B06 Cost Estimating Case Study Essay
Order ID# 45178248544XXTG457 Plagiarism Level: 0-0.5% Writer Classification: PhD competent Style: APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago Delivery: Minimum 3 Hours Revision: Permitted Sources: 4-6 Course Level: Masters/University College Guarantee Status: 96-99% Instructions
B06 Cost Estimating Case Study Essay
ONLYDO QUESTION 8
B06 Cost Estimating
Directions: Be sure to make a copy of your answer before submitting it to Ashworth College for grading. Unless otherwise stated, answer in complete sentences, and be sure to use correct English spelling and grammar. Your response should be a minimum of one (1) single spaced page to a maximum of two (2) pages in length.
For the figure provided, answer the following questions. Provide the correct units for each calculation. To obtain full credit, show all steps, state all assumptions (if any), and all the answers must be correct. Work must be neat and legible. A simply stated answer receives no points.
Excavation
- Enlarge the footprint by 5 feet for accuracy and slope, then determine the volume of topsoil to be removed and stockpiled, if the thickness 9”.
- If no soil is to be stockpiled, and the swell is 10 percent, how many truck loads will it take to cart away from the site using 7 cy trucks?
Foundation
A cross section of the 24” wide continuous footing is shown. Assume this footing detail applies to all footings throughout the building.
- Determine the total linear feet of footing required?
- Calculate the cross-sectional area of the footing?
- Determine the volume of concrete in cubic yards for the footing. Add 5% for waste and round off.
Slab
- Given that the slab is 4” thick, calculate the volume of concrete required for the slab (use 8% waste factor).
- Given WWF was specified for the reinforcing in the slab, determine how many rolls are required? Assumptions: 750 sf per roll and add 20% for lap and waste.
- Using the following labor and material rates calculate the cost to provide and install the WWF and pour the concrete slab.
Productivity rate for slab = 0.4 labor hours/cy
Productivity rate for WWF = 1 labor hour/roll
Labor rate for slab and WWF = $14.50/hr
Grading Rubric
Please refer to the rubric on the next page for the grading criteria for this assignment.
CATEGORYExemplarySatisfactoryUnsatisfactoryUnacceptable
10 points 8 points 5 points 2 points
Student provides a correct
topsoil volume and clearly
outlines logical calculation
steps.
Student provides a somewhat
correct topsoil volume and
adequately outlines logical
calculation steps.
Student provides a partially
correct topsoil volume and
partially outlines logical
calculation steps.
Student provides an incorrect
topsoil volume with minimal/no
outline of logical calculation
steps.
10 points 8 points 5 points0-2 points
Student provides a correct
truckload determination and
clearly outlines logical
calculation steps.
Student provides a somewhat
correct truckload determination
and adequately outlines logical
calculation steps.
Student provides a partially
correct truckload determination
and partially outlines logical
calculation steps.
Student provides an incorrect
truckload determination and
minimal/no outline of logical
calculation steps.
10 points8 points 5 points0-2 points
Student provides a correct strip
footing determination and
clearly outlines logical
calculation steps.
Student provides a somewhat
correct strip footing
determination and adequately
outlines logical calculation
steps.
Student provides a partially
correct strip footing
determination and partially
outlines logical calculation
steps.
Student provides an incorrect
strip footing determination and
minimal/no outline of logical
calculation steps.
5 points4 points 3 points0-2 points
Student provides a correct CSA
calculation and clearly outlines
logical calculation steps.
Student provides a somewhat
correct CSA calculation and
adequately outlines logical
calculation steps.
Student provides a partially
correct CSA calculation and
adequately outlines logical
calculation steps.
Student provides an incorrect
CSA calculation and minimal/no
outline of logical calculation
steps.
10 points8 points 5 points0-2 points
Student provides a correct
foundation concrete volume
determination and clearly
outlines logical calculation
steps.
Student provides a somewhat
correct foundation concrete
volume determination and
adequately outlines logical
calculation steps.
Student provides a partially
correct foundation concrete
volume determination and
partially outlines logical
calculation steps.
Student provides an incorrect
foundation concrete volume
determination and minimal/no
outline of logical calculation
steps.
10 points8 points 5 points0-2 points
Student provides a correct slab
concrete volume calculation
and clearly outlines logical
calculation steps.
Student provides a somewhat
correct slab concrete volume
calculation and adequately
outlines logical calculation
steps.
Student provides a partially
correct slab concrete volume
calculation and partially
outlines logical calculation
steps.
Student provides an incorrect
slab concrete volume
calculation and minimal/no
outline of logical calculation
steps.
15 points12 points 8 points0-5 points
Student provides a correct
WWF reinforcement
determination and clearly
outlines logical calculation
steps.
Student provides a somewhat
correct WWF reinforcement
determination and adequately
outlines logical calculation
steps.
Student provides a partially
correct WWF reinforcement
determination and partially
outlines logical calculation
steps.
Student provides an incorrect
WWF reinforcement
determination and minimal/no
outline of logical calculation
steps.
15 points12 points 8 points0-5 points
Student provides a correct LCE
calculation and clearly outlines
logical calculation steps.
Student provides a somewhat
correct LCE calculation and
adequately outlines logical
calculation steps.
Student provides a partially
correct LCE calculation and
partially outlines logical
calculation steps.
Student provides an incorrect
LCE calculation and minimal/no
outline of logical calculation
steps.
5 points4 points 3 points2 points
Student does not make any
errors in grammar or spelling,
especially those that distract
the reader from the content.
Student makes 1-2 errors in
grammar or spelling that
distract the reader from the
content.
Student makes 3-4 errors in
grammar or spelling that
distract the reader from the
content.
Student makes more than 4
errors in grammar or spelling
that distract the reader from
the content.
10 points8 points 5 points2 points
The paper is written in proper
format. All sources used for
quotes and facts are credible
and cited correctly. Excellent
organization, including a variety
of thoughtful transitions.
The paper is written in proper
format with only 1-2 errors. All
sources used for quotes and
facts are credible and most are
cited correctly. Adequate
organization includes a variety
of appropriate transitions.
The paper is written in proper
format with only 3-5 errors.
Most sources used for quotes
and facts are credible and cited
correctly. Response is poorly
organized, but may include a
few effective transitions.
The paper is not written in
proper format. Many sources
used for quotes and facts are
less than credible (suspect)
and/or are not cited correctly.
Response is disorganized and
does not include effective
transitions.
Question 4 –
Foundation: Cross-
sectional Area (CSA)
Calculation (5 Points)
Question 7 – Slab: WWF
Reinforcing
Determination
(15 Points)
Question 5 –
Foundation: Concrete
Volume Determination
(10 Points)
Question 6 – Slab:
Concrete Volume
Calculation (10 Points)
Format – APA Format,
Citations, Organization,
Transitions (10 Points)
Question 1 –
Excavation: Topsoil
Volume (10 Points)
Mechanics -Grammar,
Punctuation, Spelling
(5 Points)
Question 2 –
Excavation: Truckload
Determination (10
Points)
Question 8 – Labor Cost
Estimate (LCE)
Calculation (15 Points)
Question 3 –
Foundation: Strip
Footing Requirement
(10 Points)
RUBRIC
Excellent Quality
95-100%
Introduction 45-41 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Literature Support
91-84 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Methodology
58-53 points
Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score
50-85%
40-38 points
More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.
83-76 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.
52-49 points
Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality
0-45%
37-1 points
The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.
75-1 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.
48-1 points
There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow NEW TEMPLATE OPTIMIZED RANK MATH
NEW TEMPLATE OPTIMIZED RANK MATH