Question 1

Concrete work for thin building elements of specified thickness is usually measured in square metres (area). Which of the following are measured in sq.m under this rule?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: In quantity surveying, the unit of measurement depends on the nature of work. Thin concrete layers or panels of specified thickness are typically measured by area, while structural concrete members (beams, slabs of structural thickness) are measured by volume. Recognizing this distinction is necessary for accurate billing. Given Data / Assumptions: The items listed are thin elements with a stated uniform thickness. Measurement rules prescribe sq.m for such items. Formwork and reinforcement, if any, are measured separately in appropriate units. Concept / Approach: Concrete flooring, thin roof toppings, D.P.C. bands, and thin wall panels are all quantified by area because thickness is standardized in the specification; pricing reflects cost per sq.m for the given thickness and surface finish. Step-by-Step Solution: Roof/floor thin concrete: measured in sq.m at given thickness.D.P.C.: a thin band → measured in sq.m.Wall panels (thin): measured in sq.m.Therefore, “All the above” is correct. Verification / Alternative check: Standard schedules list concrete flooring and D.P.C. items on an area basis, with thickness embedded in the item description. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Any subset misses at least one thin element that is indeed measured by area. Common Pitfalls: Confusing structural RCC slabs (measured in cu.m) with thin toppings/flooring measured in sq.m; not accounting for surface finish requirements in the specification. Final Answer: All the above.

Question 2

For sanitary fittings in a building (e.g., WCs, flushing pipes, lavatory basins, and sinks), the specification and rate typically include the cost of the fittings and their fixing. Which selection best reflects this?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Sanitary items are generally supplied and fixed (S&F) under BOQ items that include both the cost of the fitting and the labour/materials for fixing it as per specification. This ensures a functional installation without micro-splitting basic operations into separate items. Given Data / Assumptions: Items include water closets, flushing pipes, lavatory basins, and sinks. Standard plumbing practice bundles cost and fixing unless stated otherwise. Ancillary materials (e.g., screws, putty, small sundries) are assumed included in the rate. Concept / Approach: Specification language typically reads “supply and fix in position” for such items, meaning the contractor provides the article, transports, sets it in place, connects as needed, and leaves it ready for use. This bundled approach streamlines tendering and execution. Step-by-Step Solution: Check each item: WC, flushing pipe, basin, sink—all are commonly S&F.Therefore, choose the inclusive option “All the above.” Verification / Alternative check: Reviewing typical SOR entries confirms that sanitary fixtures include fixing, jointing, and making good. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Any single item choice under-represents the standard practice across all listed fittings. Common Pitfalls: Omitting fixing accessories or sealants; misunderstanding when special valves or traps are separately measured. Final Answer: All the above.

Question 3

Under standard measurement rules for building works, to what precision is area typically recorded for billing and take-off purposes?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Consistency in rounding and recording quantities is essential for transparent billing. Overly coarse rounding introduces significant errors, while overly fine precision complicates documentation without practical benefit. Industry standards specify a sensible precision for area measurements. Given Data / Assumptions: Areas are computed from measured dimensions (usually recorded to 0.01 m). We seek the standard rounding precision for area entries in BOQs. The goal is to balance accuracy and practicality. Concept / Approach: Since linear dimensions are commonly kept to 0.01 m, the resulting areas are reasonably rounded to 0.01 sq.m. This avoids material quantity distortions and aligns with typical SOR/SMM practices. Coarser steps like 0.05 sq.m may cause noticeable discrepancies across many items. Step-by-Step Solution: Recognize standard dimension precision: 0.01 m.Compute area and round: keep 0.01 sq.m for billing entries.Select option 0.01 sq.m. Verification / Alternative check: Checking common measurement handbooks confirms 0.01 sq.m as the norm for area rounding. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Coarser increments (0.02–0.05 sq.m) can cumulatively skew totals and are not standard. Common Pitfalls: Rounding inconsistently across items; rounding intermediate dimensions and the final area separately (double rounding). Final Answer: 0.01 sq.m

Question 4

According to standard productivity norms, what is the expected daily out-turn of cement concrete 1:2:4 (nominal mix) placed by one mason under ordinary site conditions?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Out-turn norms guide planning and scheduling for concrete works. They depend on mixing method, transport distance, placing constraints, and finishing. For nominal mixes such as 1:2:4, exam-standard planning values are used to avoid over- or under-allocation of labour. Given Data / Assumptions: Cement concrete nominal mix 1:2:4. One mason assisted by helpers under normal conditions. Non-mechanized or basic mechanized handling with typical haul distances. Concept / Approach: Published handbooks and SOR references typically place daily mason output for 1:2:4 concrete around 2.0–3.0 m^3, with 2.5 m^3 as a widely accepted central value for planning. Higher figures assume better mechanization and ideal logistics; lower figures reflect constraints or complex formwork. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify the typical range for manual/semimanual concrete placement.Select a median planning benchmark: 2.5 m^3 per mason per day.Confirm that this value aligns with many question banks and schedule norms. Verification / Alternative check: Cross-checking references shows 2–3 m^3 as common; 2.5 m^3 is therefore a reasonable expected out-turn for exam purposes. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 1.5 m^3 or 1.0 m^3: Too conservative for normal conditions. 3.5 m^3 or 5.0 m^3: Optimistic unless highly mechanized or exceptionally favourable conditions exist. Common Pitfalls: Ignoring delays due to formwork or reinforcement congestion; not considering transport distances or vibration/finishing time. Final Answer: 2.5 m^3

Question 5

In structural steel measurement, which accessory weights are added to the weight of the respective main item for payment and accounting?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: When measuring structural steelwork, standard methods require including the weights of essential accessories that form part of the functional assembly. This avoids underpayment and reflects the true installed steel mass delivered by the fabricator/erector. Given Data / Assumptions: Main members include beams, columns, trusses, and frames. Accessories like cleats, brackets, bolts, and spacers are integral for connections and stability. We seek which accessory weights are included in the payable steel weight. Concept / Approach: Steel measurement conventions typically add the weights of cleats, brackets, bolts, and separators to the respective assembly item because they are necessary to complete the structural connection as per drawings. Minor consumables (welding electrodes, paints) are not weighed but are included in rates by description. Step-by-Step Solution: Cleats and brackets: connection steel → add to item weight.Bolts and separators: essential fasteners/spacers → included in overall steel weight.Therefore, choose “All the above.” Verification / Alternative check: BOQ preambles often state that bolts, nuts, washers, cleats, and small fittings are measured as part of the structural steel item by weight. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Picking any single accessory ignores standard inclusion of all listed items. Common Pitfalls: Double-counting accessories separately; omitting bolts in the final steel tally leading to disputes. Final Answer: All the above.

Question 6

Public health engineering — specifying appurtenances for water supply: When preparing a schedule of items for a building’s internal water-supply work, for which of the following fittings must you specify size (nominal bore), capacity/pressure rating…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: In quantity surveying and public health engineering, item descriptions must fully define what is to be supplied and installed. For valves and small fittings, three descriptors avoid ambiguity: size (nominal bore), capacity or pressure rating, and material of construction. This ensures correct procurement, price comparability, and code compliance. Given Data / Assumptions: The listed items are bib-cocks, stop-cocks, ferrules, and ball valves. Standard practice follows IS codes and departmental SORs where fittings are identified by size, duty/pressure class, and material. Domestic water networks require compatibility among pipe material and fittings. Concept / Approach: Each fitting controls or conveys water and must mate with a specific pipe size. Pressure rating (e.g., PN class) guards against failure, and material choice affects corrosion resistance, potability, durability, and cost. Hence, all three attributes are routinely specified for these fixtures. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Bib-cocks: need size (e.g., 15 mm), material (brass/CP), and pressure class for reliability.2) Stop-cocks: isolation valves; size and PN rating crucial; material dictates longevity.3) Ferrules: pipe-main tapping fittings; bore and material (gun-metal/brass) must suit main’s pressure.4) Ball valves: require bore, pressure rating, seat/ball material, and body material. Verification / Alternative check: Any SOR/BOQ template lists size, material, and rating for these items to avoid site disputes and substitutions. Why Other Options Are Wrong: (a)–(d) list individual fittings but ignore the others; all of them need these specifications. Common Pitfalls: Quoting “as directed by Engineer” without size/PN/material leads to claims and delays. Mixing incompatible materials (e.g., brass into PPR) without adapters. Final Answer: All the above.

Question 7

Civil engineering estimation — trigger for revised estimate due to price level change: As per standard departmental practice, a revised estimate must be prepared if the sanctioned estimate exceeds the original because of price level change by more t…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Cost control in public works relies on thresholds that trigger a revised estimate. When prices escalate, the sanctioned cost may exceed the technically sanctioned (TS) estimate, requiring administrative review and re-approval to maintain financial discipline. Given Data / Assumptions: Only price level (market rates) is changing; scope and quantities remain the same. Departmental rules commonly prescribe a threshold percentage. Question asks the standard percentage value used as a trigger. Concept / Approach: Departments typically set a clear percentage (commonly 5%) beyond which a revised estimate becomes mandatory to reflect current schedule of rates and secure proper sanction for the increased outlay. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Identify intent: escalation-only situation.2) Apply standard threshold used in PWD/CPWD-style practice.3) Select 5.0% as the commonly adopted trigger for revised estimate due solely to price change. Verification / Alternative check: Many exam standards and departmental guides cite 5% as the limit before revising the estimate because of rate revisions. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 2.0%, 2.5%, 4.0% are too low and would cause frequent administrative burden without material benefit. “—” is not a valid engineering control value. Common Pitfalls: Confusing escalation triggers with scope-change triggers (which may require revision regardless of percentage). Using provisional sums without updating SORs. Final Answer: 5.0%.

Question 8

Centre line method of estimating a building — key rules: Identify the correct statements about using the centre line method to compute quantities for walls and associated items in a building.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The centre line method is a fast and reliable estimating technique for buildings with repetitive wall geometry. Instead of measuring each wall face separately (long-wall/short-wall), quantities are obtained using the total centre line length multiplied by item-specific cross-sections, with careful junction corrections. Given Data / Assumptions: Rectangular/symmetric planning so that junction corrections are systematic. Different wall thicknesses (e.g., main wall vs. partition) may exist. Items measured include excavation, foundation concrete, brickwork, and DPC where applicable. Concept / Approach: For any layer having uniform cross-section, quantity = centre line length * cross-sectional area. When wall thickness changes or walls intersect, the centre line length requires adjustments (usually by half the meeting wall thickness at each junction) to avoid double counting. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Compute centre line lengths for each distinct thickness section.2) Apply junction corrections: subtract or add half the meeting wall thickness as per layout.3) Multiply corrected centre line by item cross-section (e.g., t * depth for masonry).4) Sum over all layers/items (excavation, PCC, footing, brickwork, DPC). Verification / Alternative check: Cross-check with long-wall/short-wall method on a small bay; both should match within rounding if junction corrections are applied properly. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Options (a)–(c) are individually correct; hence “All the above” is the right consolidated choice. Common Pitfalls: Forgetting to recompute centre line for different wall thicknesses and offsets. Omitting half-thickness deductions at T-junctions and cross-junctions, causing quantity inflation. Final Answer: All the above.

Question 9

Sanitary engineering — minimum recommended diameter for a domestic sewer laid at 1 in 100 gradient: Choose the most appropriate nominal diameter for a house sewer (building drain) at a longitudinal gradient of 1:100 under normal domestic conditions.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Design of small sewers balances self-cleansing velocity, economy, and constructability. For building drains within premises, codes and practice specify minimum diameters ensuring adequate flow without frequent blockages at practical gradients. Given Data / Assumptions: Domestic wastewater with typical peaking factors. Gradient provided is 1 in 100 (1%), common in plots with limited depth. Pipe material compatible with standard fittings (PVC/stoneware). Concept / Approach: Empirical and code-based guidelines recommend a minimum of 100 mm for house sewers. With 1% slope, self-cleansing velocities are achievable for normal domestic discharge, making 100 mm the economical and acceptable choice. Larger diameters are used for branch/outside sewers and manhole-to-manhole lines (often 150 mm minimum). Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Check minimum code diameter for house sewers: typically 100 mm.2) Check gradient: 1 in 100 is within workable range for 100 mm lines.3) Select the smallest compliant diameter to ensure economy and maintain self-cleansing criteria. Verification / Alternative check: Numerous departmental SORs and plumbing handbooks cite 100 mm as minimum for WCs/soil lines; outside lines or longer runs often upgrade to 150 mm especially between chambers. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 150–200 mm are conservative and costlier for internal house sewers at 1% slope. 175 mm is non-standard in many catalogs and offers no clear advantage here. Common Pitfalls: Oversizing small domestic lines reduces velocity, increasing deposition risk. Ignoring minimum cover and ventilation leading to odors and surcharge. Final Answer: 100 mm.

Question 10

Measurement practice — stone work items measured in square metre: In which of the following cases is stone work measured in square metre (area) rather than cubic metre (volume)?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Correct units are essential for consistent measurement and payment in BOQs. Masonry items may be measured by volume or area depending on whether they form a mass (thickness appreciable) or a facing/surface treatment (thickness relatively small and standardized). Given Data / Assumptions: Standard IS/CPWD-style measurement rules. Stone masonry of walls vs. stone facings and dressed slabs for chajjas. Concept / Approach: Mass masonry (walls, columns) is measured in cubic metre. Surface linings, veneers, facings, and dressed slab applications are measured in square metre. Therefore, wall facing and dressed stones laid in chajjas fall under area measurement, while volumetric items remain in cubic metre. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Classify each item by whether it is a surface finish or a mass element.2) Wall facing ⇒ surface treatment ⇒ square metre.3) Dressed stones in chajjas ⇒ slablike surfacing ⇒ square metre.4) Columns/lintels/copings and general stone masonry ⇒ volumetric ⇒ cubic metre (thus not in sqm). Verification / Alternative check: CPWD and standard textbooks specify veneer/facing in sqm, structural masonry in cum, confirming the selection. Why Other Options Are Wrong: (b) and (c) represent mass elements; they are measured in cubic metre. Options listing any volumetric items are inconsistent with area measurement practice. Common Pitfalls: Using cubic metre for thin facings, complicating rate analysis and payments. Ignoring different thicknesses of facing that may have separate item codes. Final Answer: (a) and (d).

Question 11

Materials quantity — cement for 100 m² CC floor, 1:2:4 mix, 4 cm thick: Estimate the quantity of cement (in cubic metres, based on dry volume method) required for a 100 m² floor laid in cement concrete 1:2:4, thickness 4 cm.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: For floor concreting, material quantities are often computed from mix proportion by volume, converting finished (wet) concrete volume into dry volume to account for voids and wastage. Cement content then follows from the proportion of total parts. Given Data / Assumptions: Area = 100 m², thickness = 4 cm = 0.04 m. Wet concrete volume V_wet = area * thickness. Mix = 1 : 2 : 4 (cement : sand : coarse aggregate) ⇒ total parts = 7. Dry volume factor ≈ 1.54 (common practice for estimation). Concept / Approach: Compute wet volume, convert to dry volume using a multiplying factor, then take cement share as 1/7 of the dry volume. Convert to cubic metres of cement (before bag conversion if needed). Step-by-Step Solution: 1) V_wet = 100 * 0.04 = 4.00 m³.2) Dry volume V_dry = 1.54 * 4.00 = 6.16 m³.3) Cement volume = (1 / 7) * 6.16 = 0.88 m³ (≈ 0.90 m³ when rounded for BOQ).4) Rounded estimate corresponds to standard option 0.90 m³. Verification / Alternative check: Bag check (optional): Volume per 50 kg bag ≈ 0.035 m³ ⇒ 0.88 / 0.035 ≈ 25 bags (approx.), which matches field thumb-rules for a 4 cm topping over 100 m² in 1:2:4. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 0.94, 0.98, 1.00 m³ imply higher dry factor or different mix; not aligned with standard 1.54 factor and 1:2:4 proportion. Common Pitfalls: Using wet volume directly to split proportions, underestimating cement. Ignoring wastage and bulking; 1.50–1.54 factor is customary for estimates. Final Answer: 0.90 m3.

Question 12

Earthwork in railway embankment — prismoidal volume with varying height: A railway embankment 150 m long has formation width 11 m and side slopes 2 horizontal : 1 vertical. Ground falls 1 in 50 along the alignment. Formation falls 1 in 150 (same dir…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: For linear earthworks with linearly varying cross-sections, the prismoidal formula gives an accurate volume using areas at the two ends and the mid-section. In rail embankments, cross-sectional area depends on height, formation width, and side slope. Given Data / Assumptions: Length L = 150 m. Formation width b = 11 m; side slope s = 2 (H:V = 2:1). Ground fall = 1/50; formation fall = 1/150 (same direction). Height at start (x = 0) = h0 = 0.5 m. Concept / Approach: Height relative to ground increases with distance at the rate (ground fall − formation fall). Cross-sectional area for an embankment is A = bh + sh^2. Apply the prismoidal formula V = L/6 * (A0 + 4Am + A1). Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Relative rise rate = (1/50 − 1/150) = 0.02 − 0.006667 = 0.013333 per metre.2) Heights: h0 = 0.5 m; h_mid at 75 m = 0.5 + 750.013333 = 1.5 m; h1 at 150 m = 0.5 + 1500.013333 = 2.5 m.3) Areas: A = bh + sh^2 = 11h + 2h^2.A0 = 110.5 + 2*(0.5^2) = 5.5 + 0.5 = 6.0 m².Am = 111.5 + 2(1.5^2) = 16.5 + 4.5 = 21.0 m².A1 = 112.5 + 2(2.5^2) = 27.5 + 12.5 = 40.0 m².4) Prismoidal volume: V = 150/6 * (6 + 421 + 40) = 25 * (6 + 84 + 40) = 25 * 130 = 3250 m³. Verification / Alternative check: End-area method gives V ≈ L * (A0 + A1)/2 = 150(6 + 40)/2 = 3450 m³; prismoidal correction subtracts 200 m³ to account for curvature of area-height relation, yielding 3250 m³ as above. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 3225 and 3275 m³ are near-misses not matching exact prismoidal computation. 3300 m³ is higher; likely based on average area without correction. Common Pitfalls: Using bh + 2sh^2 instead of bh + s*h^2 (the standard derivation already accounts for both sides). Forgetting the difference of ground and formation gradients when computing height variation. Final Answer: 3250 m3.

Question 13

Measurement units — pointing, plastering, glazing, striking: Select the correct statement about the units commonly used for measuring finishing items such as pointing, plastering, glazing, and striking in building works.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Measurement rules standardize how to quantify building work for estimation and payment. Finishing items that cover surfaces (rather than adding appreciable thickness/volume) are typically measured by area in square metre for clarity and uniformity in BOQs. Given Data / Assumptions: Surface treatments and finishes are considered. Standard departmental/CPWD conventions apply. “Striking” refers to struck finishes (e.g., struck pointing or struck surface treatment) measured as finished area. Concept / Approach: Any operation that covers or treats a surface—like pointing between joints, plastering coats, glazing panes, or providing a specific struck finish—is measured in square metre. Rates reflect thickness, mix, and class, but the measurement unit remains area. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Pointing: finish to joints ⇒ sq.m of wall face treated.2) Plastering: coats on wall/ceiling ⇒ sq.m by each face and thickness class.3) Glazing: glass fixed in shutters/frames ⇒ sq.m of pane area.4) Struck finishes: measured as area of surface finished ⇒ sq.m. Verification / Alternative check: Standard measurement handbooks list these items in square metre; only special cases (e.g., bead length, small panes by number) deviate with clear notes. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Each of (a)–(d) is correct; hence the collective correct choice is “All the above”. Common Pitfalls: Confusing volumetric masonry measurement with surface finishes. Mixing linear measurement (running metre) used for beading or grooves with surface items. Final Answer: All the above.

Question 14

Irrigation engineering — provision of berms in canals: Under which site conditions are berms provided along canals to improve stability, access, and maintenance?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Berms are horizontal strips or shelves provided along canals between the toe and the spoil or between water edge and bank to improve stability, reduce erosion, and facilitate inspection and maintenance. Their need arises under a variety of ground conditions. Given Data / Assumptions: Canal alignment may pass through cuttings, fills, or mixed profiles. Design aims to control side slope erosion and provide access. Concept / Approach: Whether the canal section is in cutting, filling, or mixed, berms can stabilize slopes, separate spoil banks, permit drainage, and serve as inspection paths. Hence, they are employed broadly across all typical site conditions, with width and level chosen per design manuals and soil conditions. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) In excavation: berm isolates canal bank from spoil and reduces erosion.2) In embankment: berm flattens the profile and improves stability against slips.3) In mixed sections: berms handle transitions and provide uniform maintenance access. Verification / Alternative check: Design guides specify berms as a common feature; their absence is exceptional and must be justified by site conditions. Why Other Options Are Wrong: (a)–(c) are each valid conditions; therefore the inclusive answer is “All the above”. Common Pitfalls: Confusing berms with service roads; although sometimes coincident, design intents differ. Omitting berms on dispersive or erodible soils where they significantly reduce maintenance. Final Answer: All the above.

Question 15

Modular bricks as per Indian Standards (actual size) According to Indian Standards (IS) for modular bricks, identify the actual size of a modular brick (excluding mortar thickness).

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: In building materials and construction, it is essential to distinguish between the actual (unit) size of bricks and their nominal size (which includes mortar allowance). Modular sizes are standardised in India to ensure uniform coursing, proper bonding, and predictable masonry dimensions. Given Data / Assumptions: The question asks for the actual size of a modular brick. Actual size excludes the mortar thickness. Nominal size includes the standard mortar joint thickness for coursing. Concept / Approach: Modular brick sizes are specified in IS standards. The actual size is the physical size of the fired brick itself. The nominal size is larger because a standard mortar joint is added in design calculations to achieve modular coordination in masonry. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Recall standard modular brick sizes used in Indian practice.2) Actual size is the brick alone; nominal size = actual size + mortar allowance on length and width.3) The commonly adopted actual modular size is 19 cm × 9 cm × 9 cm; nominal is 20 cm × 10 cm × 10 cm. Verification / Alternative check: Cross-check with standard masonry coursing: two bricks placed with one mortar joint should align to neat multiples of 10 cm in nominal dimensions, confirming 20 × 10 × 10 cm nominal and 19 × 9 × 9 cm actual. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 23 × 11.5 × 7.5 cm, 25 × 13 × 7.5 cm: Not standard modular sizes in Indian practice. 20 × 10 × 10 cm: This is the nominal size (includes mortar), not the actual unit size. None of these: Incorrect because 19 × 9 × 9 cm is correct. Common Pitfalls: Confusing nominal size with actual size; assuming the same dimensions are used globally; ignoring the mortar joint allowance in nominal dimensions. Final Answer: 19 cm x 9 cm x 9 cm

Question 16

Expected out-turn of brickwork in cement mortar (foundation and plinth) Per mason per day, what is the typical out-turn (productivity) for brickwork in cement mortar in the foundation and plinth courses, under normal site conditions?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Out-turn (or productivity) norms are widely used in estimation and rate analysis to plan manpower and time. For brickwork in foundation and plinth, a standard benchmark per mason helps in preparing realistic schedules and costs. Given Data / Assumptions: Brickwork is in cement mortar. Location of work: foundation and plinth. Normal working day, average site conditions (no unusual constraints). Concept / Approach: Standard practice handbooks and departmental schedules provide indicative out-turns. Foundation and plinth masonry is generally faster than superstructure due to easier access and fewer interruptions, leading to a moderate productivity figure adopted for planning. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Identify the relevant activity: brickwork in foundation and plinth.2) Refer to common practice norms used in estimation handbooks.3) Adopt the typical value of 1.25 m^3 per mason per day for planning and rate analysis. Verification / Alternative check: On constrained sites or with complex bonding, actual out-turn may reduce, but for normal conditions, 1.25 m^3 is consistently used in estimation references and BOQ planning. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 1.00 m^3: Conservative; often used for superstructure or constrained work. 1.50 m^3, 1.75 m^3: Optimistic for routine planning; may occur only with exceptional productivity. None of these: Incorrect because 1.25 m^3 is the accepted planning norm. Common Pitfalls: Blindly using high productivities without considering site constraints; not differentiating between foundation/plinth and superstructure masonry rates. Final Answer: 1.25 m3

Question 17

Plinth area, carpet area, and floor area — identify the incorrect statement Read each definition and select the incorrect statement about plinth area, carpet area, and floor area in building estimation.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Clear terminology is crucial in estimation and valuation because quantities, costs, and compliance rules depend on how areas are defined. Plinth area, carpet area, and floor area are distinct and often confused terms. Given Data / Assumptions: Standard estimation terminology as taught in civil engineering. Plinth area is measured at floor level and includes the thickness of walls. Carpet area is the net usable area inside rooms, excluding walls and most service shafts. Floor area (or built-up area usable) is defined systematically, not by “carpet area plus kitchens/baths” wording that implies kitchens/baths are not part of carpet area, which is misleading. Concept / Approach: Correct definitions: Plinth area: Built-up covered area measured at floor level, generally including internal and external wall thicknesses. Carpet area: Usable area within the internal faces of walls; typically includes kitchens and other rooms but excludes wall thicknesses, verandahs (unless enclosed as rooms), balconies, etc. Floor area: A prescribed measure used by authorities; commonly related to built-up/covered area minus certain deductions; definitions vary by code, but it is not defined as “carpet area plus kitchens and baths”. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Check option (a): matches plinth area definition → correct.2) Check option (b): carpet area as usable covered area → acceptable.3) Check option (c): incorrectly suggests kitchens/baths are outside carpet area and then added to form floor area → this wording is wrong.4) Therefore, option (c) is the incorrect statement. Verification / Alternative check: Compare with standard handbooks where carpet area already includes kitchen and most habitable/utility rooms (minus wall thickness and typical exclusions); thus (c) misleads by double-counting or misclassifying areas. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option (a): Correct definition of plinth area. Option (b): Acceptable definition of carpet area. Option (d) or (e): Broad choices that do not align with the targeted incorrect statement. Common Pitfalls: Mixing local by-law definitions with general estimation terms; treating verandahs/balconies inconsistently; forgetting that code-specific definitions may vary but the logic of (c) remains flawed. Final Answer: The carpet area of a building along with area of its kitchen, pantry, store, lavatory, bath room and glazed verandah, is called floor area

Question 18

Box cutting volume in a cement concrete road with gravel sub-base A cement concrete road is 1000 m long, 8 m wide, and 0.15 m thick, laid over a gravel sub-base 0.10 m thick. Compute the volume of box cutting in the road crust (excavation to the bot…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: In road estimation, box cutting refers to excavation made to accommodate the designed crust (sub-base + base + wearing course) so that finished levels are achieved. The volume is the plan area multiplied by the total thickness of layers to be recessed into the natural ground. Given Data / Assumptions: Length L = 1000 m. Width B = 8 m. Concrete slab thickness = 0.15 m. Gravel sub-base thickness = 0.10 m. Uniform layers and level ground for calculation. Concept / Approach: Box cutting volume V = plan area * total thickness recessed. Total crust thickness here = 0.15 + 0.10 = 0.25 m. Multiply by plan area L * B. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Compute plan area: A = L * B = 1000 * 8 = 8000 m^2.2) Total crust thickness: t = 0.15 + 0.10 = 0.25 m.3) Box cutting volume: V = A * t = 8000 * 0.25 = 2000 m^3. Verification / Alternative check: Dimensional check: m^2 * m = m^3; reasonableness check: if only one layer (0.10 m), volume would be 800 m^3; with two layers (0.25 m), 2000 m^3 is logical. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 500, 1000, 1500 m^3: Result from using incorrect total thickness or arithmetic slips. None of these: Incorrect because 2000 m^3 is correct. Common Pitfalls: Omitting one of the layers in thickness, confusing subgrade preparation with sub-base thickness, or mixing centimetres with metres. Final Answer: 2000 m3

Question 19

Canal in banking/cutting — berm design and area relations Identify the correct statements regarding canal classification relative to natural surface level (NSL), area of canal in cutting, area of canal bank, and berm width design with respect to ful…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: In canal design and estimation, sections may lie in embankment (banking), cutting, or a combination. Basic geometric relations for trapezoidal sections and empirical berm widths tied to full supply depth (FSD) are standard checks in preliminary design and quantity takeoff. Given Data / Assumptions: Trapezoidal section with bed width B and side slopes represented by a factor S for both sides combined. Bank (embankment) geometry quantified similarly with B1 (top width) and d1 (bank height above NSL). Empirical berm rules linked to FSD are used in preliminary design. Concept / Approach: For a trapezoid, area A in cutting can be written A = Bd + Sd^2 when S represents the sum of the two side-slope run factors. Embankment (bank) area follows an analogous form. Classification relative to NSL determines whether the canal is in banking, cutting, or mixed, guiding berm width prescriptions (e.g., 3d for full banking, 2d for mixed situations), as adopted in many textbooks and departmental practices. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Banking vs cutting: bed above NSL → banking; FSL above NSL with bed near NSL → mixed.2) Cutting area: A = Bd + Sd^2 using combined side-slope factor.3) Bank area: A_bank = B1d1 + Sd1^2.4) Berm guidance: fully in banking → berm ≈ 3d; mixed → berm ≈ 2d. Verification / Alternative check: Dimensional reasonableness: each term in the area expressions has units of area; berm rules align with conventional thumb-rule practices used for preliminary sizing. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Each individual option (a–d) is consistent with common preliminary design guidance; hence selecting a single one would omit the others. Common Pitfalls: Confusing whether S denotes one side slope or combined; forgetting that berm rules are thumb-rules and may be tuned by local standards, stability checks, and right-of-way limitations. Final Answer: All the above

Question 20

Correct metric units in quantity estimation for buildings Select the correct metric unit for the specified quantity when estimating for building works.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Unit consistency underpins correct quantity takeoff and BOQ preparation. Misstating units causes serious errors in costing, ordering, and measurement. Estimation relies on SI-based metric units for all basic and derived quantities on site. Given Data / Assumptions: Standard SI/metric practice in civil estimation. Length, area, volume, mass/weight, and capacity must use correct units. One best answer is expected. Concept / Approach: In SI: length → metre (m); area → square metre (m^2); volume → cubic metre (m^3); capacity (fluids) → litre; mass → kilogram (kg) whereas weight (force) → newton (N). Among the options, only one is unambiguously and universally correct without contextual caveats. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Check option (a): length measured in metre → correct.2) Option (b): area is in m^2, not m^3 → incorrect.3) Option (c): volume is in m^3, not m^2 → incorrect.4) Option (d): in engineering, weight is a force; SI unit is newton, not kilogram (kg is mass) → misleading.5) Option (e): litre for capacity is acceptable in practice, but questions of this type typically expect the unequivocal base SI mapping; selecting one, (a) is the safest canonical choice. Verification / Alternative check: Cross-check BOQs: plastering measured in m^2, concrete in m^3, rebar mass in kg (mass) but load in N/kN. Only (a) fits without nuance. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Cubic metre for area: wrong dimension. Square metres for volume: wrong dimension. Kilogram for weight: weight is force; SI unit is newton. Litre for capacity: commonly used, but the question expects the single most canonical mapping; hence (a). Common Pitfalls: Confusing mass with weight; interchanging area and volume units; ignoring that capacity (litre) is derived and context-dependent. Final Answer: Metre for length

Estimating and Costing Questions