About Rough Estimate Calc

Why this site exists

I'm a hobbyist. Weekend projects, mostly — the kind where you spend more time figuring out what to order than actually doing the work.

That figuring-out part is what got me here. Every project meant opening four or five calculators, getting four or five different answers, and having no way to tell which one to trust. One site would say 6 tons, another 8, and neither would explain the gap. So I'd average them, add a fudge factor, and hope.

Eventually I got curious enough to look into why the numbers disagreed. The answer turned out to be simple, and it's the reason this site exists.

Most calculators do the same arithmetic. Length times width times depth, divided by 27. That part isn't hard, and it isn't where they diverge. They diverge on density — the figure that converts cubic yards into the tons a supplier actually charges you for. Nearly every site publishes one number to two decimal places and cites nothing.

I may be biased, having built it, but I think this one works well as a single stop. One tool, consistent method, and a range instead of a number pretending to be exact.

Gravel doesn't work that way. A cubic yard of dry gravel weighs meaningfully less than the same yard after a week of rain. Crushed stone with fines packs denser than clean drain rock. Compost varies more than either, depending on what went into it. A single decimal figure hides all of that behind false precision.

So this site does three things differently.

Every density figure has two independent sources

Every material page publishes the density range used, the sources it came from, and a link to each one. Not a single number — a range, with an explanation of why the range exists.

The sources are working suppliers wherever possible: companies that sell and deliver the material and publish weights because their customers need them for load planning. Where a published standard exists — as with concrete — the standard is cited instead.

Two sources, minimum. If two credible sources disagree, the published range spans both, and the page says so rather than quietly picking one. If a second source can't be found, the page waits until one can.

You can read the full sourcing policy on the methodology page.

Waste and base volume are shown separately

Most calculators silently add a waste factor and show you one number. That figure is the right one to order, but if you can't see the underlying volume, you can't check the tool against anything — including your own arithmetic.

Every calculator here shows base volume from the raw geometry, then the waste-adjusted amount to order, then the weight. Three numbers, clearly labeled.

Numbers governed by code are not stated here

This is the part I feel most strongly about.

Some numbers in construction aren't estimates — they're requirements. How deep a footing must sit below the frost line. How thick a slab needs to be for the load it carries. Span tables, wire gauge, setbacks. These vary by jurisdiction, by soil conditions, and by what your inspector says.

A calculator site publishing "footings should be 8 inches deep" is stating something that's true in some places and wrong in others, to a reader who has no way to tell which. So this site doesn't do it.

What these calculators do is compute volume from dimensions you supply. Where your dimensions come from is your local building department, your permit set, or your engineer. Where a page needs to reference a code-governed figure to make sense, it names what determines that figure and points you to the authority, rather than supplying a number.

What this site is not

These are estimating tools, not engineering software. They'll get you to an order quantity and a rough weight. They won't tell you whether your design is sound, whether your soil will bear the load, or whether your plan will pass inspection.

Material densities vary by supplier and by region. Before a large order, call the supplier and ask for their actual weight per cubic yard. It takes one phone call, and they'll know their own material better than any calculator can.

Corrections

If a number here is wrong, I want to know. If you're a supplier and your published figures differ from what's cited, I'd rather update the range than defend a number.

Get in touch through the contact page.