ConcreteTally publishes what it got wrong. Since October 26, 2026, when this site
was published, every change to a figure, to the source a figure was
attributed to, or to a way of showing a number that could be misread, is
listed here with its date.
Entries dated October 26, 2026 or earlier were found before publication, in
this site's own review of a preview that search engines were told not to
index.
Some entries concern calculators that are not published yet: the pool chlorine calculator. Their history stays here, and they will be published once their remaining corrections pass review.
145 corrections are listed, going back to September 5, 2026.
44 of them changed a number or its attribution.
All of them were found by this site's own review or its automated checks, and they are listed for the same reason a reader's report would be: a log that recorded only reader complaints would measure how many people complained, not how much was wrong.
If you believe something here is still wrong, send it with its source via
the Contact page. Factual corrections are one of the
categories that inbox answers.
Room cooling (BTU) — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The help under Floor area of the room said the published chart runs from 100 to 2,500 square feet, while an area of exactly 2,500 was refused with a reason that spoke only of areas past 2,500, on the page and on the printed sheet.
What it says now: The help says the chart covers 100 square feet up to, but not including, 2,500, and the refusal says an area of 2,500 square feet or more is past the chart, whose last row runs from 2,000 up to, but not including, 2,500. The calculator refuses the same areas as before.
Every calculator (printed sheet) — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: When a calculator had no answer to print, the printed sheet was a blank page: no reason, nothing that was entered, no date, and none of the warnings every other printout carries, such as the pool sheet’s warning never to mix pool products. That happened when the calculator refused to work out an answer, a pool target above 10 ppm for one, when a box refused what was typed in it, such as a 0 in a measurement that has to be more than zero, and while a box was still empty.
What it says now: The sheet keeps its title, date and job and address blanks, and says in a box that the answer was not worked out, or for a pool already at its target that there is no amount to add. Under that it gives the reason: the calculator’s whole reason with its source number; or, for each box that refused what was typed in it, the sentence the page shows, naming the box and its limit; or, for each box still empty, that it still needs a value. It lists what was entered, with a value a box refused shown as typed and marked as not accepted, prints the calculator’s own note for its sheets with a sentence saying that note was written for a sheet with an answer, and ends with the source list and its caution. It carries no quantity, no list of what to buy and no blank for an order, and says it is not an order.
Pool chlorine — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The help under Free chlorine wanted said the code minimum for the pool is shown with the result, and no figure for it was: the notes under the result named the minimum without its number.
What it says now: The result lists the code minimum the target is checked against, 1.0 ppm for a pool without cyanuric acid or 2.0 ppm for a stabilized pool, with a link to the section of the Model Aquatic Health Code it comes from.
Pool chlorine — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The note saying why the line gives an amount and no count of containers, on the page and on the printed sheet, opened by saying that no container size is on record here for the product chosen, while the source list beside it cites the one size that is on record, the size of HTH’s own liquid chlorine.
What it says now: It says the only container size on record here is for another product, the HTH product this calculator gives no amount for, so the line gives the amount and not a count of containers. It gives no size.
Every calculator — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: A refusal that said which box to change pointed to it by its place on the page, as the list above or the service chosen above, on the brick, fence post, grass seed, retaining wall and rafter calculators; and a refusal caused by a figure missing on this side said it was not in anything entered above.
What it says now: Each names the box instead, the Brick size list or the Post size list for example, and the second says the fault is not in anything entered in the calculator, so the sentence reads true wherever it is printed.
Pool chlorine — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The warning for a target below the code minimum for a pool stabilized with cyanuric acid spelled the next sentence the British way, Stabilised water.
What it says now: It is spelled stabilized, as the rest of the site spells it.
Grass seed (Purdue and Illinois, Rutgers and NC State rates) — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: At these three services’ rates the answer was worked out as pure seed of the grass, and only a note on the page said the service does not say whether its rate allows for germination; the printed sheet did not say that reading the rate as pure seed is this calculator’s own reading.
What it says now: The page, the embedded calculator and the printed sheet list that reading among this calculator’s own choices, the amount the lawn needs is labeled as this calculator’s reading of the rate, and the note says the reading is the calculator’s own, not the publisher’s.
Grass seed — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: A note under the answer opened by saying that no bag count is given, which read as contradicting a weight of seed to buy.
What it says now: It opens by saying the answer is the weight of seed to buy, not a number of bags, and then why no bag on record here can be counted.
Pool chlorine — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The warnings to keep everyone out of the pool above 4 ppm, or above the 3.0 ppm on the 65% calcium hypochlorite’s label, and the warning for a target under the code minimum, were printed only among the notes after every input, about four phone screens below the answer and in the same style as the routine notes.
What it says now: They are also printed inside the answer card at the top of the calculator, styled as warnings, in the embedded calculator too, and on the printed sheet under the dose with their source numbers. The notes further down still carry them in full.
Pool chlorine — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: Both swimmer warnings ended with the instruction: the one above 4 ppm opened "This target is above 4 ppm. The Model Aquatic Health Code’s annex notes…" and only its last sentence said to keep everyone out of the pool; the one for the 65% calcium hypochlorite opened with what its label prohibits and said to keep everyone out after it.
What it says now: Each warning opens with the instruction, keep everyone out of the pool until a test reads no higher than the limit, and gives the code’s or the label’s reason after it, so the instruction is in the first lines of the answer card. The 4 ppm warning gives its number, 4 ppm or the limit on the container’s label if that is lower, and both call the reader’s label the container’s label. Where both apply, the 65% calcium hypochlorite label’s stricter 3.0 ppm comes first.
Pool chlorine — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: For 12.5% liquid chlorine the page said, only among the notes after every input: "The amount uses one registered label’s own dose for 12.5% sodium hypochlorite, 3 1/4 quarts per 10,000 gallons for 10 ppm. HTH’s page, for liquid chlorine of 10 to 12.5% sodium hypochlorite, gives about 1 gallon per 10,000 gallons for 5 to 7 ppm — about half the rise. Follow the label on the jug in hand." The printed sheet listed HTH’s figure among its sources and never said that it disagrees with the dose on the same sheet.
What it says now: The answer card, the embedded calculator and the printed sheet, under the dose, say: "HTH’s page gives about twice this amount for the same rise. Read the dose on the container’s label before buying, follow it, and test before adding more." The amount is unchanged: it is still the registered Sani-Clor label’s own dose.
Pool chlorine (printed sheet) — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The dose line, "Chlorine to add: … — that is how much to use", carried no source number, so nothing on the sheet said which of its listed sources the amount is worked out from.
What it says now: It carries the number of that source in the sheet’s own list: for 12.5% liquid chlorine, the registered Sani-Clor label’s dose direction; for a granular product, the strength recorded for it.
Pool chlorine — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The help under “Product in hand” said: “Strength is what decides the amount, so pick the container that is actually there.” The same page then showed two documents giving different doses for the same strength.
What it says now: It says the amount is worked out from the strength recorded for the product chosen, that one registered label and one maker’s product page give different doses for the same strength, and that the container’s label is the one to follow.
Pool chlorine, slate roof — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The introduction under each title ran to five lines on a phone for the pool calculator and four for the slate calculator, which pushed the answer card, and what it now carries, below the first screen.
What it says now: Each introduction is one sentence of two lines, so the answer card, with its warnings or with what the slate count leaves out, ends on a phone’s first screen. The pool’s still says it works out the volume from the pool’s shape and depth, in US units or metric; the slate’s still says the count includes a breakage allowance.
Every calculator — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: When a calculator refused to work out an answer — a pool target above 10 ppm, for one — the answer card at the top disappeared with nothing in its place, and the reason was printed only after every input, about three phone screens down.
What it says now: The card stays, titled Not worked out, styled as a warning, and carries the first sentence of the reason in the refusal’s own words, saying that the rest is with the result, on the page and in the embedded calculator. Where the pool is already at or above its target, the card is titled No amount to add.
Slate roof — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The answer card was headed "Slate to order" over a count of field slate only. That the starter course, the hip and ridge slates and the wider slates at valleys, hips, rakes and walls are not in the count was said only in the list of what is not counted, after every input, and on the printed sheet only below the purchase table.
What it says now: The card is headed "Field slate to order", and the card, the embedded calculator and the printed sheet, next to the quantity, say: "Field slate only: the starter course along the eaves, hip and ridge slates, and wider slates at valleys, hips and rakes are not in this count." The full list of what is not counted is still printed too.
Grass seed — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The answer read "Seed to buy: at least 16 lb of pure live seed of turf-type tall fescue, no other grass on the seed label" — a weight of pure live seed, not the weight of seed to buy. At Penn State’s own example label, 92 percent pure seed and 80 percent germination, a 16 lb bag holds 11.8 lb of pure live seed, about a quarter short.
What it says now: Two boxes take the seed label’s pure-seed percentage for the grass and, at Penn State’s pure-live-seed rates, its germination percentage; both start at Penn State’s example and are named as still the sample until changed. The answer is the weight of seed as bagged: for the example lawn at those figures, at least 21.8 lb of seed of turf-type tall fescue, labeled 92% pure seed and 80% germination. The 16 lb of pure live seed the lawn needs is still shown, as what the job needs. A box holding 0 is refused with a sentence saying what the figure is for. The working under the answer and on the printed sheet names the pure live seed the job needs and ends on the step to the weight bought, as bagged at the label’s figures. The pure-seed box says to add the percentages where the label lists several varieties of the grass, and the germination box says to enter the lowest where it gives one for each.
Pool chlorine — Figure or source
· caught by an automated check
What was wrong: The calculator refused a target above 10 ppm, citing a 2023 code sentence that set 10 ppm as the most free chlorine allowed while a pool is open to swimmers. The 2024 code caps free chlorine at the product label’s limits, and its annex notes that the EPA has not approved any pool product above 4 ppm with swimmers in the water, so a target between 4 and 10 ppm was dosed with nothing saying the pool had to stay closed. The registered label the site reads the 65% calcium hypochlorite’s strength from prohibits re-entry above 3.0 ppm, and the page did not say so either. The five code figures linked to council pages that no longer exist.
What it says now: The calculator still refuses above 10 ppm, now citing the 2024 code’s list of hazards that let a health authority close a pool with swimmers in. Above 4 ppm it warns that everyone stays out of the pool until a test reads no higher than the label’s limit, and for the 65% calcium hypochlorite it gives that label’s 3.0 ppm. Every code figure now links to the 2024 code and annex CDC publishes, at the page it is on.
Driveway asphalt, paver base — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The help for how the stone is quoted said only that a cubic yard measured loose is not a cubic yard compacted, and not what a ton order or a cubic-yard order is worked out at.
What it says now: It says a ton order is weighed at Wisconsin DOT’s figure for its own dense-graded base in place, which a by-weight answer quotes, and that a cubic-yard order is the compacted layer times Caltrans’ 1.5, read as loose cubic yards, and it asks the yard which it measures. It prints no density itself, so a by-volume answer, which gives Caltrans’ compact tons, never shares a page with Wisconsin DOT’s density.
Retaining wall (Allan Block) — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: Where Allan Block’s estimating chart gives more full-size blocks than counting the wall course by course (a 30 ft wall: 82 against 80), the page, the embedded calculator and the printed sheet still said the block is counted course by course, and the printed sheet said nowhere that the count followed the maker’s chart.
What it says now: There the course-by-course sentence is not printed. The page, the embedded calculator and the printed sheet give the count of full-size blocks the order takes, each pointing to the chart in the calculator’s own list of sources: the chart’s own figure at a wall length the chart prints, and at any other length a count this calculator reads from the chart, named as its own reading and not a figure Allan Block prints.
Retaining wall (Allan Block) — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The first screen read "2 cubic yards (loose) of wall rock and 3 cubic yards (loose) of wall rock", the same stone twice with nothing saying which was the leveling pad and which the drainage fill.
What it says now: Where both lines are the same stone, the first screen lists it once and says what each amount is for, the pad and the drainage, in no more words. The card and the printed sheet head each line with its own name.
Retaining wall (printed sheet) — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The sheet labeled the height the permit rule is measured over as running from the bottom of the leveling pad, citing a code entry that measures from the bottom of the footing; only the page’s field help said the pad is the footing here.
What it says now: The figure is labeled "Height the permit rule is measured over — from the bottom of the footing, here the leveling pad, to the top of the wall, here the top of the cap" on the page, the embedded calculator and the sheet.
Retaining wall — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: Beside Caltrans’ own tonnage figures, the answer printed Wisconsin DOT’s 1.85 tons per cubic yard and its 1.6 to 1.9 range for compacted base, two compacted densities from two agencies side by side, though the wall weighs neither line.
What it says now: The notes name Wisconsin DOT’s specification and its estimating range, with their sources, and say why the wall does not weigh either line, without printing their densities. Caltrans’ figures are the only ones the answer prints.
Fence (printed sheet) — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The sheet for the default QUIKRETE bag explained how Sakrete’s bag table is read between its printed depths, and the spare posts and bags of mix row gave a reason about posts, rails and boards.
What it says now: The reading of Sakrete’s table is printed only where the answer reads that table between or past its rows. The row reads "None of the makers, codes or extension services this calculator cites prints a spare allowance for fence posts or for bags of post-hole mix", and the rail and board rows give their own.
Brick, grass seed — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: Each calculator’s own choices were printed wherever their material was in the answer: utility brick, whose bag maker prints one figure, was said to be worked from the low end of a range, a seeding rate printed as one figure was said to be ordered at its heavier end, and an overseeding answer was told how a new lawn is ordered.
What it says now: A choice is printed only where it moves the answer shown: the low end only where the maker prints a range, the heavier end only where the rate is a range, and that sentence speaks of the seed ordered, for either job.
Grass seed (printed sheet) — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: Once a reader’s own lawn was entered, the sheet said, whatever the grass, that the other three extension services published for the same grass and differed — by as much as a factor of two on tall fescue. Only NC State publishes rates for bermudagrass and zoysiagrass, and only Penn State and Rutgers for perennial ryegrass and fine fescue.
What it says now: The sheet says the rate belongs to the service named on it and is that service’s figure, not a consensus figure. The page lists, grass by grass, every other service that prints a rate and what it prints.
Grass seed — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The note on Purdue and Illinois’ two columns ended "Sown at 8 instead, a new lawn would get one-ninth less seed", on a page whose own rate was Penn State’s 8, where it read as a warning about the answer shown.
What it says now: It ends by saying that, read from the per-acre column instead, Purdue and Illinois’ rate would be 8, one-ninth less seed: a reading of their own table, not of the answer shown.
Grass seed — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The answer is a weight of pure live seed, or of pure seed, and the card never said how a bag converts to it; a buyer carrying the figure to the counter as a bag weight bought about a quarter too little.
What it says now: It then said, under the answer, on the embedded calculator and on the sheet, that a bag counts as its weight times its seed label’s pure-seed percentage for this grass, times its germination percentage for a pure-live-seed rate. The answer itself was rewritten on 2026-10-26 to the weight of seed as bagged; the entry of that date says how it reads now.
Every calculator’s printed sheet (tile and grout) — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: An allowance the calculator starts above zero was printed with no reason: the tile sheet read "10% — this calculator’s own starting point, not a figure published for this" for the tile and for the grout, while the page and the embedded calculator said why the start is LATICRETE’s customary 10 percent and the low end of the 10 to 15 percent Crossville reports.
What it says now: The sheet gives the same reason the page gives, above zero as at zero, on every calculator.
Topsoil — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The depth was measured "to the finished top of the soil" in its box and on the sheet, while the sheet’s note said the depth is the depth the fill reaches when it is placed, loose, with nothing added for settling. A buyer who entered the depth wanted after settling got enough to reach it only before the soil settled.
What it says now: The box, the embedded calculator and the sheet read "Measured from the ground, patio or lawn the new soil goes onto to the top of the soil as it is placed, loose, before it settles." and say nothing is added for settling, because no publisher this calculator cites gives a figure for it.
Every calculator (metric) — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: In metric the answer’s heading said "(US units)" whenever any line kept a US unit, so the tile heading carried it over a tile line in square meters because the grout bag is sold in pounds, and once the roll size was typed in, the sod heading lacked it over a pallet sold in square feet.
What it says now: The heading says it exactly when the line it names keeps a US unit.
Roof rafters and fence rails (page and printed sheet) — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The rafter row’s "Left over" read only "62.49 ft", the offcuts of 64 boards cut for the plumb-cut slant, beside "Spare boards for a bad cut — none", and could be read as spare stock. The fence’s rail row gave a bare length the same way, also where every board but the last is cut with nothing left and the last gives fewer rails.
What it says now: On the page and the sheet it reads "62.49 ft: offcuts cut away from the 64 boards, not spare boards". Each row names what its leftover is made of: the offcut on every board, the offcut of a last board that gives fewer pieces than the others, and any spare boards.
Driveway asphalt (embedded copy) — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The embedded calculator showed "Published for this ground — asphalt 3.00 in" and "— stone base, at least 6.00 in" with no publisher, link or date anywhere in it, and the note beneath said the associations behind them were all "on this page" when the embed carried one source, for the spread rate.
What it says now: Both rows are labeled "Wisconsin Asphalt Pavement Association table for this ground" and link to that entry. The note names the three associations, gives the Colorado association’s figures, and says "all three are in the source list below".
Driveway asphalt — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The page credited 3 inches of asphalt over 6 to 8 inches of stone to the National Asphalt Pavement Association’s consumer guidance, republished word for word by the Illinois association. The Illinois page does not say it republishes anyone: it describes that build as an option some contractors use, and quotes a National Asphalt Pavement Association official recommending full-depth asphalt.
What it says now: The figures are credited to the Illinois Asphalt Pavement Association, the build is described as the option its page calls it, and the full-depth asphalt that page recommends is given beside it.
Every embedded calculator — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: An embedded calculator printed one source and dropped every Source link the full page shows beside its notes, while its own sentences pointed readers to "the source page this calculator links to" or to sources "on this page".
What it says now: An embedded calculator carries the same source list as its full page, each entry with where in the document it is, its publisher and the dates it took effect and was retrieved, and every Source link beside a note, a figure or an allowance goes to an entry in that list.
Fence post, retaining wall, driveway asphalt, paver base, roof rafters, slate roof — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: A calculator page listed every entry of each data table it reads, including figures it never uses: the fence page carried a dozen roof-rafter references and took its effective-from date, November 9, 2012, from one of them.
What it says now: Each page lists the sources its own figures, notes and controls use, and its dates are worked out from that list. Where the retrieval dates differ, the page gives the range.
Every printed sheet — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The sheet ended with one sentence naming publishers and only a few of their documents, with no sections and no dates. The grass seed sheet said four universities’ rates "are all reproduced" while showing one, and the tile sheet credited two grout makers’ charts in its footer while its body spoke of one.
What it says now: The sheet ends with a numbered list of the calculator’s sources: each document, where in it the figure is, its publisher, when it took effect and when it was last read. A number in brackets after a printed figure gives its entry.
Driveway asphalt (printed sheet) — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The sheet said an open-graded mix can be "a fifth lighter for the same thickness", and nothing on it said where that came from.
What it says now: The sentence is gone. The sheet names the figure the tonnage is worked out at, the Asphalt Institute’s 148 pounds per cubic foot in place, and says the job mix formula the plant is running governs.
Tile and grout (printed sheet) — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The sheet said the grout figure comes from one maker’s chart and that another maker’s chart differs by about a tenth for the same tile, which holds for some tile sizes and not for small mosaic.
What it says now: The sheet says the figure is read from, or scaled within, the chart of the grout named on it, and that another maker’s chart prints a different coverage.
Retaining wall, grass seed, topsoil, brick, pool chlorine — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: Notes spoke of "the paver base and driveway calculators on this site", of numbers that are "this site dividing the maker’s own two figures", of "the university publication this site cites" and of "the Sources page" — on an embedded copy, "this site" is somebody else’s, and there is no Sources heading.
What it says now: They name ConcreteTally or say "this calculator", and point to the source list below or to ConcreteTally’s sources page.
Fence post, roof rafters — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: Options and their help credited figures to one state code, a county, one city’s plan set and one named mill, while the help above them said each size came from a named authority.
What it says now: Each option names the body that published its figure, such as "12 in — San Diego County’s recommendation for a wood fence post" and "8 to 20 ft — South Coast Lumber’s range".
Grass seed — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The seeding rate under the answer and on the printed sheet did not say whose rate it was, although the field above it said the answer would.
What it says now: The rate line names the extension service it comes from; when overseeding, it says the rate is that service’s new-lawn rate cut by NC State’s overseeding rule.
Driveway asphalt — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The help under the asphalt depth said none of the sources on the page prints how much higher loose mix sits than the finished mat. The Asphalt Institute article on the list does: it sets the screed at 1.25 times the compacted thickness.
What it says now: The help says only that the figure is the rolled thickness, not a screed setting.
Brick — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The introduction said the answer says whose figure it used; the answer card on the first screen named no publisher.
What it says now: The introduction says the page asks whose count to use, which it does.
Air conditioner size (printed sheet) — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The printed sheet did not say the figure is for one room and one room air conditioner, and left out the page’s warning against buying bigger.
What it says now: The sheet says both, says the figure is worked out from ENERGY STAR’s chart and the adjustments printed with it, and quotes ENERGY STAR: "An oversized air conditioner costs more to purchase, wastes energy and does not provide better cooling."
Pool chlorine (printed sheet) — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The "Worked out from" table printed internal option values — "dimensions", "slope", "no" — instead of the words chosen on screen.
What it says now: It prints the option as the screen shows it, such as "Work it out from measurements".
Roof pitch and rafters — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The board length was chosen to fit the length to cut and nothing else, so on many roofs the board left less than the slant of the two plumb cuts takes across the rafter: a 24 ft building at 6 in 12 with a 2 ft eave was given 16 ft boards with 5 in to spare, short of the 5 5/8 in a 2x12 takes at that pitch.
What it says now: Each board is now chosen to hold the rafter and that slant for a rafter as deep as a 2x12, the deepest size the American Wood Council’s span tables list, so that roof now gets 18 ft boards. The cutting line gives the slant, a note gives the rule for other sizes, and a rafter that fits the longest board only without the slant is now refused with the reason.
Roof pitch and rafters — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The length to cut was labeled "including the overhang" without saying where it starts and ends, and the cutting row could be read as 64 pieces plus one more.
What it says now: It is labeled "Length to cut, along the edge of the board from the plumb cut at the ridge to the plumb cut at the tail, overhang included", and the cutting row reads "64 pieces of 15 ft 1/4 in — 1 from each 16 ft board, leaving 11 11/16 in on each, enough for the slant of the plumb cuts, 5 5/8 in on a rafter as deep as a 2x12 at this pitch".
Roof pitch and rafters — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The building length had no explanation under it, so whether it ran wall to wall or overhang to overhang was left to the reader, and the roof’s overhang past the gable ends was neither asked for nor listed as left out. The ridge board and the rafter count both stopped at the end walls without saying so.
What it says now: The length now says "Measured from the outside face of one gable-end wall’s framing to the outside face of the other, along the ridge line." and the list of what is left out includes "the gable-end (rake) overhang — the barge or fly rafter at its edge, any outlookers or lookout blocks under it, and any ridge board run past the end walls". The printed sheet says both.
Roof pitch and rafters — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: That the count is for a two-slope gable was said only in a note at the foot of the page, never on the answer, the printed sheet or the description at the top of the page, and nothing said a roof sloping one way only is a different job.
What it says now: The answer, the embedded copy and the printed sheet now say "Counted for a two-slope gable roof, both slopes at the same pitch: 32 rafters on each slope, with one on each end wall." and that a roof sloping one way only is not counted; the description at the top of the page names the two-slope gable too.
Every calculator — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: Several boxes asking for a measurement did not say where to measure from and to — the pool’s length, widths and end depths, the second and later lawn areas, a sod pallet’s coverage and the rafter tool’s building length among them — and the printed sheet gave only the name of each measurement.
What it says now: Every box that asks for a length, an area or a volume now starts its explanation with where it is measured from and to, or where the figure is read — the pool reads "Measured from the inside face of one end wall to the inside face of the other, across the water, on the longest line." — and the printed sheet repeats it under the name of each measurement.
Rafter, retaining wall, slate roof, fence post, paver base and pool calculators — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: Several lengths in the results named one end or none — the rafter line length ran "ridge to wall" without saying which face, and the slate exposure and the pool’s average depth named no ends at all.
What it says now: Each now names both ends, for example "Run of one rafter, level — outside of the wall framing to the face of the ridge board".
Slate roof, paver base, sod, topsoil and grass seed — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: These five printed no "Not counted" list with their quantities, on screen or on the printed sheet, while five other calculators did, so their answers read as complete.
What it says now: Each now lists it in the same place. The slate answer reads "Not counted in these quantities: the hip and ridge slates laid over the hips and the ridge" and the paver base answer names "the edging and the spikes that hold it".
Tile, fence post and rafter calculators — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The list of what is left out named some things bought with the job and not others: the tile list did not name the mortar the tile is set in or the trim, the fence list did not name the nails or screws, and the rafter list named only hip, valley and dormer rafters.
What it says now: Each list now names them; the tile list includes "thin-set or other setting mortar" and the rafter list "hangers, straps and other metal connectors".
Fence post — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The list of what is left out named the bigger, deeper corner or end posts, while the post count already includes a post at each end.
What it says now: It now reads "a bigger or deeper post at a corner or end, and the extra mix its hole takes — the count gives every post the line-post size and depth".
Fence post — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The help said a corner post belongs to both runs that meet at it, which invited counting it twice, and said a run meeting a building at both ends was not counted, so the last side of a fence between two walls of a house could only be entered as ending on one post and was given a post, a hole and its mix too many.
What it says now: The corner post is counted with the run before it, and the question about the ends has a third answer, "At neither end — both meet a house, a wall, or a post already standing or counted", which counts one post fewer.
Brick, fence post and retaining wall calculators — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: What shape of job each count is for — one rectangle of wall, one straight run on level ground — was said only in a note at the foot of the page, which the printed sheet does not carry.
What it says now: The answer, the embedded copy and the printed sheet now say it, for example "Counted for one straight run of fence on level ground."
Fence post and retaining wall calculators — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The fence note said the publisher of the most complete prescriptive set on the page draws the same limits as the page and asks for an engineer past them; that city handout draws different ones (a slope steeper than 2 horizontal to 1 vertical, a setback from a retaining wall) and says such designs may require engineering. The retaining wall note said the block makers route reinforcement to their engineering departments, which none of the documents cited says, and excluded every wall in a seismic design category, which every site in the country is in.
What it says now: Both limits are now stated as the calculators’ own, with no publisher named, and the wall sentence reads "a wall the building department requires to be designed for earthquakes".
Retaining wall — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The height the permit rule is measured over was labeled as running to the top of the wall while it included a cap whose height was printed nowhere, and the printed sheet’s own footnote said the top of the cap.
What it says now: It is labeled "Height the permit rule is measured over — from the bottom of the footing, here the leveling pad, to the top of the wall, here the top of the cap" when the wall is capped and to the top of the last course when it is not, and the cap is printed with it as "Cap height, as published for this unit", so the printed parts add up to the printed height.
Sources — retaining wall — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The permit-height entry said a wall showing three feet measures well over four feet by the rule. With no cap on VERSA-LOK Standard it measures exactly four feet, which the rule allows.
What it says now: The entry now works a three-foot wall out on two of the units, 58 inches on Belgard Diamond Pro Air with its cap and exactly 48 on VERSA-LOK Standard without one, and says that reading the leveling pad as the footing is ConcreteTally’s reading, not the code’s wording.
Slate roof — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The cut-work box asked for hips, valleys and rakes, and its help said the association allows one extra square for every 100 linear feet of it. The association gives that rate, as a common method, for cutting at hips, valleys and other angled parts of a roof; rakes are not among them.
What it says now: The box asks for hips, valleys and other runs cut on an angle, the help gives the rate as the association’s common method, and the wider slates the association names for rakes, valleys, hips and walls are listed as not counted.
Sources — fence post; Topsoil — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The sources page said the city fence handout does not apply to a fence on ground that slopes across its line, and the topsoil depth box said nobody publishes a settling figure.
What it says now: The fence entry now quotes the handout’s own limit, ground sloping across the fence more steeply than 2 horizontal for every 1 vertical, and the topsoil box limits the claim to what was searched, the extension services, agencies and trade associations this calculator could find.
Driveway, paver base, topsoil, retaining wall, brick, tile, slate, grass seed and pool calculators — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: Some notes and help pointed with "below", "above" or "beside" at something that sits elsewhere on the page — the driveway note said the compacted volumes were below it when they were above it.
What it says now: They name what they mean instead: "The compacted volumes in the result follow the measurements."
Paver base and driveway asphalt — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: Ordered by the cubic yard, the stone base was the volume of the finished, compacted layer — 4 cubic yards on the patio example, 12 on the driveway example — under the words to order, with nothing saying whether a yard would read those as loose or compacted.
What it says now: A cubic-yard order is the compacted layer times 1.5, from Caltrans’ maintenance estimating table, whose footnote gives compact cubic yards as 1.5 times the actual yardage. Treating those as the loose cubic yards to order is this site’s reading, and the page says so and tells the reader to ask the yard. By the cubic yard the patio example is 5 cubic yards and the driveway example 17. Ordered by weight, nothing changes.
Paver base — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The stone base was named only by its state, “Compacted stone base”, on the result, the embedded copy and the printed sheet, while the bedding line named its product exactly.
What it says now: The line names the stone in the hardscape association’s words: "6 US tons of dense-graded aggregate". The card and the printed sheet add its grading, ASTM D2940, and the association’s first choice, the aggregate base a city or state specifies under asphalt. The tonnage is worked at Wisconsin DOT’s figure for its own dense-graded base, which the page applies to this stone and says so.
Retaining wall — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The pad base and the drainage stone were given as volumes in place, the pad after compaction, and rounded to whole cubic yards. On a wall about 26 feet long the one cubic yard ordered for the pad was less loose stone than the compacted pad takes.
What it says now: Both lines are loose cubic yards worked out at Caltrans’ multiplier for compacted road base, which this site applies to a wall’s pad and drainage stone as its own choice: no maker or association on the page publishes a loose figure for either. VERSA-LOK and Allan Block compact the stone behind their units, the association’s construction sequence compacts from the front of the wall back, and Belgard’s guide gives no step of its own for it, so the stone is ordered the same way under all three units. The example wall orders 2 cubic yards of pad stone instead of 1 and 3 of drainage stone instead of 2.
Retaining wall — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The lines named a job, “leveling pad base” and “free-draining aggregate”; the words to ask the yard for were in a note far down the page and not on the printed sheet, and under the VERSA-LOK unit they were the trade association’s, not VERSA-LOK’s.
What it says now: Each line names what to ask for in its maker’s words — under Belgard block "2 cubic yards (loose) of 3/4-inch minus (with fines)" — on the phone screen, the card and the printed sheet, and the card and the sheet add the maker’s grading where it publishes one. VERSA-LOK’s own installation steps and specification are now cited.
Topsoil — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: Each bulk line said it was measured in place, a basis the page never defined, beside the words to order; in bags, the four-figure topsoil count gave no bulk equivalent.
What it says now: Each line says "loose", and the card and the printed sheet say what it was worked from and that nothing is added for settling, which no publisher puts a figure on. In bags, the line also gives the cubic yards the bags place.
Paver base and driveway asphalt — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: Amounts in US tons printed the unit in the singular whatever the number, as in “5.8 US ton”; the printed sheet restated a whole order as “12,000.0 lb”; in Metric the card restated the order in tonnes while a note said doing so would hand over a number nobody quotes from; and the sheets gave a tonnage without the compacted volume or the figure it was weighed at.
What it says now: Amounts agree with their number ("5.8 US tons") and a whole order is restated as a whole number. A note now says the figure in parentheses is there to check the order by. Under each stone and asphalt line the card and the sheet print the compacted layer and the published figure it was worked out at, in the publisher’s own words.
Sources page — paver base — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The entry for what the stone base must be printed a trade name, dense-graded aggregate base, under a quotation from the Interlocking Concrete Pavement Institute that does not contain those words.
What it says now: The name is gone from that entry. The name the paver base calculator now uses is quoted in a new entry from the Concrete Masonry & Hardscapes Association’s own grading table, and stored names are labeled as the publisher’s words rather than as what the trade calls a material.
Sources page — aggregate table — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: Caltrans’ four estimating multipliers were labeled as amounts to order, measured loose or compact, which the publisher does not say, and their note said no calculator computes from them.
What it says now: They are labeled as what the table gives, tons or cubic yards of stone for each cubic yard of loose or compacted layer, and the note says which one the calculators use and that treating its compact cubic yards as loose ones is this site’s reading.
Retaining wall — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The Sources page gave Allan Block’s wall rock a product name in this site’s own wording, and a control on the wall page said a whole cubic yard was how a small delivery is quoted and the smallest amount a yard will load, which no publisher on the page says.
What it says now: The wall rock entry takes its name from the manual’s own section heading, and the control says only that a step is a whole cubic yard.
Paver base, driveway, retaining wall and Sources — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: Caltrans’ Section 20 table was described as reconciling, though its compact tons do not agree with its own stated 1.5 tons per cubic yard; its Section 07 table was said to leave out rows the publisher does not print.
What it says now: Wherever a cubic-yard order of compacted stone uses Caltrans’ multiplier, the page says that the table disagrees with its own basis and that ConcreteTally takes the cubic-yard figure, the larger; the printed sheet says so wherever the other figure would change the count. Both tables are transcribed in full.
Grass seed — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The answer counted bags: "3 bags 5.6 lb each, 16.8 lb total". The only bag behind that count was a sun-and-shade mixture of five other grasses blended with lawn food, while the amount came from a rate published for one grass, and a bag’s weight was treated as a weight of seed.
What it says now: The answer then became a weight of pure live seed, or of pure seed, of the grass the rate is for, in the publisher’s words, and no bag was counted, because no bag on record holds one grass alone. That weight was not the weight of seed to buy; the entry of 2026-10-26 says how the answer reads now.
Grass seed — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The page offered a 15 lb bag and said another brand’s product page contradicted its own rate by a third, and it compared a seed mixture’s whole weight, lawn food included, with a university’s rate for seed. The other brand’s page no longer lists a 15 lb bag or the coverage the comparison used.
What it says now: The 15 lb bag and both comparisons were removed.
Grass seed and Sources — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: Penn State’s fine fescue rate was described as its rate for pure stands in the sun, and its table was transcribed with a fine fescue row under sunny sites that Penn State does not print.
What it says now: The table is transcribed as Penn State prints it, and its fine fescue rate, 4 to 5 lb per 1,000 sq ft, is described as its rate for partly and fully shaded areas, which is where it prints it.
Fence — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: In metric, the post line gave the length as 2.439 m, rounded up past the 8 ft it stood for, so a stock 8 ft post looked too short, and the printed sheet cut rails of 2.44 m from 8 ft boards. The picket line gave no length, the rail line gave no size, the post line ended with an open "plus" that read as a second thing to buy, and the mix names were ConcreteTally’s spelling.
What it says now: Post, rail and picket lengths are in feet in both unit systems, as a yard sells them: "at least 8 ft 3 in each"; in metric the length needed is also given in meters. A cut is never printed longer than the board it comes from. The pickets read "219 boards (1x6, at least 6 ft each) of pickets", the rails say "size not chosen", the post line ends "plus the depth of any stone base or soil cap", and each mix is named as its maker names it.
Brick — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The mortar line named no mortar type, its material was labeled "bagged mortar mix, counted in brick", the printed sheet gave 945 and 7 next to the bags with no unit, and nothing said why the mortar covered fewer brick than the brick line bought.
What it says now: The line names the mix its count is published for: "27 bags (80 lb each) of Type N mortar mix, the type this count is for". The figures are given as brick, the page says the extra brick bought for waste and breakage are not laid and get no mortar, and it says which mortar type a wall needs is not decided here.
Retaining wall — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The cap line named no cap and gave its length as "(18 in each)", which reads as eighteen to a pack; for VERSA-LOK, which sells two cap styles, it gave one count. The block names were ConcreteTally’s spelling, and the Allan Block page did not say its caps need adhesive.
What it says now: The cap line names the cap as its maker lists it and says the length is its length: "14 caps (18 in long each) of Diamond Pro Air Straight Face Cap". VERSA-LOK caps are counted per style, laid alternately. Block names are the makers’ own, and the Allan Block page lists the cap adhesive among what it does not count.
Rafters — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The purchase line gave no board size; that it was open was said only in a separate note and on the sheet. In metric the length to cut was printed two ways on one answer.
What it says now: The line says so: "size not chosen: a span table sets it", and the ridge line says its depth is not chosen. The length to cut is printed one way everywhere.
Sod and slate roof — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The answer at the top of the page gave only the piece count; the pallets or squares a supplier sells by were several screens down, and on the printed sheet the two lines sat one under the other with nothing joining them.
What it says now: The pallets or squares are given with the count, on the first screen and on the sheet: "That is 5 pallets (500 sq ft each) plus 5 rolls".
Pool chlorine — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: Dichlor and trichlor were named without the strength the amount depends on, liquid chlorine was given a "trade strength" the page never defined, the 12.5% dose came from one product’s label without saying so, and the answer was headed "Chlorine to pour in" even for tablets.
What it says now: Every product is named by what its label prints, for example "liquid chlorine labeled 12.5% sodium hypochlorite"; the strength each amount assumes, and whose dose the liquid amount uses, are stated with it; the answer is headed "Chlorine to add".
Topsoil — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: Bagged Scotts topsoil was counted from the 0.75 cu ft the bag is sold as, about one bag in eight fewer than the maker’s own coverage of 4 sq ft a bag at a 2-inch layer, and the line did not name the product.
What it says now: The bags are counted by the maker’s coverage line, the larger count, and the line names the product and the coverage it was counted at. The page and the printed sheet say that the maker’s two figures disagree.
Every calculator — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: In metric, some lines gave one unit’s size in US units and the total in metric units, so the count could not be checked against the total, and nothing at the top of the answer said why sizes stayed in US units.
What it says now: A line gives a total only in the unit its one-unit size is printed in, and the answer’s heading says "(US units)" whenever the line it names keeps a US unit.
Slate roof — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The owner’s-stock control said "Default 0 spares, from the specification named under Sources below", and the source entry it pointed to was labeled "quantity not published".
What it says now: The control says the zero is this calculator’s own starting point, because the roof does not use those slates. It names the association’s sample specification, which asks for one extra square of field slate when a roofing contract calls for owner’s stock, gives that square in slates for the size chosen, counted as slate is sold, at a 3-inch headlap, and takes a typed number.
Driveway asphalt — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: Tonnage was worked out at 110 pounds per square yard per inch, while the same publisher’s answer to how much asphalt a project needs says to use 148 pounds per cubic foot, about 1 percent more. The sample driveway was 11 tons.
What it says now: Tonnage is worked out at 148 pounds per cubic foot. The sample driveway needs 11.1 tons and is ordered as 12.
Sources — asphalt — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: A Colorado association entry stored a "longest useful rolling window" of 20 minutes that its quoted sentence did not contain, and said it was the reason the driveway calculator adds no over-order allowance.
What it says now: The entry quotes the association’s own sentences about rolling time and stores no figure. The driveway calculator’s zero starting margin is labeled as its own choice, beside the control.
Retaining wall — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: For Allan Block, caps were the run divided by its 18 inch cap, fewer than the seven for each ten feet on its own estimating chart (13 short at 400 feet), and blocks were the wall face divided by one block’s coverage, one to five fewer than the chart at most of the wall sizes it prints.
What it says now: Allan Block caps and blocks are never fewer than its estimating chart. Between the lengths the chart prints, the calculator reads between them and says that the reading is its own.
Retaining wall — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: Blocks were counted by dividing the wall face by one unit’s coverage, which left out the unit cut to finish each course. The sample wall was 54 blocks.
What it says now: Each course is counted to whole units with no offcut reused. The sample wall is 56 blocks.
Retaining wall — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: Belgard’s 6 inch burial and its trench rule were used for VERSA-LOK and Allan Block units as well, and the 4 inch Allan Block pad was set in a trench 24 inches wide.
What it says now: Each unit is set, padded and drained by its own maker’s figures where the maker prints them: VERSA-LOK buries at least a tenth of the height that shows on a pad about 6 by 24 inches; Allan Block buries a whole block, in its 24 inch trench with 6 inches of wall rock, or its 18 inch trench when its 4 inch pad is chosen, and the page says that Allan Block’s guide also asks for 6 inches; and each of the three makers’ own 12 inches of stone behind its units is used.
Fence posts — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The sample job set its posts in mix 24 inches deep on a 6 ft fence — a third of the fence, which the page itself warns is not the bag makers’ rule — and left out the mix QUIKRETE puts under each post. With Sakrete’s mix in a 10 inch hole, the bag count could run below Sakrete’s own table.
What it says now: The sample follows QUIKRETE’s method for its Concrete Mix: a 33 inch hole with 6 inches of mix under the post, a 99 inch post set 27 inches deep, and 46 bags for 14 posts. With Sakrete’s mix in a 10 inch hole the order is never below Sakrete’s table.
Sod — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: A 16 x 24 in slab was counted as 2.67 square feet, a rounding the producer does not print.
What it says now: Slabs are counted at their exact area, 384 square inches.
Pool chlorine — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The two liquid chlorine strengths were stored as available chlorine, while their labels print sodium hypochlorite.
What it says now: They are stored and labeled as the sodium hypochlorite percent the labels print.
Sources — Figure or source
· caught by an automated check
What was wrong: Some stored figures were not in the quoted words beside them — a hole width taken from a table heading, a pallet coverage multiplied out from two table rows, a product strength with no quote at all.
What it says now: Those figures are now in the quote or transcribed table beside them, or are marked as worked out with the arithmetic shown, and figures whose meaning depends on their words show the words.
Every calculator with an allowance control — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: Controls said "it is not a published figure — nothing this calculator could find prints an allowance for this work" even where a related figure is published, credited published defaults to "the specification named under Sources below" without naming who or linking to it, and the printed sheet left out spares set to zero.
What it says now: Every control and every printed allowance row says where its starting value comes from: "Starts at 5%, the figure the National Slate Association publishes for breakage in shipping and handling." or "Starts at 0% — this calculator’s own starting point, not a published figure." The hint names the publisher in words and links to its entry in the source list, on the full page and on embedded copies.
Tile and grout — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The tile control said its 10 percent was Crossville’s figure, where Crossville reports a range of 10 to 15; the grout control credited its 10 percent to LATICRETE, whose figure is for its own grouts; grout kept for the building owner was not listed.
What it says now: Both controls say their starting figure is this calculator’s choice and name the figure behind it; the attic stock item carries Crossville’s 10 percent, and grout kept for the building owner is listed under what the quantities do not count.
Slate roof — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The breakage allowance was printed as extra "for waste".
What it says now: It is printed as "5% extra for breakage", the association’s own word.
Fence posts — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: One spares control added a post, a bag, a rail board and a fence board at every step.
What it says now: Posts (each with a bag of mix), rail boards and fence boards each have their own spares control, with a box to type the number.
Driveway asphalt, paver base, retaining wall, topsoil, grass seed, brick — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: Rounding an order up to the whole ton or cubic yard, ordering seed at the heavier end of a range and working mortar from the low end of a yield were this calculator’s own choices, stated in a few places and not at all in others.
What it says now: Each calculator lists them under the purchase caption and on the printed sheet as its own choices, with the reason, wherever they apply to the answer shown: a rounding step only where a line is rounded by it, so a bulk cubic-yard step is not printed over bags.
About, Sources — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The About page said every figure is shown with its source rather than one being chosen, and the Sources page said every entry in the data files carries the document it came from.
What it says now: Both pages say that some starting values, rounding steps and ways of counting are a calculator’s own choice, and that each calculator says so beside the value.
Retaining wall, topsoil, tile and grout — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: Choosing a different block took the example marker off the answer while the wall’s length and height were still the page’s sample, so the count read as the reader’s own wall. Choosing a topsoil job, bed count or blend, or typing a tile size, did the same.
What it says now: Only a measurement of the reader’s own job ends the example. Choosing a block, a job, a bed count, a blend or a tile size keeps the answer marked "EXAMPLE" until a measurement is typed.
Brick — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The openings box arrived holding the sample 21 sq ft as ordinary text and went on subtracting it after the reader typed their own wall, while its help said to leave it at nothing for a blank wall. On a blank 30 by 4 ft garden wall that was 702 brick instead of 851: 149 brick, about a sixth, too few.
What it says now: The sample openings drop to 0 as soon as a measurement of the reader’s own wall is typed, and the help says so; a blank wall needs nothing typed in that box.
Every calculator — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: An example answer was marked only by a small tag next to its label, on a card styled exactly like the reader’s own answer, above values that looked typed. Once some measurements were typed, nothing said which values were still the page’s sample.
What it says now: An example answer sits under a full-width dark band reading "EXAMPLE" on a dashed gray card, and every value still holding the page’s sample is marked "SAMPLE". When only some measurements have been typed, a brown band on the answer says which value is still the sample, or how many are, the answer lists them with their figures, and the printed sheet names them.
Several calculators — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The sentence describing the example named choices a reader could change without leaving the example — running bond, Penn State’s rate, straight edges, a patio for walking on — and some described how a count was worked out in a way one of those choices could make untrue. Some calculators also left an untouched value, such as the number of people in a room or a pool’s target chlorine, in the reader’s own answer without saying so.
What it says now: The sentence names only the example’s measurements, which end the example when changed, and points to the choices above it and the notes further down. A value the reader has not given is now a stated starting value, a value meaning none (no openings, no pitch check), or marked as still the sample.
Tile and grout — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The sample tile was entered as 12 by 24 in, the size name, while the help asked for the actual face size, and its 15.2 sq ft carton worked out at 7.6 tiles.
What it says now: The sample is Daltile’s San Michele cross-cut tile sold as 12 by 24, at the face size its sheet prints, 11-5/8 by 23-7/16 in, eight to a 15.20 sq ft carton. Its grout is scaled from the chart row for a tile sold as 12 by 24, and the page says that the scaling is this page’s reading of the chart.
Slate roof, rafters, paver base, fence posts, tile and grout — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: Help text next to a sample gave its metric figure as 76 mm, 38 mm, 25 mm and 1.41 m² while the boxes held 76.2 mm, 38.1 mm, 25.4 mm and 1.412126208 m², and the fence spacing help put a 6 ft fence at 1.8 m next to a height box holding 1.8288 m. On the slate page’s own 1,820 sq ft roof, typing the help’s 76 mm gave two slates fewer.
What it says now: The help gives the figure the box holds.
Every calculator but the retaining wall, metric — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: A sample value in metric showed an exact conversion to as many as nine decimals — 1.412126208 m² for a 15.2 sq ft carton — with nothing saying why.
What it says now: The conversion stays exact so the answer cannot move, and the value now says which sample it converts: "Sample: 340 sq ft, converted exactly."
Topsoil — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The example was two raised beds of 32 sq ft each, and the ground-covered figure did not say how many beds it counted.
What it says now: The example is one bed of 64 sq ft, the same 53.3 cu ft, because a bed count the reader leaves alone now starts at one, and the figure says how many beds it counts: "Ground covered, one bed".
Pool chlorine — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The example raised the free chlorine to 4 ppm, above the 1.5 to 3.0 ppm maintenance range printed on the label of the liquid chlorine the example uses, and nothing said where 4 came from.
What it says now: The example raises it to 3 ppm, the top of that label’s range; the help says whose range it is and that another product’s label gives its own, and the value is marked as the page’s sample until the reader types theirs.
Grass seed — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: With NC State and Kentucky bluegrass chosen, the lighter end of the published rate was given as 1 lb per 1,000 sq ft, taken from a paragraph of NC State’s guide, while the same guide’s planting table for the mountains prints 1.5 to 2. Nothing said the two disagreed.
What it says now: The lighter end is 1.5 lb per 1,000 sq ft, from NC State’s table, and the page states both of NC State’s figures and why it takes the table’s. The heavier end, 2, is unchanged.
Grass seed and Sources — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: Purdue and Illinois’ tall fescue rate was shown as 6 to 9 lb per 1,000 sq ft without saying that the same table row prints 261 to 348 lb per acre, which is 6 to 8.
What it says now: The page says the publisher’s two columns disagree at the heavy end, gives the arithmetic, and says this site takes the heavier figure, 9.
Grass seed — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The overseeding help said no publisher prints a table for overseeding, and the overseeding note said nobody publishes an overseeding rate, while Penn State prints one for perennial ryegrass. When a source printed no rate for a grass, the page said this reflects regional practice, which only NC State says, and only for perennial ryegrass in North Carolina.
What it says now: The help says only Penn State prints an overseeding rate, and only for perennial ryegrass; the note names the chosen source and credits the reduction rule to NC State in its own words. The sentence about regional practice has been removed except where NC State says it, in its own words.
Sources — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: Purdue and Illinois’ table was said to give no stand-alone rate for perennial ryegrass or fine fescue because neither is recommended alone in Indiana or Illinois; the publication gives no such reason. Purdue and Illinois’ table was also called the oldest of the four; Rutgers’ fact sheet is older.
What it says now: The entry says the publication prints both grasses only inside blends and does not say why, and describes the table as the second oldest.
Sources — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: NC State’s entry stored a summary in the site’s own words as if it were the publisher’s table, and dropped the publisher’s rows for some grasses without saying so.
What it says now: The entry transcribes NC State’s tables and sentences as printed and says which rows and columns are left out and why.
Fence — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The maker’s worked example of two bags for a 9 in hole 30 in deep was said to be explained by its method of stopping the mix short of the top.
What it says now: Stopping short explains only part of the gap; the page says so, and where that maker’s bag is counted it says that the count is by the yield printed for one bag.
Tile and Sources — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The two 12 by 24 carton figures were presented as a sixteen percent difference between the tiles, with square-meter figures credited to the makers, who print none; Marazzi’s carton figure was not checked against its own tile size, and its tile size was given in millimeters it does not print.
What it says now: Most of the difference is nine pieces to a carton against eight; Marazzi’s carton figure is shown to be more than nine pieces of its printed size cover. The square meters and millimeters are labeled as conversions.
Sources — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The Wisconsin asphalt association’s Traffic Class II entry listed figures for good and poor ground only, though its table also prints the medium-ground row.
What it says now: The medium-ground figures are listed too: asphalt 3.5 to 4.0 inches, base 6.0 to 12.0 inches.
Tile — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The rule that two thirds of a tile’s depth must be cleared for grout was credited to ARDEX’s data sheet for a different product, FL.
What it says now: It is credited to the data sheet of the grout the calculator offers, ARDEX FH, which prints the same sentence.
Pool — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The dichlor entry said trade material is quoted anywhere from 56 to 63 percent, with no publisher for that range.
What it says now: The range has been removed. The entry now gives what its source says: it has seen products labeled 56 percent and does not know why. It adds, in this site’s words, that the strength printed on the bucket governs.
Sources — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: Transcribed tables were printed as monospace text that wrapped mid-number on a phone; the hardscape association’s table of bedding-course installation properties had lost its last testing-frequency cell; and notes already written about how a table is read, such as where a room on a row boundary falls, were never shown.
What it says now: Tables are printed as tables, row by row on a phone, with the missing cell restored. Those notes are shown with their entries, several reworded to say only what the publisher and the calculator actually do, and every place where a publisher’s own figures disagree with each other is marked and explained, including the bedding course’s screeded thickness range, a grout color kit’s weights, a sod tolerance and a fast-setting mix’s metric figures.
Sources — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The sod tolerance was credited to Turfgrass Producers International directly; the copy cited is a grower’s adaptation of that guideline. The cooling chart’s ceiling-height sentence was placed beneath the chart, and the asphalt association’s compacted-thickness sentence on the facing page; both are on the page or paragraph before.
What it says now: The sod entry names the grower’s edition and quotes its own statement that it modifies the TPI original. The two locations are corrected.
Topsoil and Sources — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: Penn State’s compost topdressing depth was described as a topsoil depth.
What it says now: The topdressing depth is described as a compost depth, with no topsoil topdressing figure claimed.
Every calculator — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The line saying what to buy stated what one package is only on some calculators, and only inside the package’s name. Elsewhere it was a bare count — "14 posts", "3345 slates", "8 cartons" — with no length, size or coverage beside it.
What it says now: Every purchase line then said what one unit is and, where the job is measured in the same amount, the total. The seed and fence lines were rewritten again on 2026-10-12; the entries of that date say how they read now.
Topsoil — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The answer was headed "Soil to order", and the rows that work it out began "The job needs 1.3 cu yd" directly under "Topsoil and compost together 53.3 cu ft", a total in another unit. The 1.3 is the topsoil alone, and nothing on the screen said so.
What it says now: The answer is headed "Screened topsoil to order", the rows that work it out are captioned "Screened topsoil — how the quantity was worked out", and the total above them is stated in the unit the order is in as well: "Topsoil and compost together 1.98 cu yd (53.3 cu ft)". Every calculator that orders more than one material now names the one its working rows describe.
Brick, retaining wall, fence post and rafter calculators — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: What each count leaves out — the corners and cap course of a brick wall, the corner units and drain pipe of a retaining wall, a fence’s gates and bracing, a roof’s hip and valley rafters — was stated only in a note at the foot of the page. The printed sheet carries no notes, so the sheet a supplier fills an order from said "986 brick" with nothing beside it. The brick allowance was also labeled "Breakage and cutting" while the same page said cut brick was not counted.
What it says now: The list now prints directly under the purchase quantities and on the printed sheet: "Not counted in these quantities: the returns into an opening; the extra brick a corner takes to keep the bond". The brick allowance is labeled "Breakage", which is what its published 5 percent covers.
Topsoil — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The two compost-to-topsoil ratios (1:2 and 1:1) were cited to the University of Maryland Extension as its ratio for topping up an existing bed. Maryland gives them for filling a new raised bed on the ground. Every raised bed was also measured against the depths Maryland publishes for a bed on a patio, the blends were offered for a bed on a patio, which Maryland fills with compost and a soilless growing mix, and a lawn topdressing ordered topsoil against a published layer that is compost.
What it says now: The ratios cite Maryland’s March 2026 page for a new bed on the ground, with its eight-inch minimum depth of the mix, and are offered on that job only. "A new raised bed on a patio or driveway" is a separate job, ordered as compost and soilless growing mix in equal parts; a topdressing orders compost; a new lawn and a garden-bed top-up order topsoil.
Topsoil — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: Bought in bags, the compost was counted in the bag size of one named topsoil product, 0.75 cubic feet, which no document publishes for compost, and raised beds were counted in that bag although its maker says it is for in-ground use only.
What it says now: The ordering control reads "Bags, by the cubic foot". Compost and soilless mix bought in bags are given as a volume in whole cubic feet, and so is topsoil for a raised bed; the topsoil bag is counted only for a new lawn or a garden-bed top-up, with its size on the line.
Pool chlorine — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The purchase line counted 1 lb and 15 lb packs for 65% and 73% calcium hypochlorite, dichlor and trichlor, and one-gallon jugs for 12.5% liquid chlorine. Every one of those sizes came from a page about a different product: an HTH 4-in-1 shock and an HTH 10% liquid chlorine.
What it says now: Those five products are given by amount only, for example "at least 0.74 lb", because no container size is on record for any of them. A size is counted only for a product whose own page prints it.
Brick — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The mortar note, the Extra bags hint and the sources page said the bag maker’s figure for how many brick one bag lays already included the mortar a mason wastes. No publisher says that of the yield table the page uses; it says only that its estimates are subject to job site waste. The hint also called a spare bag cheap insurance and left the decision to the reader.
What it says now: The page says the yield table does not state whether its figures include waste, that no publisher prints a percentage to add to a bag count, and that the page adds nothing for waste unless the Extra bags control is moved. The quantities did not change.
Tile and grout — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The extra tile on the order started at 0 percent, and the page said no publication recommends any ("nothing this calculator could find prints an allowance for this work"). A tile maker does publish one: Crossville reports that most installers recommend ordering an additional 10 to 15 percent. The worked example ordered 8 cartons.
What it says now: The tile starts at 10 percent, the low end of that range, credited to Crossville under Sources. The worked example orders 9 cartons, and the line says "10% extra for waste".
Tile and grout — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The attic-stock figure was cited to a Daltile FAQ page that now refuses visitors, and the page also quoted that publisher as saying "take wastage into account" with no link to where it says so.
What it says now: Attic stock is cited to Crossville, which gives ten percent of the installed area as a common recommendation, and the unlinked quotation is gone. The printed sheet now says "Not counted in these quantities: attic stock".
Retaining wall — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: A note said a yard quoting by the ton was asking a question the page would not answer, because nothing first-party gives the weight of a cubic yard of crushed base and the state specifications that exist set grading rather than a conversion. Both were wrong: Wisconsin DOT’s Standard Specifications fix 1.85 tons per cubic yard for their in-place dense-graded base, and the same agency’s design manual gives its estimators 1.6 to 1.9 for its rolled open-graded base.
What it says now: The page names both sources and says why neither is carried to the wall: the pad stone is named only by its size and fines or by a maker’s or the association’s own description, none of which points at a road specification. Both aggregate lines stay volumes. Until 2026-10-12 the page also printed both figures; since then it prints neither beside Caltrans’ own.
Retaining wall — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The leveling-pad note gave the pad material as three-quarter-inch minus with the fines left in, for every block on the page. That is Belgard’s wording for its own wall; under the Allan Block unit it contradicted Allan Block’s rule, which allows its wall rock or a low permeable granular material, and under the VERSA-LOK unit it put one maker’s material under another maker’s wall.
What it says now: Each block’s pad material is given in its own maker’s words. Until 2026-10-12 the VERSA-LOK unit, whose maker’s pad wording was not then among the sources, was given the trade association’s description; since then VERSA-LOK’s own installation steps are cited.
Retaining wall — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The controls for the pad base and the drainage stone called them loose material, while the quantities were worked out as volumes in place, the pad after compaction, and nothing on the page said a yard quoting cubic yards might be measuring them loose.
What it says now: The controls name the "pad base and drainage stone". Until 2026-10-12 a warning in the answer said a yard quoting cubic yards might be measuring loose; since then both lines are loose cubic yards and say what they were worked out from.
Driveway asphalt and paver base — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The notes on the stone quoted a 36 to 47 percent difference between stone measured loose and compacted, credited to one state agency. It was measured by university researchers for Wisconsin’s highway department, and the department’s copy of the report now returns a not-found error, so the figure can no longer be checked against it.
What it says now: The figure is no longer quoted. Until 2026-10-12 the notes said a cubic yard measured loose is not a cubic yard compacted and asked which one the yard meant; when the stone is ordered by weight, a note says it was weighed at Wisconsin’s 1.85 tons per cubic yard.
Paver base — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The stone base was ordered for the paved area only, while the area help told readers to excavate wider so the base could run past the edge restraint; the stone for that strip was in nobody’s order.
What it says now: A new input takes the length of paving edge held by spiked edging, and the base is counted that much wider — as wide as the base is deep, up to ten inches, per the hardscape association’s guide specification. The worked example’s stone goes from 80.0 to 84.9 cubic feet: still 6 US tons by weight, 4 cubic yards instead of 3 by volume (the compacted layer; since 2026-10-12 a cubic-yard order is in loose cubic yards, 5 for this example).
Paver base — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The bedding line said "40 bags (50 lb each) of bedding course material", which named no bag, so it read as a count of any maker’s fifty-pound bag, on the card and on the printed sheet taken to the counter.
What it says now: The line names the bag the count divides by: "40 bags (50 lb each) of QUIKRETE All-Purpose Sand (ASTM C-33)".
Paver base — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The bedding bags were counted from the yield on Sakrete’s data sheet for its Paver Base — a product that sheet draws as the layer under its leveling course, that states no ASTM grading, and that Sakrete no longer lists — while the page said the bedding must meet ASTM C33.
What it says now: The bags are counted from QUIKRETE’s own fifty-pound All-Purpose Sand bag, which prints half a cubic foot and states that it meets ASTM C33. The count did not change.
Grass seed — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The comparison between a bagged seed mixture and university guidance quoted a rate of 3 to 4 pounds per 1,000 square feet and attributed it to Penn State Extension. Penn State publishes no such figure. That range comes from a different table on the same page — Purdue and Illinois’ rate for a Kentucky bluegrass and ryegrass blend.
What it says now: The comparison uses Penn State’s own published figure for a comparable three-way mixture, 4 pounds per 1,000 square feet, and the multiple derived from it was recalculated.
Grass seed — Figure or source
· found in review
What was wrong: The warning that a bag’s own coverage claim implies a much heavier rate than the universities publish was also shown for bermudagrass and zoysiagrass. That bag contains neither: it is a cool-season mixture. The comparison was between two different products, and acting on it would have meant sowing nearly four times the seed a warm-season lawn needs.
What it says now: The warning is limited to the grasses the bag actually contains, with tests asserting it stays silent for the others.
Grass seed — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The number of bags to buy was shown as "3 5.6 lb bags" — two numbers separated by a space. On a phone this reads as 35.6.
What it says now: It then read three bags with the weight in brackets after the noun. That line was rewritten on 2026-10-10; the entry of that date says how it reads now.
Grass seed — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: In metric, the seeding rates were displayed in kilograms while the note directly beneath them quoted the same rates in pounds — two numbers for one quantity, a factor of 2.2 apart, next to each other.
What it says now: Seed is shown in pounds in both unit systems, which is how it is sold.
Topsoil — How it was shown
· found in review
What was wrong: The largest figure on the printed sheet was labeled "Soil to fill the space" but included the compost as well. A reader reading that total to a supplier and asking for soil would have ordered soil for the compost’s share of the bed as well — more soil than the bed needed, and no compost.
What it says now: Where a compost blend is chosen, the figure is named for both materials.
Topsoil — How it was shown
· caught by an automated check
What was wrong: The area limit was applied to all beds added together while the input box stated a limit per bed, so two measurements each inside their own stated limit could produce a refusal neither had warned about.
What it says now: The limit applies to one bed and is the same number the box shows.
Every calculator — How it was shown
· caught by an automated check
What was wrong: The results section was headed at the wrong level, so a screen-reader user navigating by headings would not find the answer in the list. Embedded versions had no page heading at all.
What it says now: Heading levels corrected across the site, with an automated check that fails the build if they drift again.