink legends and outlet dimensions/positions must be tied to each host before net deductions.
  • Q6118 density is a quartz proxy, not a measured product density.

PROJECT 07

Three raised wall panels ↗

Compared with the source

  • Three raised left panels retain separate row labels 19/20/21.
  • Row19 width 45.5 + 30.125 + 29.375 = 105; row20 28.75 + 30.25 + 46 = 105; row21 46.125 + 30.25 + 28.75 = 105.125 checked.
  • Center heights 33.875, 32.625, 32.375 and base heights 19.75, 20, 19.75 agree with retained readings.

Still needs confirmation

  • Corresponding right-side notched wall panels and cropped upper row are not fully resolved.
  • Electrical openings have local callouts but need exact size/position confirmation.
  • TCE1220 2400 kg/m3 is a labeled family estimate.

PROJECT 08

Counters, bar and wall panel ↗

Compared with the source

  • Both sheets inspected; 35.25 × 25.5 counter, 59.5 × 45 island, 128 × 14.5 bar checked.
  • Large wall-panel width 38 + 47.5 + 37.5 = 123; overall height 30.375 and base 18.5 checked.
  • Separate 84.75 × 21 desk and 75.5 × 22.25 double vanity retained.

Still needs confirmation

  • Main L counter has unresolved leg width and remains omitted; appliance gap must remain empty.
  • Powder vanity outline, backsplash lengths and outlet/cutout templates require confirmation.
  • Bar internal dashed line is not its perimeter.

PROJECT 09

Vanity top, seat and trim ↗

Compared with the source

  • Top 61.375 × 24.75; seat 32.5 × 12.875; trim 46 × 5 and 15.375 × (3.5 - 0.0625) checked.
  • Three-inch front edge is a built-up/perspective face, not 3-inch stone thickness.

Still needs confirmation

  • Rounded corner radius and nominal sink dimensions are not deducted from gross rectangle.
  • Seat and trim positions/supports are not specified; schematic set is not an installation arrangement.
  • TP2534 density remains a quartz proxy.

PROJECT 10

An estimated top and a separate strip ↗

Compared with the source

  • Lower independent Y9006 strip is 18.625 × 5 with 1 × 1 corner notch; 92.125 square inches, 0.059435365 m2 gross polygon.
  • Upper source explicitly shows 22.5 depth, 11.75 step, 36.5 sink-center-to-right dimension and 3 cm thickness; full length absent.

Still needs confirmation

  • 68-inch full length and 24.5-inch step location are invented visual assumptions, clearly labeled; never treat as measured job data.
  • Upper 9.25 local dimension and sink location need clarification.
  • Upper TCE4047 and lower Y9006 are different jobs/materials and must never be merged.
  • Support review covers only the lower calculated strip and explicitly holds upper capacity checks.

PROJECT 11

Kitchen counter and bathroom vanities ↗

Compared with the source

  • 39 × 22.5 separate counter and 28 × 22.5 powder vanity match source.
  • Master 72.75-inch top width with 0.25-inch right projection produces 73-inch outside envelope; right upper depth19 and overall22.5 retained.
  • Upper vanity25.125 ×22.5 retained; lower vanities codeTCE8003,20mm separate from kitchenTCE4033,30mm.

Still needs confirmation

  • Large wraparound kitchen run unresolved; no gross job total.
  • Vanity sink templates, step orientation and material density not exact-SKU verified.
  • Backsplash heights are not an independently measured cutting list.

PROJECT 12

A three-piece surround ↗

Compared with the source

  • Folded surround top35.75 ×6.25 and two52 ×6.25 side returns match perspective annotations.
  • Part quantity top1 + sides2 preserved; parent folded perspective is not an extra part.

Still needs confirmation

  • Large surround and long raised panel remain unresolved; several dimensions do not establish a unique closed contour.
  • Long-panel shoulder sum and overall reading require reconciliation; do not infer closure from image proportions.
  • Corner mitre/overlap and attachment details missing.
  • TP6610 density is proxy.

PROJECT 13

Stepped vanities and wall panels ↗

Compared with the source

  • Waterfall developed face36.25 ×36 retained; perspective island top not inferred.
  • First vanity65.125 ×22 with37-inch full-depth portion and6-inch wing checked.
  • Second vanity67.375 ×22 with38-inch full-depth portion and6-inch wing checked.
  • Wall panels135.5 ×20 and62.625 ×19.75 retained.

Still needs confirmation

  • Main kitchen L and perspective island top lack complete plan dimensions.
  • Vanity sink openings and electrical boxes require fabrication template and placement confirmation.
  • Short vanity backsplash strip cutting lengths unresolved.

PROJECT 14

Counters, shelves and a hood surround ↗

Compared with the source

  • Both sheets inspected; island43.5 ×30.375, lower TCE1220 vanity46 ×22.25 and green-stone vanity39.75 ×21.875 checked.
  • Upper Q6174 counters62.75 ×25 (two) and97.125 ×25, small vanity31.625 ×21.875 retained.
  • Wall surround five developed pieces and hood front57.875 ×39 plus two22 ×39 returns retained.
  • Three50 ×21 shelf panels and two hood returns preserve quantities3 and2.

Still needs confirmation

  • Different material groups TCE1220, green stone, TCE4046, T4000, Q6174 and BQ6716 must remain distinct; not every material appears in grouped subset.
  • Large waterfall island, TV panel and several stepped/double vanities remain unresolved.
  • Some dimensions include +1/16 allowances; clarify whether table uses nominal or cutting size.
  • Green-stone identity, Q6174 exact density, mitre thickness/overlap, sink/electrical templates and shelf brackets unconfirmed.

Primary references and their limits

Supplier families and comparison ranges support the selected estimates; no exact project slab or batch density was verified. Primary sources were checked during the October 2026 review. Some direct pages timed out, including the Canadian TCE product-information PDF and older Caesarstone sheet; the report records those access limits. Group Italy and Quantum comparisons were available as primary-domain search excerpts rather than full retrieved pages.

Manufacturer and physics sources

What remains outside this audit

Personal checks and native Fusion/AutoCAD models still need to be recorded. The existing views are reconstructed from supplied drawings; personal CAD files and reviews are still pending.