Measurement Units, Rounding and Conversion Controls in Quantity and Cost Reporting: A Journal-Style Sample for KA21102 (UMS)

For information and reference only – not to be submitted as your own work. This extract shows one way a journal-style paper can be organised. Your own topic, data, sources and wording must be your own, and your university’s academic integrity and similarity rules apply.

Introduction to this sample

This is a worked extract for students reading the KA21102 Contracts and Estimations assignment brief at Universiti Malaysia Sabah. It takes Topic 12 of the brief as its angle and follows the required journal layout.

For the full explanation of how to plan each section, read the blog on how to write a journal-style assignment. The worked figures below are illustrative, not taken from a real project.

Stuck on topic choice or the methodology section? Our civil engineering experts can walk you through it. Share your requirements here or see our civil engineering assignment help in Malaysia.

Model-answer extract

Title page

Measurement Units, Rounding and Conversion Controls in Quantity and Cost Reporting for Malaysian Building Projects. Course KA21102 Contracts and Estimations. (Your name, matric number and submission details go here.)

Abstract

Quantity and cost reports depend on the units in which work is measured. A unit chosen inconsistently, a conversion applied with the wrong factor, or a figure rounded too early can shift a cost estimate without anyone noticing. This paper examines how unit selection, rounding and conversion are controlled in quantity and cost reporting for building works in Malaysia. A structured review of nine published sources was combined with a worked take-off example to compare reporting with and without defined controls. The example shows that rounding only at the final reporting stage kept the cost difference below 0.02%, while a single mismatched conversion factor understated a steel item by about 1.6%. The paper proposes a short control table for units, precision and conversion that estimators can apply before quantities enter a bill of quantities.

Keywords: measurement units; rounding; conversion; quantity surveying; cost reporting; SMM2

1. Introduction

Cost estimating draws on measured quantities, so any weakness in measurement passes straight into price. Surveys of estimating practice show that estimators rely heavily on measured quantities and past data [1]. Studies of public works also report a persistent tendency to underestimate cost, which makes small avoidable errors worth removing [2]. This paper asks three questions. Which unit should be used for each work category? At what stage should values be rounded? How should conversions be documented?

The scope is building works measured under a Standard Method of Measurement. The jurisdiction is Malaysia, where the second edition of the Standard Method of Measurement of Building Works (SMM2) is the common reference. Contract form is not the focus, although a priced bill under a standard form such as PAM or PWD would carry these quantities.

2. Literature review (extract)

Standard methods of measurement exist to give every party the same basis for quantities, and Malaysian studies describe both the benefits of adopting them and the behavioural reasons why practice still varies [3,4]. International practice shows the same logic: the RICS New Rules of Measurement 2 sets out detailed measurement rules for building works [5]. For physical units, the SI system provides the coherent base for length, area, volume and mass [6].

Digital take-off adds a new source of variation. Software-generated quantities need modelling rules suited to take-off [7]. A Malaysian comparison found that BIM outputs were often not compliant with SMM2, that some items could not be extracted in square metres, and that some beam and brick wall quantities differed from manual take-off by more than 5% [8]. A later study compared Revit and Cubicost TAS against SMM2 [9]. Together these sources point to a gap: unit and rounding rules are assumed rather than controlled.

3. Methodology

The study uses a desk-based, qualitative design with a worked numerical test. Sources were selected by searching for measurement standards, take-off and cost reporting in peer-reviewed journals and recognised standards. The worked example then applies three controls to one concrete item and one reinforcement item. Figures are illustrative and were chosen to show the arithmetic, not to represent a real project. The limitation is plain: one example cannot represent all work sections, so the findings suggest a control method rather than prove an error rate.

Need the same level of structure for your own topic? Journal and research paper writing support is available.

4. Results and analysis

Table 1 sets out the unit and rounding controls proposed. The unit of measure follows the type of work, and each value carries a stated precision.

Table 1. Proposed unit and rounding control table (illustrative)

Table 2 applies these controls to two items. Rates are assumed for illustration.

Table 2. Worked example (illustrative figures)

5. Discussion

The slab example shows that rounding at the end is low risk: the difference was under one ringgit. The reinforcement example shows the larger danger. A conversion factor from a different tonne definition is a clerical choice, yet it moved the item by about 1.6%. That is a bigger distortion than the rounding, and it would be repeated across every reinforcement line that used the same factor.

This agrees with the pattern in the literature: errors enter through process, not arithmetic. Where models and software produce quantities, the same control table would help an estimator check whether an output follows SMM2 units before pricing [8,9]. Practical implications are modest but clear. Firms can record the unit, precision and conversion factor beside each bill item, and reviewers can check these before the bill goes out. The limitation noted above remains: the numbers are illustrative and cover two items only.

6. Conclusion and recommendations

Units, rounding and conversion can be controlled with a short table agreed before take-off begins. Three recommendations follow. First, fix the unit for each work category using SMM2. Second, carry full precision until the item total and round once. Third, record every conversion factor so a reviewer can trace it. Future work should test these controls on real Malaysian bills and compare manual and BIM-based take-off against them.

Related resources

Browse more Universiti Malaysia Sabah (UMS) assignments, or see the measurement of construction works sample (BQS401) for a different measurement task.

About the expert

Qazzafi Bin Abu Bakar is a civil engineering expert at Malaysia Assignment Help. His profile lists a Bachelor’s degree in Civil Engineering from Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, about 8 years as a civil engineer and about 6 years as a part-time academic writer, 2,230 completed orders, and subjects including transportation, environment, hydraulics and soil mechanics.

Want help with your own KA21102 paper? Our experts provide guidance and model answers for study purposes. Submit your assignment details and we will reply with a quote.

References

1. Akintoye A, Fitzgerald E. A survey of current cost estimating practices in the UK. Constr Manag Econ. 2000;18(2):161-72. doi:10.1080/014461900370799

2. Flyvbjerg B, Holm MS, Buhl S. Underestimating costs in public works projects: error or lie? J Am Plann Assoc. 2002;68(3):279-95. doi:10.1080/01944360208976273

3. Nizam Akbar AR, Muzafar SA, Mohammad MF, Syed Jamaludin SZH. Current usage of Standard Method of Measurement (SMM): human behaviour issues. Environ-Behav Proc J. 2021;6(17):41-7. doi:10.21834/ebpj.v6i17.2873

4. Nizam Akbar AR, Mohammad MF, Ahmad N, Maisyam M. Standardization in construction environment: adopting standard method of measurements. Asian J Behav Stud. 2018;3(12):147-59. doi:10.21834/ajbes.v3i12.131

5. Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors. NRM 2: Detailed measurement for building works. 2nd ed. London: RICS; 2021.

6. Thompson A, Taylor BN. Guide for the use of the International System of Units (SI). NIST Special Publication 811. Gaithersburg (MD): National Institute of Standards and Technology; 2008. doi:10.6028/NIST.SP.811e2008

7. Monteiro A, Martins JP. A survey on modeling guidelines for quantity takeoff-oriented BIM-based design. Autom Constr. 2013;35:238-53. doi:10.1016/j.autcon.2013.05.005

8. Soon LT, Ng ZX, Kamarazaly MA, Kam KJ. The analysis of BIM based measurement for the quantity surveying profession. J Eng Sci Technol. 2022; Special Issue (STAAUH/THINK SPACE).

9. Soon LT, Wong LS, Kamarazaly MA, Saar CC, Sheikh Ilmi H. Comparison of BIM-based quantities take-off in quantity surveying profession. Plan Malaysia. 2024;22(32). doi:10.21837/pm.v22i32.1499