Guide
Rebar Weight: Where d²/162 Comes From
Every rebar chart in India prints the same shortcut: mass per metre equals d² over 162. It is a good number and it is not the exact one. This explains where it comes from, how far off it is, and why the figure that actually costs money on site is not the weight at all — it is the number of bars.
The formula is just a cylinder
A reinforcement bar is a steel cylinder, so its mass per metre is its cross-sectional area times the density of steel. Area is π/4 × d², and every standard that matters here — IS 1786, BS 4449, ASTM A615 — agrees the density is 7850 kg/m³.
That is the entire derivation. There is nothing else in it. Rearranged so you can put the diameter in as millimetres instead of metres, it collapses to a single division:
kg/m = d² ÷ 162.196
A 16 mm bar is 256 ÷ 162.196 = 1.5783 kg/m. A 20 mm bar is 400 ÷ 162.196 = 2.4662 kg/m. You can check any row of any chart in about ten seconds, which is worth doing once, because charts do disagree.
The divisor is 162.196, not 162
The number everyone carries is 162, and it is a fine thing to carry — it is easy to remember and you can do it in your head on site.
But it is rounded down. The exact value is 4 000 000 ÷ (π × 7850) = 162.196, and using 162 instead makes every mass read 0.121% high. On a tonne of steel that is about 1.2 kg.
That is far inside any wastage allowance, so this is not a reason to stop using the shortcut. It is the reason two charts sometimes disagree in the last digit, and knowing which one you are looking at stops you chasing a discrepancy that was never an error.
The number that actually costs money
Weight is the easy half. The half that goes wrong is the bar count.
Almost every schedule works it out as total length divided by stock length, rounded up. That quietly assumes every offcut finds another cut to serve. On a real site it usually does not.
Three 7 m cuts is 21 m of steel, so the arithmetic says two 12 m bars. But no two 7 m cuts fit on one 12 m bar, so you need three — and 15 m of the 36 m you bought is scrap. The estimate was not slightly optimistic; it was a whole bar short.
It is not always wrong. Three 5 m cuts genuinely is two bars, because 5 + 5 fits with a metre to spare. That is exactly why the shortcut survives: it is right often enough that nobody stops trusting it.
Working a schedule properly
Take each bar mark: diameter, cut length, number of bars. Put laps, hooks and bend allowances into the cut length itself rather than adding a percentage at the end — those allowances differ by standard and by detail, and a flat percentage hides which one you used.
Multiply cut length by count by mass per metre for the weight of each mark. Total by diameter, because that is the unit steel is ordered in: nobody buys the slab's steel, they buy so many tonnes of 12 and so many of 16.
Then work out the bars separately by packing the cuts, and compare that count to the division. The gap between them is steel you will buy and not use.
Common questions
Is d²/162 wrong?
No, it is rounded. The exact divisor is 162.196, so d²/162 reads 0.121% high — about 1.2 kg in a tonne. That is well inside any wastage allowance, so keep using it. It just explains why two charts can differ in the last digit.
Rebar weight chart →Why is my delivery lighter than the schedule?
Probably rolling tolerance. Nominal mass is a theoretical figure; real bars vary within a permitted band, tighter on large diameters than small ones. Check a delivery against the tolerance, not against the nominal weight.
Do the ribs count in the weight?
No. The area used is the plain circle of the nominal diameter, ribs excluded. Every standard on this subject follows that convention, which is why the deformed bar and the plain round of the same nominal size share a mass per metre.
How many 12 m bars do I need?
More than total length divided by twelve, usually. That division assumes every offcut gets reused. Three 7 m cuts total 21 m so the division says two bars, but no two of them share a bar and you need three.
Rebar weight calculator →Does this work for ASTM #4 and #5 bars?
The formula does, but do not use it. ASTM publishes a nominal mass per foot rather than leaving it to be derived, and above #8 the bars stop being simple eighths of an inch, so deriving from the diameter lands up to 0.19% away from the standard's own figure. Use the published table.
ASTM bar table →