Example: a geometric comparison only
Across a 20 × 10 m reference pad, an average 150 mm cut represents 30 m³ and an average 100 mm fill represents 20 m³. On an explicitly identical volume basis, the arithmetic surplus is 10 m³. That is approximately 13.0795 yd³ before the tool's display rounding. It is not automatically ten loose cubic metres for export or proof that the cut meets the fill specification.
Start with separate measured quantities
A rectangular model multiplies area by an average cut depth and, separately, an average fill depth. If the cut occurs only over part of a site, the average depth must refer to the full area entered or the region must be measured separately. Otherwise you accidentally spread a local depth across the entire site.
For variable ground, divide the project into suitable measured areas or use the required survey-volume method. A simplified pad calculator cannot recreate a terrain model, resolve retaining walls or establish the proposed grading surface.
Know the volume condition
A bank cubic metre describes material in place before excavation. A loose cubic metre describes excavated material with its current voids. A compacted cubic metre describes the installed fill condition. The same number in these three columns need not represent the same quantity of soil.
Use project-specific factors or measured relationships to compare the quantities. Do not take a generic percentage from an unrelated soil and apply it to every stage. The FHWA reference below explains why earthwork conversion assumptions belong to the project.
Understand this calculator's simplification
The cut-fill tool calculates rectangular cut and fill from two average depths, then applies its single visible percentage to both. That is a simple scenario model. It cannot represent different cut and fill conversion factors or determine whether the excavated material is suitable for reuse.
For a pure geometric comparison, use zero in that factor field. Keep any independently verified bank-to-loose or bank-to-compacted calculations on separate lines. The tool currently reports its balance in cubic yards even with metric dimension inputs, so read the output units before transferring it.
Import or export is more than a net number
A site with a nominal surplus may still need selected imported material if the excavated material cannot serve the specified fill. Likewise, topsoil, unsuitable material and different fill classes may need separate stockpiles and destinations. A zero net geometric balance does not prove zero haulage.
Record the destination, material class, volume basis and relevant density for each movement. Use the actual haul capacity and disposal conditions when calculating loads and cost. Keep survey revisions and quantity changes visible so a revised balance can be traced to its inputs.
Do it in order
- Calculate cut and fill on documented areas and depth bases.
- Identify bank, loose and compacted conditions before comparing quantities.
- Separate material suitability and verified conversion factors from geometric net balance.
Planning boundary
This simplified balance is not a survey model, geotechnical assessment, compaction specification or grading design.
Sources checked
Does cut volume equal the fill available?
Only after checking material suitability and converting to the required fill basis. Geometric volume alone cannot establish this.
Why does the metric-input tool show yd³?
That is its stated output convention. Keep the label with the result and convert explicitly when your supplier works in m³.