Summer Project Report On: Geodesic Techniques Pvt. LTD

Geodesic Techniques Pvt.
Ltd
SUMMER PROJECT REPORT

On
“VARIANCES BETWEEN STANDARD COSTS AND THE ACTUAL

COSTS”
At
“GEODESIC TECHNIQUES PVT.LTD

BANGLORE”
SUBMITTED BY
Mithun Jain
(USN: 09MBA60049)
Jain Businees School
Internal Guide
Prof. Rajan
Jain Business school Page 1

Geodesic Techniques Pvt. Ltd
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I sincerely acknowledge the help I received from various persons and sources in collection of data and
information in completing this satisfactory project.
I would like to extend my sincere thanks to Prof. Rajan for his guidance & suggestions.
I am very grateful to Shri Kanat of ”Geodesic Techniques Pvt .Ltd” Bangalore for giving me an opportunity
to do this project in their organization and for their valuable guidance in successful completion of the
project.
Lastly, but not the least I would like to thank the entire teaching and non teaching staff faculty for helping
me directly or indirectly during this project.
Mithun Jain

SYNOPSIS OF THE PROJECT

1.1 PROJECT STATEMENT:
To analyze the variances between activity-based standard costs and the actual costs for a sample of projects
and to analyse the reasons for the variances.
1.2 OBJECTIVES:
a. Understand the business model
b. Establish the scope of work matrix for a sample of projects executed in past 3 yrs in terms of
Design, Detailing, Supply, Fabrication (Factory Fabn/ Site Fabn), Erection
c. Classify the sample in terms of-
1. Complexity (on account of Fabn, Ere, No. of. Assemblies involved…etc)- Simple/ Medium/
Complex
2. Volume (in terms of m.ton)- Light/ Heavy/ Medium
3. Project Size (in terms of value)- Small, Medium, Large
d. For the project sample, arrive at the actual cost/m.ton for various Estimation heads and compare it
with Standard costs/m.ton established by the company.
e. Compare & Analyze variances
1.3 METHODOLOGY
• Create a flow chart of all the major activities of a typical project.
• Understand the Standard Costs established by the Company for labour, consumables,
overheads…etc further classified per activity viz., design, factory/site fabrication, erection.
• Identify all the Cost Codes possible for each of the activity.
Eg: Labour can be a cost code associated with Erection activity and for Site Fabrication.
• Map the cost codes to different estimation heads.
Eg: Staff Salary, Cell-phone expenses …etc fall into Overheads.
• Each cost code has to be looked into separately and the portion of the cost incurred by each
cost code for different activities identified has to be ascertained.
Eg: Out of Total Fuel Cost of Rs.1000, Rs.250 is incurred during fabrication stage and remaining
Rs.750 is incurred during Construction stage.
• Total Cost for each activity is to be obtained after taking the sum of different
estimation heads falling into that activity.
• Dividing the total cost of each estimation head for a particular activity with the tonnages
of work done for that activity and hence arriving at cost/mt
• Compare the actual cost/m.ton of work done for different estimation heads with
standard cost/m.ton already established by the company.
• Analyze the variance.
• The above steps are repeated for other sample of projects.
• Analyze the reasons for the variation.

1.3 NEED FOR THE PROJECT
The Company has maintained Accounting books where Costs incurred for various Ledger
Accounts are clearly defined. The Company can get clear information about its Financial
Position and Growth for a particular period of time. But for a construction company like
Geodesic, it is equally important to know the profitability of projects, compare against the
budget, and analyze the variance reasons there for.
A project that company takes can have different activities involved in it, and each activity
has various cost codes. The company has to look into the profitability of each of the
activities to decide if an activity can be subcontracted, or to be done in-house by the
company. The profitability of any project depends on the reliability of the estimated costs of
the project.
The company has already defined cost/mT for different activities as shown in fig.1. This is a
standard cost as per the company’s planning team estimate and this need to be verified for a
set of project sample taken. The scope of my project is to find out the actual cost of different
Estimation heads under each activity and analyze the variance with respect to the standard
Cost/m.ton .
The Standard Cost/m.ton is helpful in creating and maintaining budget and also helps in
finding out the reasons for increase in total cost by tracking the heads which are responsible
for increase in the total project cost.
Standard Cost/m.ton is a figure of cost which gives the costs of activity in standard
conditions.

The Costs of the project sample does not vary with respect to Standard cost for different
categories of projects is the Hypothesis to be tested.
Fig 1: Standard Cost/m.ton of different Estimation Heads for different categories of

project.
Description Simple Light Simple Simple Heavy Complex Complex
Medium medium Heavy
FFB. LAB
3,228.00 2,367.00 1,566.00 3,216.00 2,304.00
FFB. WEL
1,668.00 1,668.00 1,390.00 2,085.00 1,668.00
FFB. CONS.
800.00 750.00 600.00 900.00 750.00
FFB. POW
2,431.00 1,823.00 1,167.00 2,431.00 1,823.00
FFB. OVD.
2,610.00 1,958.00 1,253.00 2,610.00 1,958.00
SFB. LAB
4,410.00 3,216.00 2,560.00 4,410.00 3,336.00
SFB. WEL
2,085.00 1,668.00 1,390.00 2,085.00 1,668.00
SFB. CONS.
1,000.00 800.00 700.00 1,000.00 800.00
SFB. POW
4,000.00 3,000.00 2,200.00 4,100.00 3,200.00
SFB. OVD
2,500.00 2,200.00 1,850.00 2,600.00 2,300.00
ERE. LAB
4,515.00 3,564.00 2,830.00 4,560.00 3,612.00
ERE. POW
1,668.00 4,200.00 3,500.00 5,100.00 4,400.00
ERE. OVD.
1,100.00 2,200.00 1,850.00 2,600.00 2,300.00
ERE. WEL
5,000.00 1,668.00 1,390.00 2,085.00 1,668.00
ERE. CONS.
2,500.00 900.00 800.00 1,100.00 900.00
PREL.
750.00 650.00 500.00 750.00 680.00

COMPANY PROFILE

Geodesic Techniques Pvt. Ltd was formed in 1986 with the primary objective of offering
superior solutions for conventional roofing requirements. The company ventured into
lightweight, pre-engineered and prefabricated steel structures and space frames such as
double-layer grids and geodesic domes and developed several new space frame systems
suitable for various applications.
Geodesic is backed by four decades of structural engineering, construction management and
contracting experience. It is led by a team of qualified and experienced professionals in civil
engineering, architecture, mechanical engineering, Structural engineering, construction
management and contracts management.
Geodesic is now engaged in the field of large span, pre-fabricated, steel-intensive and
innovative structures including high-rise steel buildings, signature structures and
infrastructural works. The core competence is structural engineering and design, and
innovative solutions are offered which are reflected in many landmark and signature
buildings. There is a team of highly skilled designers and construction management
specialists to assist the strong and well qualified management team.
Geodesic is an ISO 9001:2000 certified Construction Company and provides integrated

Design, Engineering, Procurement and Construction services for Steel Intensive construction
and infrastructure sector projects.
The company is known for its innovative designs and construction services in the field of
Pre-fabricated and large span space structures. The focus areas are steel structures in-
• Office spaces and Office facilities

• Retail and whole sale malls
• Public infrastructure utilities like airports (airport hangars, terminal building roofs, etc)
• Sky walks
• Industrial and storage sheds

Geodesic has executed several challenging design and construction projects for companies in
the private, public sector, government departments and individual entrepreneurs. The
Company’s projects include factories, corporate offices, stadiums, airport terminals,
multilevel car parks , auditoriums, hotels, temples and diverse utility outlets, all of which are
based on the company’s unique strengths and design capability in space frames and hard
core structural engineering capabilities.
Design and Structural Engineering have been the back bone of Geodesic. The young
engineers at Geodesic are well trained in analyzing and designing complex three dimensional
structures. They also play an important role in value engineering by optimizing the design
and standardizing the components in ‘Design and Build’ projects. Geodesic has executed
many prestigious projects across the length and breadth of the country in its chosen area of
expertise. The company has designed and executed several stadiums, roofing projects for the
SAF games in Chennai, an indoor stadium in Bangalore for the National games and an
indoor stadium in Puttaparthi. It has also designed the prestigious Kanteerava stadium for the
National Games in Bangalore. The company has designed and constructed several projects
for prestigious clients such as Infosys and Tata Consultancy Services.
The Company continuously endeavors to identify and locate opportunity areas where it can
leverage its excellent in-house design and construction capabilities utilizing contemporary
architectural engineering design, space frame and prefab technologies and industrialized
construction and engineering technologies for rapid and cost effective implementation.
Geodesic has embarked on several key urban infrastructure projects involving large scale
steel-composite large span structures for several applications including urban transportation,
multi level car parks, airport passenger terminal buildings, hangars, etc. It has completed
executing the multi level car park (MLCP) for Infosys Technologies at their Pune campus
with a capacity of 2000 cars and 1000 two-wheelers in a ten storied steel building.
To offer contemporary, end-to-end and world class solutions, Geodesic is in the process of
entering into strategic tie-ups with several overseas companies with leadership in specialized
areas. The tie-up with M/s Yongnam Holdings, based in Singapore and one of the largest

steel construction and prefabrication companies in Asia, has strengthened Geodesic’s

offerings and provide opportunities to bid for very large projects in India.
Geodesic Techniques Design Capability-

The engineers are well trained in analyzing and designing complex three dimensional
Structures using the latest design and engineering software packages and also customized in-
house software. Value engineering is kept in mind by optimizing the design and
standardizing the components in design & build projects. The Company has a team of trained
detailers with proficiency in complex structures.
The in-house research and development team is continuously engaged with product and
software development where our programs are aimed at reducing human errors and ensure
faster design and thereby reducing project deliveries. It employs softwares like AutoCAD,
Delphi, Rebar cad, Tekla, Rhinocerous, Bocad, Nisa, Strap, Sap2000, Etabs and others.
In-House Software
The R&D team is engaged in product and software development. They have developed
software for streamlining the work in the areas of design, detailing and manufacturing. The
programs also interface with other analysis packages, CAD/CAM machines and robotic
systems. Geodesic is also one of the first Indian companies to use robots in site based
construction. It is currently at the forefront of pre-fabrication and industrialized construction
practices. It has a large network of partners and vendors in several trades dedicated for fast
track delivery. Its vendor development team gears up specialized vendors having modern
machinery and technology to deliver critical components. With its partners’ network it offers
specialist services and products, including forgings, die castings, water jet/laser plasma
cutting, and CNC machining, drilling, bending, pressing, spray/hot dip galvanizing etc.
Geodesic uses plant intensive approach for crucial activities requiring precision and speed
with a special focus on safety. Construction engineering begins at the design office and all
projects are planned from the office and executed in a professional environment.

Manufacturing Facilities
A fully equipped manufacturing unit is presently available in the industrial area Peenya,
Bangalore with good facilities to take up light manufacturing.
New Manufacturing unit at Bidar, Karnataka

The company has nearly finished the construction of its factory in an area of 50acres of land
in Bidar, Karnataka. This manufacturing plant will have an annual capacity of up to 36,000
mT of production. This will have the capacity to handle heavy fabrication. Bidar is located
on the Hyderabad – Pune highway, about 140 km from Hyderabad and 550 km from
Mumbai and will be able to cater to the market requirements in Mumbai, Pune and
Hyderabad regions.
2.2 SOME COMPLETED PROJECTS
Infosys Multi level Car Park, Pune

Client: M/s. Infosys Technologies Ltd
Scope of work:
Design, supply, fabrication and erection of the multi level car park at Pune. The
structure is a G+10 Floors with a capacity of 2000 cars and 1000 two wheelers
Inverted Canopies for MIAL, Mumbai

Client: MIAL
Scope of work:
Fabrication and supply of steel components and erection of steel and fabric.
Ambience mall, New Delhi

Client: M/s Ambience Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd

Scope of work:
Design, supply, fabrication and erection of Skylights
Metro cash and carry, Hyderabad

Client: M/s. Metro Cash and Carry
Scope of work:
Design, supply, fabrication and erection of distribution centre building, car park and
all connected miscellaneous structures
Ansal Plaza, Noida

Client: M/s Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Ltd.
Scope of work:
Design, supply, fabrication and erection of skylights.
Puttaparthy indoor stadium, Puttaparthy, AP

Client: M/s. Larsen and Toubro Limited.
Scope of work:
Design, supply, fabrication and erection of the roof structure for the indoor stadium
Mega Mall, Mumbai

Client: SilverMoon construction Pvt. Ltd
Scope of work:
Design, supply, fabrication and erection of freeform roof structure and glass cladding
Logitech Park, Mumbai-Skywalks

Client: M/s. Pantheon Infrastructure Private Limited
Scope of work:

Design, supply, fabrication and erection of skywalks connecting buildings, including

glass Cladding
Celebrity Fashions, Chennai

Client: Celebrity fashion Pvt. Ltd.
Scope of Work:
Design & construction of civil works, structural works, roofing and cladding works,
electrical package, ETP/STP, water supply and sanitary works and external
development including roads, compound wall,etc.
Infosys Multiplex Dome, Mysore

Client: M/s. Infosys Technologies Ltd, Bangalore
Scope of work:
Design, supply, fabrication and erection of Geodesic Dome and glass cladding
DLF Star Mall, Gurgaon

Client: M/s.DLF Commercial Enterprises
Scope of work:
Design, supply, fabrication and erection of Dome structure and glass cladding
Infosys food court, Pune

Client: M/s. Infosys Technologies Ltd
Scope of work:
Design, supply, fabrication and erection of food court structure
Lalbagh Glass House, Bangalore

Client: M/s. Bangalore Development Authority
Scope of work:
Restoration of Glass House at Lalbagh, Bangalore including dismantling and

refurbishment of structure and glazing
Structural steel works

Client: M/s. Tata consultancy services Techno Park, SIPCOT, Chennai
Scope of work:
Supply, fixing of structural steel works to form an architectural marvel as shown. This
job is of approximately 7000 tons
Delhi International Airport, terminal-1B

Client –DIAL
Scope of work:
Supply, fabrication and erection of the roof structure for the new terminal 1B at the
terminal
MIAL Skywalk
Client : Mumbai International Airport Ltd
Scope of work:
Design, supply, fabrication and erection of skywalk between MLCP and Terminal
building at International Airport, Mumbai.
MIAL Inverted canopies:

Client: MIAL
Scope of work:
Fabrication, supply and erection of steel structure and erection of fabric
MIAL MLCP
Client: Mumbai International Airport Ltd
Scope of work:
Design, supply, fabrication and erection of multilevel car park for 1600 cars
(G+3+Terrace). The structure is constructed using steel and RC Pre-cast panels. The
special requirement is that the entire building is to dismantled and re-erected at
another location after a few year of service in approx 5 lakh sq.ft built up area
MIAL T1C
Client: L&T
Scope of Work:
Detailing, fabrication and erection of steel roof for T1C terminal at Mumbai for CSIA,
Mumbai.

Inverted Canopies for MIAL, Mumbai Software Development Block, Pune
Mega Mall, Mumbai Infosys Multiplex Dome, Mysore
TCS TECHNOPARK
MIAL MLCP
PREPARATION OF SCOPE MATRIX FOR DIFFERENT PROJECTS
3.1 CLASSIFICATION OF PROJECTS:

For the purpose of benchmarking and Standardizing, the various projects that the company
has finished are divided into different groups based on its complexity and tonnage. The
projects are also classified in terms of Low, Medium and High value projects based on
empirical relation as follows.
If Value of the project< 750 Lakhs, then Low Value project.
If Value of the project >750 and <2000 Lakh, then Medium Value project.
If Value of the project > 2000 Lakh, then High Value Project.
Similarly in terms of Tonnage the projects are divided into 3 different categories as Light,
Medium and Heavy Tonnages.
Therefore if Tonnage<500m.ton, then Light Project
If Tonnage>500 but <2000 mton, then Medium Project
If Tonnage >2000m.ton, then Heavy Project.
The Complexity of a project is determined by the Planning Engineers based on the

Complexity of joints and structure. Hence the projects are divided into Simple and Complex.
Hence Entire set of projects are divided into 6 categories based on Complexity and Tonnage.
They are
• Simple Light
• Simple Medium
• Simple Heavy
• Complex Light
• Complex Medium

• Complex heavy.
The Actual Costs of each project are compared with the standard costs of that particular
category into which the given projects falls and the variation is analyzed.
Projects are also classified on the basis of Welded or Bolted Structures as they are the basic
reasons for variations of various cost heads which fall into the category of Power and
Welding.
These classifications help us in estimating costs for each classification of project and the
variation of the costs for different sets of projects.
3.2 CREATION OF SCOPE MATRIX:

Scope Matrix defines the scope of the work for each project, in terms of the activities listed
below-
 Designing
 Detailing
 Factory Fabrication
 Site Fabrication
 Erection
 Painting
 Roofing Cladding Works
 Civil Works
The scope matrix helps in apportioning the costs to the right activity and also acts as a
check to ensure that any works executed outside the scope of the contract are billed
separately as an extra claim.
Total tonnage in m.ton is taken as per Work Order and considering amendments, if
any. The percentage of tonnage completed is also taken from the contracts dept. This
is the actual amount of work done for which the costs are incurred. The Contractual
Duration and Actual Duration are analysed for any time overruns. This could be one of
the reasons for the cost overruns in comparison to the standard costs as the costs of
certain resources depend on the length of time for which the resource is used.

Table 1: Scope of Work Matrix

KOL
RAJA
CHEP KAT INDO DEHL RAIP
TNLA MAN TCS
AUK CIDC A RE HI UR
DOM DRI PHAS
STAD O AIRP AIRP MEZ AIRP
E AIRP E 2-
IUM 1433 ORT ORT ZANI ORT
2028 ORT 1382
2083 ITD 1411 NE 1463
1436
1383
Desig
No No No No No No No Yes No
n
Detaili
Yes Yes No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes
ng
Suppl
Yes Yes No Yes No No No Yes No
y
Scope Factor
Matrix y Fabn Yes Yes No Yes No No No Yes No
Site
No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes
Fabn
Erecti
Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes
on
Painti
Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes
ng
Roof,
claddi Yes Yes No No No No No Yes No
ng
Civil
No No No No No No No Yes No
works

CHEPAUK TNLA RAJAMANDR KOLKATA

CIDCO
STADIUM DOME I AIRPORT AIRPORT ITD
Contract 142 1 513.8 1,150
(in laths) .00 1,779.00 ,163.04 8 .00
Value SMALL MEDIUM MEDIUM SMALL MEDIUM
Tonnage LIGHT MEDIUM MEDIUM MEDIUM HEAVY

Factory. 84 0 0 0 0
Fabn
Site Fabn 0 0 119 435 NA
Classifi
Complexit COMPLE
cation SIMPLE SIMPLE SIMPLE COMPLEX
y X
Revised
84 851 1330 543 5000
m.Ton
Fabn.
84 13.47 862 435 775
Progress
Ere.
84 0 119 435 NA
Progress
Classificat Simple-Light Complex- Simple- Simple- Complex-heavy
ion tonnage medium Medium Medium tonnage
Contract
3 4 5 6 19
Duration
Act.Durati 2 9 8 11 16
on
Act. Start
Feb-10 Jan-10 Nov-09 May-09 Aug-09
Month
Actual/
Mar-10 Sep-10 Jun-10 Mar-10 Nov-10
Expected

Table 2: Classification Matrix
TCS INDOR RAIPU DELHI

PHASE E R MEZZA
CONTR 2 AIRPO AIRPO INE
3200
ACT 1,337.99 468.46 791.54
PRICE
VALUE MEDIU MEDIU
SMALL LARGE
M M
Tonnage MEDIU MEDIU
HEAVY HEAVY
M M
Factory
0 0 0 1800
Fabn
Site Simple-
1414 253 168
Fabn Medium
m.Ton COMPL COMPL COMPL tonnage,
as per EX EX EX
WO
Revised
2178 1052 1778 1901
m.Ton
Fabn
2178 1052 1778 1800
Progress
to Dt To
Ere.
1872 825.39 654 1800
be done
Ere
1414 253 168 1800
Progress
to Dt
Classific Comple Comple Comple Simple-
ation x-heavy x- x-heavy Medium
tonnage medium tonnage tonnage,
Contract tonnage
9 3 6 6
Duratio
n
Actual
12 10 15
Duratio
n
Actual
Jul-09 Aug-09 Jul-09
Start
Month
Actual/
Jun-10 May-10 Sep-10
Expecte
d End

1. MAPPING BETWEEN COST CODES AND ESTIMATION HEADS
ESTIMATION HEADS
Estimation heads are Cost Heads according to which the project costs are estimated which in
turn would encompass one or more Cost Codes used in financial accounts.
All the Cost Codes included would get mapped to the 5 Estimation heads.
The 5 Estimation heads are
• Labor
• Overheads
• Welding Items
• Consumables
• Power, plant and machinery.
The Cost Codes are mapped to these 5 Estimation heads to facilitate comparison with the
Standard costs which are mutually exclusive. All the possible expenses that could be
incurred for Fabrication or Erection activity are included under these 5 Estimation heads.
These Estimation heads can individually drive the costs of a project and hence are
considered for analysis. Dividing into more number of Estimation heads would not only
dilute the Estimation head but also create confusion in case of ambiguous ledger accounts
which could fall into more than one Estimation head. Any Cost Codes that do not fit into any
of the above mentioned Estimation Heads are ignored and are marked as NA. The
understanding about the Estimation is explained below-

4.1.1 Labor Charges:

Labour Charges includes all costs directly or indirectly related to labour. This would
encompass basic wages, house rent allowance, overtime and incentive payments made to
employees and further includes-
(i) Contribution to provident fund and ESIS
(ii) Bonus/ ex-gratia payment to employees
(iii) Provision for retirement benefits such as gratuity and superannuation
(iv) Medical benefits
(v) Subsidized food
(vi) Leave with pay and holiday payment.
(vii) Leave encashment
(viii) Other allowances such as children’s education allowance, conveyance allowance
which are payable to employees in the normal course of business etc.
4.1.2. Power, Plant and Machinery Charges:

Includes the machinery hired and Fuel charges for operating those plants and machinery.
It also includes the power costs for machineries which work on AC/DC current. In case a
company owned machine is used, then the Depreciated amount of Machinery cost is
taken as expense for the project..
4.1.3. Consumables:
It includes all the recurring costs incurred on materials which can be used only for one
project and either gets completely consumed or gets torn making it not possible to use
them for other projects.
This includes, Tools and Tackles cost, Gases and Lubricants, Other Consumables,
Personal protection Equipments like helmets, jackets for labors, Electrical items like
wires, bulbs etc.

4.1.4. Welding Items

The reason to differentiate this from consumables or power is because it is one of the
main contributors of costs for a project. Welding Items include the Welding machine
costs, Costs of Welding Electrode and other Welding items.
4.1.5. Overheads
Overheads include all the expenses which are not direct costs and do not directly
contribute for the project per-se. They do not have a direct correlation with the amount of
work done.
Overheads includes costs like
• Staff Salary and other expenses on staff
• Computer charges, Telephone charges, Printing charges, Courier charges.
• Vehicle charges, freight charges
• Professional charges, Interests, Insurance charges.
• Administration charges etc.
COST CODES:
Cost Codes are all the centers for which costs are incurred for the completion of a
project. It is a numbering system given to specific kinds of work for the purpose of
organizing the cost control process of a specific project.

LEDGER ESTIMATION HEAD
41 Repair & Maintenance Others Overheads
1 Consultancy charges Overheads
42 Repair & Maintenance Overheads
43 2 StaffComputer
Accommodation& printer cost Overheads Overheads
44 3 LaborComputer peripherals
Accommodation Labor Overheads
45 4 Utilities
Cell at staff Expenses
phone accommodation Overheads Overheads
46 5 Utilities at laborExpenses
Telephone accommodation Labor Overheads
47 6 RentTransportation Charges Overheads Overheads
48 Office Stationery Prelims & general
7 Vendor Labor Labor
49 Printing & scanning Charges Overheads
50 8 Professional
Printing Charges
& stationery Overheads Overheads
51 9 Office Expenses
Exgratia Labor Overheads
52 10 PPE PF contract Labor Consumables Labor
53 11 StaffSurvey
Recruitment
Charges Overheads Labor
54 12 Site PF
Infrastructure
Admin Charges Prelims & general
Labor
55 13 Site Administrative
Allowance charges Overheads Overheads
56 Staff salary / site allowance Overheads
14 Employers contribution to PF Labor
57 Staff Salary Overheads
58 15 PowerESIcharges
contract labor Power Labor
59 16 Employers
Postage & courier ESICharges
Contribution Overheads Labor
60 17 Post Lc Charges Expenses
& Telegraph Overheads Overheads
61 18 Pluming
Water & Charges
Sanitary Items Consumables Overheads
62 19 PlantUsuance
& Machinery Cost
Bill Discounting Charges Power Overheads
63 20 Parking Charges
Vehicle hire charges Overheads Overheads
64 Weld mesh Welding Rods
21 Running Maintenance Cost 4 wheeler Overheads
65 Furniture Prelims & general
66 22 Running Maintenance
Photocopying Charges Cost 2 wheeler Overheads Overheads
67 23 LaborVehicle Repair 2 wheeler
Conveyance Labor Overheads
68 24 Subscriptions
Vehicle Repair 4 wheeler Overheads Overheads
69 25 Material
Labor handling
Travel Charges Labor Labor
70 26 Material
Travel &Self
for constructed
Hospitality equipment
Directors Power Overheads
71 Site Equipment Prelims & general
27 Travel & Hospitality Guests Overheads
72 Security charges Overheads
73 28 Travel
Sealant Overheads Overheads
74 29 Tools
Miscellaneous Expenses Overheads Consumables
75 30 welding
Medical items
Expenses Overheads Welding Rods
76 31 Labor WelfareWires
Welding Labor Welding Rods
77 32 Labor Welfare celebrity
Transportation Purchases Labor Overheads
78 33 Labor Wages
Welding Electrode Labor Welding Rods
79 Leased Line Internet & collocation Charges Overheads
34 Telephone Instruments Overheads
80 Internet & collocation Charges Overheads
81 35 Telephone
Interest Expenses Expenses Overheads Overheads
82 36 Site Maintenance
Insurance Car Overheads Overheads
83 37 Seminar
Insurance & Training
Worker Expenses
Compensation Labor Overheads
84 38 Insurance
SafetyOthers
Products Overheads Consumables
39 Repair & Maintenance Computers Overheads
40 Repair & Maintenance P& M Power
85 Insurance Labor
86 Hire charges DG Sets Power
87 Hire Charge Machinery Power
88 Hire charges Power
89 Gifts & Entertainment Expenses Overheads
90 Food & refreshment- staff Overheads
91 Food & refreshment- Labor Labor
92 Penalty Overheads
93 Festival celebration Expenses Overheads
94 Fees & commission Overheads
95 Job & Work Charges Labor
96 Electricity charges Overheads
97 Donation Overheads
98 Diesel & Fuel for Machinery Power
99 Diesel & Fuel Expenses Power
100 Conveyance Overheads
101 Contract Staff Salary Overheads
102 Contract Labor Labor
103 Other Consumables Consumables
104 Consumables Consumables
105 Customs and Demurrage Charges Overheads
106 Gas & Lubricant Power
107 General Expenses Overheads
108 Wood Preliminary
109 Brokerage Labor
110 Books & periodicals Overheads
111 Network Maintenance Overheads
112 House keeping Labor
113 Directors Conveyance Overheads
114 Boarding & lodging Overheads
115 BG charges Overheads
116 Lc Commission Overheads
117 Bank charges & commission Overheads
118 Electricity appliances office Overheads
119 Electrical items Preliminary
120 Electrical Accessories site Preliminary
121 Electricity appliances site Preliminary
122 Staff Welfare Overheads
Table 5: Mapping between Cost head and Estimation head
123 Packaging material Overheads
124 Packaging Overheads
125 Labor Labor
126 PRW Labor Labor
127 Statutory Exp. PRW Labor
128 Aluminum Sections NA
129 Angles & Sections NA
130 Bought-Out Materials NA
WORK FLOW FOR A CONSTRUCTION PROJECT
Fig 2: THE FLOW CHART OF OBTAINING A PROJECT
Fig 3: THE FLOW CHART OF WORK FOR A TYPICAL PROJECT
The Entire project is divided into different activities; Design (DES) & Detailing, Factory
Fabrication (FFB), Site Fabrication (SFB), Erection (ERE), Painting (PNT), Roofing-Cladding,
and Civil works. The company is mainly into Steel Fabrication and Erection which incur the
company the major costs, moreover other activities like Roofing, painting and civil works is
mostly sub-contracted. Hence scope would be limited into estimating the Cost Drivers for three
main activities viz. Factory Fabrication, Site Fabrication and Erection.
After the Scope document is prepared, we have the nature of work to be done for each of the
project, tonnage of the project, amount of fabrication done in the factory and Erection
individually, classification into which the project would fall into, duration planned and actual
duration of the project. If the project is not complete yet, the estimated completion date is taken
in place of actual duration. The Planned duration and Actual duration together give us the delay
in the project with respect to what was planned actually, which could be one of the factor in
increase in cost vis-à-vis cost planned.
CALCULATING THE COST OF PROJECTS
The Actual cost of the project is found out by looking into the Cost-Centre of the Accounting
book. Cost-Centers are the list of different projects done by the company, hence whenever a
cost is incurred for a project, then the particular cost is assigned to the respective cost-centre.
Under Each Cost centre, there are various ledger accounts concerned with that particular
project.
All the Voucher Entries are exported from TALLY (Accounting software of the company) into
MS.Excel 2007 format; Looking at the narration of each voucher entry and looking at the bill
number of the purchase, each voucher can be assigned different activities and Groups, viz.
FFB, SFB, ERE, IDC, PNT, PRE, DES, OTH.
FFB- All the Costs incurred Directly, Indirectly or for purchases for Factory Fabrication.
SFB- All the Costs incurred Directly, Indirectly or for purchases for Site Fabrication.
ERE- All the Costs incurred Directly, Indirectly or for purchases for Erection purpose.
PNT- All the costs incurred for Painting works.
DES- All the Allot able costs for Designing and detailing purpose.
PRE- all the costs incurred for preparation of working platform and other onetime
preliminary expenses which would help site fabrication and Erection works.
IDC- includes all the recurring Indirect Expenses which cannot be assigned to any
particular activity as such but would result in total increase in the cost of the project.
OTH- includes costs incurred for other activities like Civil Works etc.
For Each activity, the ledgers involved are grouped into various Estimation heads like Labor,
Power – Plant & Machinery, Welding items, Overheads, Consumables. This is done looking at
the Mapping between Ledger Accounts and Estimation heads table. The costs of materials are
taken as NA, as they don’t fall into the scope of the project. Hence we have all the costs
divided amongst different activities and Estimation heads. Creating a pivot table gives a
summary for each category of costs.
The below is the table obtained after pivoting the table, this gives us the total cost incurred for
each activity. These values are taken for further analyses and to find out the percentage
variation in the cost with respect to standard cost/moon for that particular category of the
project.
Task Group Esti Total
ERE Purchases Consumables ####
NA ####
Overheads ###
Purchases Total #####
Direct Exps Labor ####
NA ####
Power #####
Welding #####
Direct Exps Total ###
IDC Indirect Exps Labor #####
NA ####
Overheads #####
Indirect Exps Total ####
PNT Direct Exps NA ####
Direct Exps Total ######
PRE Direct Exps Overheads ####
Power ###
Direct Exps Total ####
SFB Purchases Consumables ####
NA ####
Overheads ###
Welding ####
Purchases Total #####
Direct Exps Labor #####
NA ####
Overheads ####
Power ####
Welding ####
Direct Exps Total #####
Taxes Direct Exps NA #####
Direct Exps Total #####
Grand Total #####3
Table 6: A model of pivot table showing the cost of a project

PURCHA NET COST/M. std VARIAN %GE
DIRECT SE TOTAL TONS TON cost/m.ton CE Varia
LABOUR nce
FACTORY 0
OVERHEADS
FACT. 0
WELDING
FACTORY 0
CONSUMAB
LES FACT. 0
POWER
FACT. 0
SITE 4,537.6 1321.625
LABOUR ### ##### 861.34 3 3216 096 41%
SITE 1,152.5 -
WELDING #### #### #### 861.34 4 2085 932.4644 -45%
SITE #### 908.2 -159
CONSUMAB #### # 861.34 3 1000 91.77386 -9%
LES #### 652.5 398
-
SITE POWER ### # 861.34 4 3000 2347.464 -78%
SITE 327.9 -996
OVERHEADS ### 1 #### 861.34 1 2200 1872.092 -85%
ERECTION 9,315.7 321
5751.779
LABOUR ##### ##### 118.76 8 3564 724 161%
ERECTION #### 4,818.6 618.6889
POWER #### # 118.76 9 4200 525 15%
ERECTION ## 21.0 -
OVERHEADS ##### ## 118.76 5 2200 2178.949 -99%
ERECTION #### 2,803.6 141
718.6628
WELDING #### # 118.76 6 2085 494 34%
ERECTION #### 2,566.7 1666.785
CONSUMAB #### # 118.76 9 900 955 185%
LES
PRELIMINA ## 29.1
RIES #### ## 118.76 3
OVERHEADS
PRELIMINA 5.7
RIES POWER #### ### 118.76 3
TOTAL ## 34.8 -
PRELIMNAR ###3 ## 118.76 6 650 615.1397 -95%
IES 777
Table 7: A model variation table for a project
DC LABOUR #####
IDC OVERHEADS #####
TOTAL Actual Averag Cost/m.ton Std Variance(increa %ge
cost e tons cost/m.ton se in cost) Varianc
Labor ##### 980.1 5730.59432 3258.1676 2,472.43 76%
Overheads ##### 980.1 2406.83995
7 2200
2 206.84 9%
Consumables # ##### 980.1 71109.196 987.88286 121.31 12%
Power ##### 980.1 1158.04713 3145.4055
9 (1,987.36) -63%
Welding ###### 980.1 1352.60483
8 2085
7 (732.40) -35%
6
Table 8: A model of Total cost variation table for a project
The Total costs for Each Estimation head is a sum total of Estimation head costs of each
activity and IDC costs. Hence Total Labor cost in the Total Cost of Estimation head table is a
sum of Labor costs of FFB, ERE, SFB and IDC.
Following this method for all the projects selected gives us Variation of Costs for each of the
activity against the standard cost for the respective activity. Hence we can tell, by how much
percentage is each Estimation head varying and can analyze the reason for the same.
Average tons: is the weighted average of fabrication and Erection work done for a particular
project.
Cost/m.ton: is obtained by dividing Actual Cost by the Average Tons of work done.
Std Cost/m.ton: is the average of standard cost/m.ton for different activities for a particular
project.
Variance: is the difference between Actual Cost/m.ton and Std Cost/m.ton. If the Variance is
positive, it is Unfavorable variance, which means the actual cost is more than standard cost and
if the variance is negative, it is favorable variance, which means the actual cost is lesser than
standard cost.
Percentage Variance: It is obtained by dividing the Variance with Std. cost/m.ton and putting
the result in terms of percentage.
CIDCO – 1433
NET TONS COST/ std VARIA %G

TOTAL MTON cost/m.t NCE E
LABOUR 0
FACT.
OVERHEAD 0
S FACT.
WELDING 0
FACT.
CONSUMA 0
BLES FACT.
POWER 0
FACT.
SITE 3,908,4 861.34 4,537.6 3216 1321.6 41%
LABOUR 38 3 25096
SITE 992,725 861.34 1,152.5 2085 - -
WELDING 4 932.46 45%
SITE 716,041 861.34 831.31 1000 - -
CONSUMA 168.69 17%
SITE 562,055 861.34 652.54 3000 - -
POWER 2347.4 78%
SITE 282,440 861.34 327.91 2200 - -
OVERHEAD 1872.0 85%
ERE. 1,106,3 118.76 9,315.7 3564 5751.7 161
LABOUR 42 8 79724 %
ERE. 572,268 118.76 4,818.6 4200 618.68 15%
POWER 9 89525
ERE. 2,500 118.76 21.05 2200 - -
OVERHEAD 2178.9 99%
ERE. 332,963 118.76 2,803.6 2085 718.66 34%
WELDING 6 28494
ERE. 232,409 118.76 1,956.9 900 1056.9 117
CONSUMA 6 59414 %
PRE. 3,460 118.76 29.13
OVERHEAD
PRE. 138,674 118.76 1,167.6
CONSUMA 8
PRE. 680 118.76 5.73
TOTAL 142 118.76 1,202. 650 552.54 85%
IDC LABOUR 601,776

IDC OVERHEADS 2,070,544
TOTAL Actual cost Cumulativ Cost/m.ton Std Variance(increas %ge

e tons Cost/m.to e in cost) Variance
n
Labor 5,616,556 490.05 11,461.19 6780 4,681.19 69%
Overheads 2,358,944 490.05 4,813.68 4400 413.68 9%
Consumables 948,449 490.05 1,935.41 1900 35.41 2%
Power 1,135,002 490.05 2,316.09 7200 (4,883.91) -68%
Welding 1,325,688 490.05 2,705.21 4170 (1,464.79) -35%
Table 9: Variation of Activity wise costs and total cost variation for Cidco Project
Comments:
Labor-The Total Labor cost is underestimated by 69%. Both Site Fabrication and Erection
labors are more than Standard even by leaving out IDC costs.
Overheads-As both the Site Fabrication work and Erection work takes place at the site of
construction, differentiation of overheads from IDC would be difficult. Hence it is sensible to
look into the total overhead costs rather than individual overheads costs fonder both activities
separately. Hence in this case the total overhead cost is underestimated by 9%.
Consumables-The cost of Consumables for Erection is more than the standard cost. The
cumulative cost of consumables is also lesser than the standard cost as seen from the table.
Power-The power requirement for Erection is more as this is a Welded Structure and that for
Site Fabrication is lesser by 70%. The Cumulative power requirement is also lesser by 63%
from the Standard costs.
Welding-The Welding cost, unlike bolted structures is not lesser by a larger magnitude, still the
total Welding cost is lesser than the standard Welding cost. Hence the standard Welding cost is
overestimated.
6.2 CHEPAUK STADIUM
DIRE PURCH INITIAL NET TON COST/M std VARIAN %GE

CT ASE TOTAL TOTAL S TON cost/m. CE Varian
ton ce
LABOUR 1,185, 1,185,00 1185002. 84 14107.176 3228 10879.17 337%
FACTORY 003 2.81 806 26 626
OVERHEAD 428,92 33,168 462,096. 462,096. 84 5501.1428 2610 2891.142 111%
S FACT. 8 00 00 57 857
WELDING 41,447 41,447.0 41447 84 493.41666 2085 - -76%
FACTORY 0 67 1591.583
333
CONSUMAB 256,678 256,678. 256678 84 3055.6904 800 2255.690 282%
LES FACT. 00 76 476
POWER 14,567 235934 250,501. 250,501. 84 2982.1547 2431 551.1547 23%
FACT. 00 00 62 619
SITE - 0 84 0 0
LABOUR
SITE - 0 84 0 0
WELDING
SITE - 0 84 0 0
CONSUMAB
LES
SITE - 0 84 0 0
POWER
SITE - 0 84 0 0
OVERHEAD
S
ERECTION 701,75 701,751. 701,751. 84 8354.1808 4515 3839.180 85%
LABOUR 1 19 19 83 883
ERECTION 947,83 947,832. 947,832. 84 11283.714 5000 6283.714 126%
POWER 2 00 00 29 286
ERECTION 37,766 37,766.0 37,766.0 84 449.59523 2500 - -82%
OVERHEAD 0 0 81 2050.404
S 762
ERECTION 388,159 388,159. 388159 84 4620.9404 1100 3520.940 320%
CONSUMAB 00 76 476
LES
PRELIMINA 88439 88,439.0 88439 84 1052.8452 750 302.8452 40%
RIES 0 38 381
CONSUMAB
LES
PRELIMNA - 0 84 0 0
RIES
POWER
IDC LABOUR 181028.5

IDC OVERHEADS 535851.96
TOTAL WEIGHTED COST/MTO WEIGHTED VARIANCE(increa TOTAL

COST AVG. N CUM. STD se in actual cost) %GE
TONNAGE COST/MTO VARIANC
N E
TOTAL LABOUR 2,067,782. 84 24,616.46 7743 16,873.46 218%
50
TOTAL 1,035,713. 84 12,329.93 5110 7,219.93 141%
OVERHEADS 96
TOTAL WELDING 41,447.00 84 493.42 4170 (3,676.58) -88%
TOTAL POWER 1,198,333. 84 14,265.87 7,431.00 6,834.87 92%
00
TOTAL 644,837.00 84 7,676.63 1900 5,776.63 304%
CONSUMABLES
Table 10: Variation of Activity wise costs and total cost variation for Chepauk Stadium Project
Comments:
Labor The Reason for this is there is no apparent distinction in the accounts books
between labors used for the fabrication work and for Fabric installation work.
Overheads The variance of 120% for the total overheads is assigned to the same reason as
above. Although if only direct cost is considered the overheads for factory is
92% implies the overheads standard is underestimated and hence need to be
revised
Welding The Factory Fabrication Welding cost is overestimated by 80% and hence need
to be revised. The Erection is majorly bolted and hence there is no welding cost
involved in the erection.
Power The Power charges are lesser by a magnitude more than that for other projects.
Looking at the welding charges, as lesser welding work is done; this must have
impacted the power charges as well.
Consumable The Total consumable charges has increased as special kinds of consumables
s were used in Fabric installation work and the differentiation needs to be done
between consumables used for only Fabrication and Erection work and
Consumables used for special purposes like Fabric Installation in this case.
Preliminaries Costs incurred for Preliminary is not separated in the Accounts book and
moreover this being a project stretched for a very short period of time,
differentiation is more difficult in this case.
6.3 DIAL MEZZ FLOOR
INDIRE DIRECT PURCHA NET TON COST/MT std VARIAN %GE
CT SE TOTAL S ON cost/m.t CE Varian
LABOUR 103669 7878009 7,981,678. 1800 4434.2655 on
2367 2067.265 ce
87%
FACTORY 00 56 556
OVERHEAD 283950 7331749 3772628. 11,388,32 1800 6326.8484 1958 4368.848 223%
S FACT. 25 7.25 72 472
WELDING 3487195 3,487,195. 1800 1937.3305 1668 269.3305 16%
FACTORY 00 56 556
CONSUMAB 2,775,865 2,775,865. 1800 1542.0125 750 792.125 106%
LES FACT. .50 50
POWER 1107 8705542 8,706,649. 1800 4837.0272 1823 3014.027 165%
FACT. 00 22 222
SITE 150 260 410.00 0 0
LABOUR
SITE - 0 0
WELDING
SITE - 0 0
CONSUMAB
LES
SITE POWER (722) (722.00) 0 0
SITE 162 192 354.00 0 0

OVERHEAD
S
ERECTION 12,061,11 12,061,11 1800 6700.62 3564 3136.62 88%
LABOUR 6.00 6.00
ERECTION 6481707.6 6,481,707. 1800 3600.9486 4200 - -14%
POWER 3 63 83 599.0513
ERECTION 451852 451,852.0 1800 251.02888 1668 -167 -85%
WELDING 0 89 1416.971
ERECTION -5000 34373 29,373.00 1800 16.318333 2200 111
- -99%
OVERHEAD 33 2183.681
S
ERECTION 1264113 1,264,113. 1800 702.285 900 667
-197.715 -22%
CONSUMAB 00
LES
PRELININAR 180 40403
IES
CONSUMAB
PRELIMINA 3300 3,300.00 1800
RIES POWER
TOTAL
PRELIMINA 850160 853,460.0 474.14 700 (225.
RIES 3300 0 1800 86) -32%
IDC LABOUR 2082907
IDC POWER 8850
IDC CONSUMABLES 0
IDC WELDING 0
TOTAL Cumulative Average Cost/m.ton Standard Variance %ge

Cost tons Cost/m.ton (increase in Variance
cost)
Labor 22,125,701.0 1800 12292.0561 5931 6361.05611 107%
0 1 1
Overheads 28,247,561.7 1800 15693.0898 4158 11535.0898 277%
1 4 4
Welding 3,939,047.00 1800 2188.35944 3336 - -34%
4 1147.64055
6
Power 15,200,506.6 1800 8444.72590 6023 2421.72590 40%
3 6 6
Consumables 4,849,735.50 1800 2694.2975 1650 1044.2975 63%
Table 11: Variation of Activity wise costs and total cost variation for Chepauk Stadium Project
Comments
Labor- The Total Labor cost is exceeded by 124% for all the activities included. If only
FFB is considered, even after excluding IDC cost, the labor cost is more by 129%.
The data for SFB is not correctly maintained, Hence SFB labor cost is not available
Overheads- The Total Overheads cost is exceeded by 314% from the standard cost. One of the
reasons that could be attributed is the distance of the Site from the Factories which
are situated all the way south of the country.
Welding- As the Structure is Welded, any welding charges is incurred for FFB only. And
only a small amount of Welding is done in site. Hence the total welding cost is
lower than the standard.
Consumables The Total Consumables used for the factory is more than the standard cost.
The total consumables for the other projects are more than the standard cost for the
cumulative cost.
Power- The power and Plant& Machinery cost for mezzanine cost for FFB is also 150%
more than the standard cost. Whereas the power cost for Erection is in terms with
other projects, i.e. less by 14% of the Standard Cost.
6.4 INDORE STADIUM
SFB Direct Purcha Initial Net Ton Cost/m.T Std Variance %ge
Indir se total Total s on cost/m. Varia
ect ton nce
SITE 5,009, 5,009,65 5,009,65 825. 6069.433 4410 1659.433 38%
LABOUR 650 0.00 0.00 39 843 843
SITE 1,672, 1,672,10 1,672,10 825. 2025.839 2085 - -3%
WELDING 108 8.00 8.00 39 906 59.16009
402
SITE 735,2 735,211. 735,211. 825. 890.7438 1000 - -11%
CONSUMA 11 05 05 39 302 109.2561
BLES 698
SITE 1,750, 1,750,44 1,750,44 825. 2120.744 4100 - -48%
POWER 441 1.00 1.00 39 133 1979.255
867
SITE - 214,6 1,650 213,421. 213,421. 825. 258.5698 2600 - -90%
OVERHEA 2902 73 00 00 39 882 2341.430
DS 112
ERECTION 1,032, 1,032,53 1,032,53 252. 4082.630 4560 - -10%
LABOUR 538 8.00 8.00 91 185 477.3698
153
ERECTION 1,074, 1,074,10 1,074,10 252. 4247.000 5100 - -17%
POWER 109 9.00 9.00 91 909 852.9990
906
ERECTION 8138 - 8,138.00 8,138.00 252. 32.17745 2600 - -99%
OVERHEA 91 443 2567.822
DS 546
ERECTION 24,72 24,720.0 24,720.0 252. 97.74227 2085 - -95%
WELDING 0 0 0 91 986 1987.257
72
ERECTION 576,0 576,045. 576,045. 252. 2277.671 1100 1177.671 107%
CONSUMA 46 95 95 91 701 701
BLES
PRE. 65099 650,998. 650,998.
CONSUMA 8 00 00
BLES
PRE. 488, 488,507. 488,507.
LABOUR 507 00 00
TOTAL 1,139, 1,139 1380.565 750 630.5656 84%
PRELIMINA 505 ,505 1,139,50 825 551
RIES 5
IDC LABOUR 515243.56
IDC POWER 582935
IDC CONSUMABLES 14106.5
IDC WELDING -358582
TOTAL FROM Average tons Cost/m.ton Std Variance %ge

THIS cost/m.ton Variance
SHEET
Labor 6,557,431.5 539.15 12,162.54 8970 3,192.54 36%
6
Consumables 1,325,363.5 539.15 2,458.25 2100 358.25 17%
0
Overheads 3,020,006.7 539.15 5,601.42 5200 401.42 8%
1
Power 3,407,485.0 539.15 6,320.11 9200 (2,879.89 -31%
0 )
Welding 1,338,246.0 539.15 2,482.14 4170 (1,687.86 -40%
0 )
Table 11: Variation of Activity wise costs and total cost variation for Indore Stadium Project
Comments
Labor: The labor cost is 36% more than standard cost which is acceptable considering the average labor cost
for other projects.
Consumables: The Cost of consumables is more than the standard which is acceptable.
Overheads: The Overheads cost is lesser than average overhead cost of other projects. This project is more
efficient in terms of spending for overhead costs.
Welding: Although Raipur is partly welded structure, the cost for welding is still lesser than other welded
structure and the variance is in negative value with respect to standard cost/m.ton. Hence the standard cost is
over-estimated.
Power: The actual power cost is in negative value and is in line with other projects. Hence it is clear that the
standard power cost is over-estimated.
6.5 KOLKATTA AIRPORT
DIRE PURCH ADDITION INITIA NET TO COST/M std VARIA %GE

CT ASE ALS L TOTA NS TON cost/m. NCE Varia
LABOUR
FACTORY
OVERHEAD
S FACT.
WELDING
FACTORY
CONSUMA
BLES FACT.
POWER
FACT.
SITE 6,840, 684060 684060 971 7044.908 3336 3708.908 111%
LABOUR 606 6 6 342 342
SITE 810801 810801 810801 971 835.0164 1668 -832.98 -50%
WELDING 779
SITE 1780373. 178037 178037 971 1833.546 800 1033.546 129%
CONSUMA 6 3.6 3.6 447
BLES
SITE 29389 293895 293895 971 3026.733 3200 - -5%
POWER 58 8 8 265 173.2667
SITE 23063 13382 244019 244019 971 251.3069 2300 - -89%
OVERHEAD 7 001 2048.693
S
ERECTION 0 0 971 0 0
LABOUR
POWER
OVERHEAD
S
CONSUMA
BLES
PRELIMINA 699,8 699872 699872 971 720.7744 0
RIES 72 593
LABOUR
PRELIMNA 0 0 971 0 0
RIES
POWER
PRELIMINA 426,8 2,850 429696 429696 971 442.5293 0
RIES 46 512
OVERHEAD
S
PRELIMINA 427,106 427106 427106 971 439.8619 0
RIES 979
CONSUMA
PRELIMINA 11267 429956 0 155667 155667 971 1603.165 680 923.16 136%
RIES 18 4 4 808
TOTAL
IDC LABOUR 660823

IDC WELDING
IDC CONSUMABLES 11415
IDC POWER 72477
TOTAL Cumulative Average Cost/m.ton Std Variance %geLabor
Cost Tons Cost/m.ton
Labor 7501429 971 7725.46755 3336 4389 132%
9
Welding 810801 971 835.016477 1668 -833 -50%
9
Consumables 1791788.6 971 1845.30236 800 1045 131%
9
Power 3011435 971 3101.37487 3200 -99 -3%
1
Overheads 5952803.93 971 6130.59107 2300 3831 167%
7 9
Table 12: Variation of Activity wise costs and total cost variation for Kolkata Airport Project
Comments:
The Total Labor cost and Overheads cost has increased because of idle man-power in the site as the Fabricated
materials are not cleared by the client because there is a delay in their erection .The Delay has resulted in
increased overheads cost as well.
Consumables: Increase in consumables is because there is a special kind of problem being faced by the Site
fabrication labors. The alignment of the material is not matching to the client’s requirement and hence gases are
used to heat the metal to make it aligned as per the specification. This has resulted in increased Consumable
cost.
Power: Power cost, although looks like it is below the standard power cost; if the average actual cost/m.ton of
other projects is considered, then the power cost is more. This is attributed to the same reason as above, i.e. due
to because of Heating of Metal structures to make it come to proper alignment.
Welding: The Welding cost is in lesser than standard welding cost/m.ton but it is in the same lines with other
projects. Hence the Standard welding cost is under-estimated.
6.6 RAIPUR AIRPORT-1463
INDIRE DIREC SFB/ER PURCH NET TONS COST/ std VARIA %GE
CT T E ASE TOTAL MTON cost/m.t NCE Varianc
LABO - 2.407 - on
1566 (1,566. e-100%
UR 00)
FACTO
OVER - 2.407 - 1253 (1,253. -100%
HEADS 00)
FACT.
WELDI - 2.407 - 1390 (1,390. -100%
NG 00)
FACTO
CONSU - 2.407 - 600 (600.00 -100%
MABL )
ES
POWE - 2.407 - 1167 (1,167. -100%
R 00)
FACT.
SITE 39812 693825 6,978,0 651.73 10,706. 2560 8,146.9 169%
LABO 7.4 69.40 99 9
UR
SITE 132997 1,329,9 651.73 2,040.6 1390 650.68 47%
WELDI 5 75.00 8
NG
SITE 107906. 767755. 875,66 651.73 1,343.6 700 643.60 92%
CONSU 5 46 1.96 0
MABL
SITE 276475 -207176 2,557,5 651.73 3,924.3 2200 1,724.3 78%
POWE 9.5 83.50 0 0
R
SITE 173908 348931 600 0 523,43 651.73 803.15 1850 (1,046. -57%
OVER 9.00 85)
HEADS
ERE. 995,124 995,12 654.137 1,521.2 2830 (1,308. 84%
LABO 4.19 8 72)
UR
ERE. 688,003 688,00 654.137 1,051.7 3500 (2,448. -70%
POWE 2.50 7 23)
R
ERE. 23,804 23,804. 654.137 36.39 1390 (1,353. -97%
WELDI 00 61)
NG
ERE.O 276845. 11499 600 288,94 654.137 441.72 1850 (1,408. -76%
VERHE 5023 4.50 28)
ADS
ERE.C 116228. 107906. 19,494 243,62 654.137 372.44 800 (427.56 -53%
ONSU 54 5 9.04 )
MABL PRE. 72062 72062 -
LABO
UR
PRE. 23804 23804
WELDI
NG
PRE. 95550 1175 96725 -
OVER
HEADS
PRE. 121686 378453 500139 -
CONSU
MABL
PRE.PO 1820 1820 -
WER
PRELIM 694550 654.137 1, 500 56 112%
INARIE 061.78 1.78
S
IDC LABOUR 227269

IDC WELDING 0
IDC POWER 8900
Activity Tons Proportion

FFB 2.407 0.0018398
SFB 651.73 0.4981602
ERE 654.137 0.5
TOTAL Cumulative Average Cost/m.ton Std Variance %ge

Cost Tons Cost/m.ton Variance
Labor 8,115,538.59 436.09 18609.72 6956 11653.72 168%
Welding 1,353,779.00 436.09 3104.3474074170 -1065.652593-26%
Overheads 3,646,246.74 436.09 8361.1997334953 3408.199733 69%
Consumables 1,119,291.00 436.89 2561.93002 2100 461.9300196 22%
Power 3,254,486.00 436.89 7449.1489546867 582.1489539 8%
Table 13: Variation of Activity wise costs and total cost variation for Raipur Airport Project
Comment:
Labor: The Contractual duration was 6 month, but the estimated duration is 15 months now;
there is an idle labor in the site, this has lead to increased site fabrication labor cost.
Overheads: The Overheads is mainly in the form of IDC and has increased the total overheads
cost w.r.t. standard by 69%. This is also attributed to the delay in the project implementation.
Power: The power cost is more than the average for other projects because it is a welded
structure and hence power required in this case will also be more.
Consumables: The consumables cost is more than standard cost but is on par with average
consumable cost for other projects.
Welding: The Welded cost is less by 26% of the standard cost even though it is a bolted
structure. Hence it can be argued that the Standard cost for welding is under-estimated.
6.7 RAJAMANDRY AIRPORT
DIRECT PURCHA TOTAL TON COST/m.t std VARIAN %GE

SE COST S on cost/m.t CE VARIAN
LABOUR 1,296,242. 1,296,242. 291 4,454.44 on
2367 2,087.44 CE
88%
FACTORY 00 00
OVERHEADS 1,247,486. 465,716.0 1,713,202. 291 5,887.29 1958 3,929.29
FACT. 00 0 00 93%
WELDING 482,823.0 482,823.0 291 1,659.19 1668 (8.81)
FACTORY 0 0 -1%
CONSUMABLES 1,038,002. 1,038,002. 291 3,567.02 750 2,817.02
FACT. 00 00 244%
POWER FACT. 138,171.8 138,171.8 291 474.82 1823 (1,348.18)
0 0 -76%
SITE LABOUR 1,046,345. 1,046,345. 144 7,266.29 3216 4,050.29
80 80 126%
SITE WELDING 121,618.0 121,618.0 144 844.57 1668 (823.43)
0 0 -49%
SITE 289,719.6 289,719.6 144 2,011.94 800 1,211.94
CONSUMABLES 2 2 121%
SITE POWER 714,116.9 714,116.9 144 4,480.15 3000 1,959.15
5 5 37%
SITE 251,835.0 79,513.00 331,348.0 144 2,301.03 2200 101.03
OVERHEADS 0 0 171%
ERECTION 1,509,530. 1,509,530. 435 3,470.19 3564 (93.81)
LABOUR 70 70 -3%
ERECTION 284,915.0 284,915.0 435 654.98 4200 (3,545.02)
POWER 5 5 -76%
ERECTION 15,680.00 270.00 15,950.00 435 36.67 2200 (2,163.33)
OVERHEADS -89%
ERECTION 79,133.20 79,133.20 435 181.92 900 (718.08)
CONSUMABLES -42%
PRE.CONSUMAB 72,697.00
LES
PRE. LABOUR 157859 157,859.0
0
Total Preliminaries
451,4 1,037.8 387.
202,408.0 72,697.00 82.0 435 9 650 89 (17.57) 60%
IDC TOTAL
IDC LABOUR 221622
ACTIVITY TONS PROPORTION

FFB 291 0.334482759
SFB 144 0.165517241
ERE 435 0.5
ESTIM. HEAD CUMULATIV Weighted COST/MTO STANDAR VARIANC %GE VARIANCE

E COST avg. tonnage N D E
COST/MTO
N
TOTAL 4,073,740.50 290.00 14,047.38 9,147.00 4,900.38 54%
LABOUR
TOTAL 5,029,230.33 290.00 17,342.17 6358 10,984.17 173%
OVERHEADS
TOTAL 604,441.00 290.00 2,084.28 5,004.00 (2,919.72) -58%
WELDING
TOTAL POWER 1,137,203.80 290.00 3,921.39 9,023.00 (5,101.61) -56%
TOTAL 1,241,708.8 290.00 2,450.00 75%
CONSUMABLES 2 4,281.75 1,831.75
Table 14: Variation of Activity wise costs and total cost variation for Rajahmundry
Airport Project
Comments:
Labor: The Labor cost for FFB is increased because of Over-time work charges.
Consumables: The Consumable costs have increased because of delay in factory fabrication
and the rework done. Further the Standard cost/m.ton for consumables seems to be
underestimated.
Overheads: Total overhead has increased because of the rework done for fabrication
purpose and also because of delay in the project.
Welding: The cost of welding is lower than the standard cost. This being a simple structure,
the welding is bound to be lesser for fabrication purpose. Moreover as it is a Bolted
Structure, there is no welding cost incurred for Erection purpose.
Power: The Total power charge is lesser than standard cost, as is the case for other project
as well. As it is difficult to differentiate the Diesel cost for SFB and ERE, there is
an increase in the power cost for SFB.
6.8 TCS PHASE 2- 1383
INDIR DIRECT PURCH INITIAL NET TON COST/M std VARIA %GE
ECT ASE TOTAL TOTAL S TON cost/m NCE Varia
LABOUR - - 10.6 0 .ton
2304 -2304 nce
-
FACTORY 100%
OVERHEA - - 10.6 0 1958 -1958 -
DS FACT. 100%
WELDING - - 10.6 0 1668 -1668 -
FACTORY 100%
CONSUMA - - 10.6 0 750 -750 -
BLES 100%
FACT.
POWER 5,547.00 5,547.00 5,547.00 10.6 523.3018 1823 - -71%
FACT. 868 1299.69
SITE 15,829,3 15,829,3 15,829,3 1862 8501.268 3336 8113
5165.26 155%
LABOUR 62.06 62.06 62.06 562 8562
SITE 2,653,8 2,653,82 2,653,82 1862 1425.253 1668 - -15%
WELDING 22.30 2.30 2.30 652 242.746
SITE 2,111,6 2,111,68 2,111,68 1862 1134.095 800 348
334.095 42%
CONSUMA 86.20 6.20 6.20 704 7035
BLES
SITE 7,077,72 7,077,72 7,077,72 1862 3801.143 3200 601.143 19%
POWER 9.44 9.44 9.44 631 6305
SITE 143,765. (2,633.7 141,131. 141,131. 1862 75.79551 2300 - -97%
OVERHEA 00 5) 25 25 557 2224.20
DS
ERECTION - 4,563,28 4,563,28 4,563,28 1414 3226.329 3612 4484
- -11%
LABOUR 7.64 7.64 7.64 .39 121 385.670
ERECTION 8,166,79 8,166,79 8,166,79 1414 5774.078 4400 8794
1374.07 31%
POWER 8.64 8.64 8.64 .39 324 8324
ERECTION 333,21 5,600.00 1,132.5 339,949. 339,949. 1414 240.3506 2300 - -90%
OVERHEA 7.00 0 50 50 .39 105 2059.64
DS
ERECTION 1,144,4 1, 1414 1069.228 1668 9389
- -36%
WELDING 29.60 512306 1512,306 .39 572 858.867
ERECTION 956,038 956,038. 956,038. 1414 675.9371 900 -0169 -25%
CONSUMA .80 80 80 .39 885 224.062
BLES
PRE. 1,921,27 1,921,27 1,921,27 1862 1031.834 8115
LABOUR 5.49 5.49 5.49 31
PRE. 230,998. 230,998. 230,998. 1862 124.0593
POWER 60 60 60 985
PRE. 80,050.0 43,245. 123,295. 123,295. 1862 66.21643
OVERHEA 0 00 00 00 394
DS
PRE. 301,309 301,309. 301,309. 1862 161.8200
CONSUMA .00 00 00 859
BLES
PRE. 0 0 0 0 0
WELDING
PRE. 1862 1383.930 680 703.93 104%
TOTAL 228
TONS PROPORTION
FFB 10.6085 0.003100361
SFB 1861.95 0.544159575
ERE 1549.14 0.452740065
IDC LABOUR 1573946.807

IDC WELDING 0
IDC POWER 150171.32
TOTAL Average Tons COST/MTO STD VARIANC %GE

(Except N COST/MTO E VARIANC
preliminaries) N E
TOTAL LABOUR 21,962,171.5 1,787.40 12,287.23 6948 5,339.23 77%
1
TOTAL 9,827,880.10 1,712.80 5,737.91 4600 1,137.91 25%
OVERHEADS
TOTAL 3,798,251.90 1,638.20 2,318.56 3336 (1,017.44) -24%
WELDING
TOTAL POWER 15,400,246.4 1,563.59 9,849.27 7600 2,249.27 30%
0
TOTAL 3,648,031.00 1,488.99 2,450.00 1700 750.00 44%
CONSUMABLES
Table 15: Variation of Activity wise costs and total cost variation for TCS Phase 2 Project
Power: The Total power cost has positive variance in this case, as power must have been utilized for
welding joints.More-over as the structure is Complex-heavy, the total power cost is more.
Consumables: The Standard Consumable cost is under-estimated. Comments
Labor: Costs for factory cannot be accurately measured as the tonnage of work involved
in case of FFB is meager. Cost of total labor is 77% more than the standard cost which
implies that the standard cost were underestimated.
Overheads: The Overheads are hidden in the form of IDC for SFB and ERE, hence total
Overheads costs has to be seen. Total overheads cost is 25% more than the standard
overheads cost.
Welding: Total welding cost is 24% lesser than the standard cost. The standard welding
cost seems to be underestimated
6.9 TNLA DOME 2028
DIRE PURCH ADDITION INITI NET TONS COST/M std VARIA %GE
CT ASE ALS AL TOT TON cost/m. NCE Varia
TOTA AL ton nce
L
LABOUR 1,621, 1,621, 16211 272.20 5955.737 3216 2739.74 85%
FACTORY 175 175 75 389 811
OVERHEAD 1,476, 2,229 1,478, 14789 272.20 5433.239 2610 2823.24 108%
S FACT. 720 949 49 389 767
WELDING 200,339 200,3 20033 272.20 735.9887 2085 -1349.01 -65%
FACTORY 39 9 389 473
CONSUMA 347,342 347,3 34734 272.20 1276.036 900 376.04 42%
BLES FACT. 42 2 389 136
POWER 1,158, 1,158, 11582 272.20 4255.060 2431 1824.06 75%
FACT. 244 244 44 389 425
SITE - - 0 4410
LABOUR
SITE - 0 2085
WELDING
SITE - 0 1000
CONSUMA
BLES
SITE - - 0 4100
POWER
SITE - - 0 2600
OVERHEAD
S
PRELIMINA 143,7 90000 233,7 23374 0 4560
RIES 49 49 9
LABOUR
PRELIMINA 37,80 4190 41,99 41990 0 5100
RIES 0 0
POWER
PRELIMINA 120,0 23200 143,2 14320 0 2600
RIES 00 00 0
OVERHEAD
S
PRELIMINA 3,102 3,102 3102 0 1100
RIES
CONSUMA
BLES
TOTAL 301,5 120,492 422,0 422,0 851 495.94 750 (254.06) -34%
PRELIMINA 49 41 41
RIES
IDC LABOUR 176923

IDC OVERHEADS 3,867,973.8
4
IDC WELDING 54,240.00
IDC POWER 1047664
TOTAL Actual Weighted Cost/m.ton Standard Variance %ge

Cost(except avg. tons Cost/m.ton Variance
preliminaries
)
Labor 1,798,098 272.20389 6,605.70 7626 (1,020) -13%
Overheads 5,346,923 272.20389 19,643.08 5210 14,433 277%
Welding 254,579 272.20389 935.25 4170 (3,235) -78%
Consumables 967,595 272.20389 3,554.67 1800 1,755 97%
Power 2,205,908 272.20389 8,103.88 4862 3,242 67%
Additional Tons
total dispatched till march 102.13289

Total material completed but
not dispatched in bidar
factory 57.393
Total fit up completed in
march 16
Total Welded in march 18
Total material completed but
not dispatched in Peenya
factory 78.678
Total tonnage for which cost
is incurred 272.20389
In this unique case, the project is still in progress and the fabrication is done in the factory. The
Fabricated structures were stored at factory itself and not dispatched to the site, Hence the
Tonnage of fabrication done but not dispatched is also taken into account for both Peenya and
Bidar factory.
Before dispatching the materials go through different processes; namely, fit-up, Welding,
Priming and then dispatching.
A portion of weightage is assigned to each of these activities according to the expenses incurred
in each of the processes.
Accordingly
• Fit-up= 50%
• Welding=20%
• Painting=20%
• Dispatching=10%
Thereby once a product passes through different activities; its quantity is multiplied by
the total cumulative proportion of weightages till that stage and thereby calculating the
cost for that quantity of material.
Comments:
Labor: The Labor cost for factory is more from standard cost by 85%; however the labor cost
for total figure is less by 3%. This is because, Erection work has not yet started and the all the
labor charges at site are allotted for preliminary activities.
Overheads: The overhead charges for Factory fabrication is more from standard cost by 108%,
however the total overhead cost is very high, this is because all the overheads at site are allotted
for preliminary activities as differentiating overheads for Erection and preliminary purpose is
difficult without proper record.
Consumables: Consumables for factory is more by 42% and that for total is more by 97%, this
increase is attributed to consumables used for Erection purpose which had just started in the
month of march.
Welding: The welding cost is clearly over-estimated, as it showing a variance of about 65%
favorably.
Power: The power cost in the factory is main cost driver for the total power increase. This
could be because of re-work done for the same material and fabricated materials which are
unaccounted because the materials are not dispatched from the factory.
RESULTS:
Project Name Labor Overheads Welding Power Consumables Preliminarie

s
Chepauk 218% 141% -88% 92% 304% 40%
Cidco 69% 9% -35% -68% 2% 85%
Dial Mezzanine 107% 277% -34% 40% 63% -32%
Indore stadium 36% 8% -40% -31% 17% 84%
Kolkata 132% 167% -50% -3% 131% 136%

Airport
Raipur Airport 170% 69% -26% 8% 22% 112%
Rajahmundry 54% 173% -58% -57% 75% 60%

Airport
TCS Phase 2 77% 25% -30% 30% 44% 133%
TNLA dome 64% 169% -78% 97% 67% -34%
Median of the 77% 141% -40% -31% 63% 84%

projects
Particula Simple Simple- Simple-heavy Complex- Complex-
rs Light medium medium heavy
Old New Old New Old New Old New Old New
FACT 3,2 5,713. 2,367 4,189. 1,566 2,771. 3,216. 5,692. 2,304 4,078.
LABOU 28. 56 .00 59 .00 82 00 32 .00 08
FACT. 1,6 1,000. 1,668 1,000. 1,390 834.0 2,085. 1,251. 1,668 1,000.
WELDI 68. 80 .00 80 .00 0 00 00 .00 80
FACT. 800 1,304. 750.0 1,222. 600.0 978.0 900.0 1,467. 750.0 1,222.
CONSU .00 00 0 50 0 0 0 00 0 50
FACT 2,4 1,677. 1,823 1,257. 1,167 805.2 2,431. 1,677. 1,823 1,257.
POWER 31. 39 .00 87 .00 3 00 39 .00 87
FACT. 2,6 6,290. 1,958 4,718. 1,253 3,019. 2,610. 6,290. 1,958 4,718.
OVERH 10. 10 .00 78 .00 73 00 10 .00 78
SITE 4,4 7,805. 3,216 5,692. 2,560 4,531. 4,410. 7,805. 3,336 5,904.
LABOU 10. 70 .00 32 .00 20 00 70 .00 72
SITE 2,0 1,251. 1,668 1,000. 1,390 834.0 2,085. 1,251. 1,668 1,000.
WELDI 85. 00 .00 80 .00 0 00 00 .00 80
SITE 1,0 1,630. 800.0 1,304. 700.0 1,141. 1,000. 1,630. 800.0 1,304.
CONSU 00. 00 0 00 0 00 00 00 0 00
SITE 4,0 2,760. 3,000 2,070. 2,200 1,518. 4,100. 2,829. 3,200 2,208.
POWER 00. 00 .00 00 .00 00 00 00 .00 00
SITE 2,5 6,025. 2,200 5,302. 1,850 4,458. 2,600. 6,266. 2,300 5,543.
OVERH 00. 00 .00 00 .00 50 00 00 .00 00
ERE. 4,5 7,991. 3,564 6,308. 2,830 5,009. 4,560. 8,071. 3,612 6,393.
LABOU 15. 55 .00 28 .00 10 00 20 .00 24
ERE. 5,0 3,450. 4,200 2,898. 3,500 2,415. 5,100. 3,519. 4,400 3,036.
POWER 00. 00 .00 00 .00 00 00 00 .00 00
ERE. 2,5 6,025. 2,200 5,302. 1,850 4,458. 2,600. 6,266. 2,300 5,543.
OVERH 00. 00 .00 00 .00 50 00 00 .00 00
ERE. 1,6 1,000. 1,668 1,000. 1,390 834.0 2,085. 1,251. 1,668 1,000.
WELDI 68. 80 .00 80 .00 0 00 00 .00 80
ERE.CO 1,1 1,793. 900.0 1,467. 800.0 1,304. 1,100. 1,793. 900.0 1,467.
NSUMA 00. 00 0 00 0 00 00 00 0 00
PRELIM 750 1,380. 650.0 1,196. 500.0 920.0 750.0 1,380. 680.0 1,251.
INARIE .00 00 0 00 0 0 0 00 0 20
CONCLUSION:
• Factors like bolted structure or Welded Structure influences the Power, Consumable and
Welding cost of the entire Structure. Hence a sufficient Correction factor should be given
for this.
• Delay in execution of projects would result in increased labor cost and overhead costs.
• Freight Cost, which is a part of Overhead costs is influenced by the amount of material
transported in one shift and can significantly impact the total overhead costs, hence
proper care should be taken to fully load the trucks before dispatching.
• Review in design can significantly increase the power, Consumable and Welding cost in
Factory because of repetition of work for the same structural part. Hence a proper co-
ordination between the Design and Engineering Team should exist to decrease the cost
because of rework.
•
8.1. SUGGESTIONS:
• Every Voucher Entry the company enters into its Accounts book should put the Activity
for which it is incurred including Sub-Activities like Sub-contracted works, Special
Costs.
• Few consumables, though bought for Site Fabrication can be used for Erection purpose as
well; in such case the total cost of the consumables is divided based on the number of
days for which it was used for each of the activities.
• For any special types of work apart from the conventional fabrication; a new standard
cost for the activity has to be found out specific to that activity.
• It is observed that the vouchers entered by people in Accountancy department has several
mistakes because they do not know few of the technical terms and hence it is suggested
that a technical person be given the responsibility at site and in stores to mark the
Estimation head for which the costs are incurred(or for purchases done).
• The Estimation team should make it clear to the finance department if it is taking special
cost-code specific to a project separately, and costs incurred for the same should be taken
into a separate cost-code in the accounts book. (Eg: For Chepauk Stadium, special tools
were used and a different cost/moon were taken for it, Hence these special tools should
be separated from regular tools and tackles code in the ledger books)
8.2. LIMITATIONS
• Projects differ in their nature of work and machinery involved, skills required and
materials to be used in a large way. Hence a standard cost should not be taken to Estimate
the costs of entire project without looking into the detail of the projects..
• Differentiating projects into different categories like Simple and Complex is subjective
and involves discretion of people involved in the project.
• The standard costs cannot be stretched to the newer projects which have its tonnage lying
beyond the range of the projects chosen while estimating the standard cost.

Summer Project Report On: Geodesic Techniques Pvt. LTD

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Summer Project Report On: Geodesic Techniques Pvt. LTD

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Geodesic Techniques Pvt.

SUMMER PROJECT REPORT

“VARIANCES BETWEEN STANDARD COSTS AND THE ACTUAL

“GEODESIC TECHNIQUES PVT.LTD

Jain Business school Page 1

information in completing this satisfactory project.

me directly or indirectly during this project.

Jain Business school Page 2

SYNOPSIS OF THE PROJECT

c. Classify the sample in terms of-

2. Volume (in terms of m.ton)- Light/ Heavy/ Medium

3. Project Size (in terms of value)- Small, Medium, Large

e. Compare & Analyze variances

Jain Business school Page 4

1.3 NEED FOR THE PROJECT

Jain Business school Page 5

Fig 1: Standard Cost/m.ton of different Estimation Heads for different categories of

Jain Business school Page 6

Jain Business school Page 7

Geodesic is an ISO 9001:2000 certified Construction Company and provides integrated

• Office spaces and Office facilities

Jain Business school Page 8

Jain Business school Page 9

steel construction and prefabrication companies in Asia, has strengthened Geodesic’s

Geodesic Techniques Design Capability-

Jain Business school Page 10

New Manufacturing unit at Bidar, Karnataka

2.2 SOME COMPLETED PROJECTS

Infosys Multi level Car Park, Pune

Inverted Canopies for MIAL, Mumbai

Ambience mall, New Delhi

Jain Business school Page 11

Metro cash and carry, Hyderabad

Ansal Plaza, Noida

Puttaparthy indoor stadium, Puttaparthy, AP

Mega Mall, Mumbai

Logitech Park, Mumbai-Skywalks

Jain Business school Page 12

Design, supply, fabrication and erection of skywalks connecting buildings, including

Celebrity Fashions, Chennai

Infosys Multiplex Dome, Mysore

DLF Star Mall, Gurgaon

Infosys food court, Pune

Lalbagh Glass House, Bangalore

Restoration of Glass House at Lalbagh, Bangalore including dismantling and

Structural steel works

Delhi International Airport, terminal-1B

MIAL Inverted canopies:

Jain Business school Page 15

Inverted Canopies for MIAL, Mumbai Software Development Block, Pune

Mega Mall, Mumbai Infosys Multiplex Dome, Mysore

PREPARATION OF SCOPE MATRIX FOR DIFFERENT PROJECTS

3.1 CLASSIFICATION OF PROJECTS:

The Complexity of a project is determined by the Planning Engineers based on the

Jain Business school Page 17

3.2 CREATION OF SCOPE MATRIX:

Jain Business school Page 19

Table 1: Scope of Work Matrix

Jain Business school Page 20

CHEPAUK TNLA RAJAMANDR KOLKATA

Tonnage LIGHT MEDIUM MEDIUM MEDIUM HEAVY

Jain Business school Page 21

Table 2: Classification Matrix