Estimator Quiz
Kanopi Estimator Quiz.
The 115 words owners, estimators and builders use when they talk about cost. Each one is a plain sentence you could say to a homeowner, with one line underneath for the pro.
Pick the plain meaning for each term. The wrong choices come from the same category, so they will look close. Keys 1 to 4 answer.
The same 40 questions for everyone, five from each category, across residential, commercial, owner-side, federal and heavy civil work. Answers stay hidden until the end, so the score is a fair read.
For the pro: the set, the choices and their order are fixed, so two people's scores compare directly. Advanced terms count more than core ones.
Scoring: a core term counts 1, a working term 2, an advanced term 3.
Results show a weighted score, a score by category and by industry, and each miss with its meaning, ready to print or save as a PDF.
Nothing you type or pick leaves this browser. No account, no data collection, no tracking.
What does this mean?
Estimator Quiz ·
Qualifying round results
Weighted by level: a core term counts 1, a working term 2, an advanced term 3. Bands: Strong is 80% and up, Working is 60% to 79%, Developing is under 60%.
By category
By industry
Industry familiarity
Misses
Kanopi Estimator Quiz, qualifying round of 40 fixed questions. Weights: core 1, working 2, advanced 3. Scored in the taker's browser; nothing was sent anywhere. kanopibuild.com/estimator-quiz
Your score
No term matches that search. Try a shorter word.
AACE sorts every estimate into one of five classes by how much of the design exists. Class 5 is a first look from an idea. Class 1 is priced from a nearly finished set. The more design, the tighter the range.
For the proClasses from AACE RP 18R-97 (process industries) and RP 56R-08 (building and general construction), both under the generic RP 17R-97. AACE sets the class by how mature the design deliverables are; the percent is a rough guide, not the test.
Estimate classes at a glance
| Class | Design defined | Stage | Typical low | Typical high |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Class 5 | 0 to 2% | Before SD | -20% to -30% | +30% to +50% |
| Class 4 | 1 to 15% | SD | -10% to -20% | +20% to +30% |
| Class 3 | 10 to 40% | DD | -5% to -15% | +10% to +20% |
| Class 2 | 30 to 75% | CD | -5% to -10% | +5% to +15% |
| Class 1 | 65 to 100% | CD, complete | -3% to -5% | +3% to +10% |
Building and general construction ranges from AACE RP 56R-08, Table 1. They are typical, at an 80% confidence interval, after contingency. On a phone the stage column is hidden; each class below names its stage. SD, DD and CD are schematic design, design development and construction documents.
Each class, in plain words
-
Class 5
0 to 2% defined
A first look from an idea and a size, before real drawings. Good for asking whether the project is worth chasing.
- Typical purpose
- Concept screening
- Typical design stage
- An idea, a size and a site, before schematic design (Before SD)
- Typical accuracy
- Low -20% to -30%, high +30% to +50%
- Method
- Parametric or capacity factored
For the pro56R-08 method: square foot factoring, parametric models, judgment or analogy. 18R-97 (process) runs wider: -20% to -50% low, +30% to +100% high, by capacity factored or parametric models.
-
Class 4
1 to 15% defined
A number from early drawings. Good for checking the design still fits the budget.
- Typical purpose
- Schematic design or concept study
- Typical design stage
- Early drawings that show the size, layout and main systems (SD)
- Typical accuracy
- Low -10% to -20%, high +20% to +30%
- Method
- Parametric or capacity factored, moving to assembly
For the pro56R-08 method: parametric models, assembly driven models. 18R-97 (process) calls it study or feasibility: -15% to -30% low, +20% to +50% high, by equipment factored or parametric models.
-
Class 3
10 to 40% defined
The usual budget estimate. This is the class most owners fund a project from.
- Typical purpose
- Design development, budget authorization, feasibility
- Typical design stage
- The design is worked out system by system (DD)
- Typical accuracy
- Low -5% to -15%, high +10% to +20%
- Method
- Assembly or elemental
For the pro56R-08 method: semi-detailed unit costs with assembly level line items. 18R-97 (process): budget authorization or control, -10% to -20% low, +10% to +30% high.
-
Class 2
30 to 75% defined
A number built from the bid set, line by line. Good for checking bids and setting the control budget.
- Typical purpose
- Control or bid
- Typical design stage
- Construction drawings, the permit or bid set (CD)
- Typical accuracy
- Low -5% to -10%, high +5% to +15%
- Method
- Definitive, detailed unit cost
For the pro56R-08 method: detailed unit cost with forced detailed takeoff. 18R-97 (process): -5% to -15% low, +5% to +20% high.
-
Class 1
65 to 100% defined
The tightest number, priced from a nearly finished set. Used to check a bid or price a change order.
- Typical purpose
- Check estimate or pre-bid, change order
- Typical design stage
- Nearly finished or finished drawings (CD, complete)
- Typical accuracy
- Low -3% to -5%, high +3% to +10%
- Method
- Definitive, detailed unit cost
For the pro56R-08 method: detailed unit cost with detailed takeoff. 18R-97 (process): -3% to -10% low, +3% to +15% high. The class comes from how complete the design is and what the estimate is for, not from an approval.
How each class is priced
-
Parametric or capacity factored
Classes 5 and 4
Cost from a few big facts, like floor area or plant size, times a known rate.
For the proSquare foot or capacity factoring, parametric models, judgment or analogy (56R-08 and 18R-97, Table 1).
-
Assembly or elemental
Class 3, and late Class 4
Cost by building part, like walls, roof or plumbing, each priced as a whole.
For the proSemi-detailed unit costs with assembly level line items; elemental breakdowns such as UniFormat fit here.
-
Definitive or unit cost
Classes 2 and 1
Cost line by line, from measured quantities times a price per unit.
For the proDetailed unit cost with forced detailed takeoff (Class 2) or detailed takeoff (Class 1).
P50 vs P80 contingency
-
P50 vs P80
50th and 80th percentile cost outcomes
Two budget levels. At P50 the job comes in under half the time. At P80 it comes in under four times out of five. Owners who answer to a board often fund at P80 and hold the gap as contingency.
For the proAACE's Table 1 ranges assume contingency set at about a 50% chance of overrun versus underrun, so they are P50 based. P50 and P80 come from range estimating or Monte Carlo (AACE RP 41R-08 and RP 57R-09).
Ranges are typical, not promises. AACE says the range for a real estimate should come from a risk analysis of that project, and that for weak project systems or complex, risky projects the high side can run two to three times the Table 1 figure.
Sources
- AACE RP 18R-97, process industries: web.aacei.org
- AACE RP 56R-08, building and general construction: web.aacei.org
- AACE RP 57R-09, cost and schedule risk: web.aacei.org