Checking claimed quantities: the design schedule and the survey
Updated: 2026-08-13 · ISKRIT
A claim can be wrong in two different ways, and they need two different checks. Either it does not match what was agreed, or it does not match what is on the ground. Passing the first check says nothing about the second.
Check one: against the schedule
Line by line, does the claimed quantity exist in the agreed schedule, in the same unit, within the agreed total. This catches the ordinary problems: quantities claimed above the contract quantity with no approved variation, items that appear in the claim but not in the schedule, units switched between area and volume, and the same work claimed under two descriptions.
It is mechanical and it should be automated, because the failure mode is volume rather than subtlety. On a schedule of 400 lines, three overclaims of a few percent each are invisible to a reader and obvious to a comparison.
Check two: against the ground
For earthworks the schedule check is not enough, because the quantity is not an item that exists or does not: it is a volume that has to be measured. The usual practice, agreeing a percentage on a site walk, produces a number with no evidence behind it, and both parties know it.
An as-built survey turns it into a measurement. The surface is surveyed, the volume is integrated against the original ground or the design surface, and the result is compared with the claim. The difference is then a fact to discuss rather than a matter of opinion.
What makes the comparison fair
| Condition | Why |
|---|---|
| Same datum and coordinate system | a datum shift moves the whole volume |
| Same boundary of measurement | volumes over different footprints are not comparable |
| Stated survey coverage | an area with no points is not zero volume, it is unmeasured |
| Bulking factor agreed in advance | in-situ and loose volumes differ by a fifth or more |
The third row is the one that causes disputes. A survey covering 80 percent of the area, integrated as if it covered all of it, understates the volume and the contractor is right to object. The honest output states the coverage next to the number.
Bulking, and which volume is being paid for
Excavated material swells when it is dug and shrinks when it is compacted. A cubic metre measured in the cut is not a cubic metre in the truck nor a cubic metre in the fill. Which of the three the rate refers to belongs in the contract, and a check that compares a survey volume against a claim measured in truckloads is comparing two different quantities.
The quantity reconciliation tool runs the schedule comparison line by line, and the as-built quantity check derives the volume from the surveyed surface and reports the coverage alongside it.
Rotating shift patterns: covering the posts and balancing the hours
Calibration intervals: setting them, shortening them, defending them
Turning an estimate into a bill of quantities that foots
Progress billing: percent complete, carry-forward and retention
Pile capacity from CPT: how the LCPC method reads a cone trace
Driven and bored piles: why the same soil gives different capacity
What belongs on a borehole log, and what quietly gets left off
Drawing a cross section: correlating layers between boreholes
From an AGS4 file to a laboratory summary: what the groups carry
Characteristic values: turning a set of test results into one number
Void ratio, porosity and saturation from one density test
When one soil layer is really two: splitting geotechnical units
ASTM D4253 and D4254: maximum and minimum index density
Relative density Dr and density index Id are not the same number
USCS classification step by step: ASTM D2487
Cu and Cc: what the two gradation coefficients actually tell you
Dual symbols in USCS: the 5 to 12 percent fines band
EN ISO 14688-1 against USCS: two different size ladders
AGS4 file validation: what the rules actually check
AGS4 syntax: the five rules that break a delivery
ASTM D2435 oedometer test: from the curve to Cc, mv and Eoed
Converting oedometer modulus to Young’s modulus
EN ISO 17892-5 and ASTM D2435: where the two diverge
ASTM D1196 plate load test: modulus and subgrade reaction
DIN 18134: Ev1, Ev2 and the compaction ratio
Ménard pressuremeter modulus: ASTM D4719 and EN ISO 22476-4
Permeability from a pumping test: the Dupuit formulas
Shewhart control chart constants: A2, A3, B3, B4, D3, D4, d2, c4
The eight out of control tests on a Shewhart chart
Repeatability and reproducibility limits: where 2.77 comes from
How rebar cutting plans are optimised: the cutting stock problem
Cutting waste in rebar fabrication: what percentage is normal
Rebound hammer calibration: why the factory curve is not enough
Kerf and offcut: what a linear cutting plan has to account for
Earthwork volume from survey points: grid, TIN and cross sections
Fire load density: the formula, the calorific values and the traps
Explosive atmosphere zones 0, 1, 2 and 20, 21, 22 explained
Pollution charges per tonne: how the over-limit multiplier works
The Russian environmental fee: who pays, when, and how the advances work