Eight services, all built on the same discipline: accurate geometry, clean data, and drawings a contractor can build from. Open any one for scope, deliverables and file formats.
05 — Method
Automation where it helps. Engineers where it counts.
We use machine assistance inside the model workflow, but nothing leaves the office without an engineer signing it off. Open any item to see exactly what is automated and what is checked by hand.
DQ
From a client brief or a site constraint sketch through to the drawing set a contractor builds from.
What we produce
Concept options, massing studies and area schedules
Permit application drawings to local authority format
General arrangement plans, sections and elevations
Construction detail packages and window and door schedules
Coordinated architectural model for handover
How we work
Projects run on a single federated Revit model. Drawings are views of that model, never separately maintained files, so a change to the geometry updates every sheet that shows it. Each issue is recorded on a drawing register with a revision code, so you can always trace what changed and when.
What we need from you
Site survey or existing drawings in any format
Brief, area requirements and any planning constraints
Your drawing standards, title block and layer or worksets convention if you have one
Interiors modelled to the same tolerance as the shell, so the fit-out actually fits.
What we produce
Space planning and furniture layouts
Reflected ceiling plans and services coordination
Joinery and millwork detailing
Finishes schedules and material take-off
Presentation views and rendered walkthroughs
Why it matters
Most fit-out overruns come from ceiling voids and riser positions discovered on site. Modelling the interior against the real structural and services model finds those conflicts at design stage, where a change costs a drawing revision rather than a site instruction.
The core of the practice. Federated, worksharing-enabled models that hold up under coordination review.
Scope
Architectural, structural and MEP modelling to an agreed LOD
Custom family creation, including parametric components
Worksharing setup, worksets and model splitting strategy
Schedules, quantities and parameter population
Clash detection and issue tracking through to resolution
IFC export and validation against the exchange requirement
Standards we work to
We work to ISO 19650 where a project calls for it, and to your BEP and naming convention where one exists. If a project has no standard yet, we propose one before modelling starts rather than after the first issue.
Quality gates
Model audit before every issue: warnings, unplaced elements, duplicates, file size
Rule-based checks for naming, parameters and level assignment
Named reviewer sign-off recorded on the register
Old drawings turned into a model you can actually work in — not a traced image on a backdrop.
Inputs we handle
Scanned paper drawings, including poor-quality and hand-annotated sets
Vector and raster PDFs
Legacy AutoCAD files with broken layer structure
Point cloud surveys (E57, RCP) and photogrammetry meshes
Process
Audit the source set and flag every inconsistency before modelling
Machine-assisted recognition of walls, openings, rooms and levels
Rebuild as native Revit elements with correct types and constraints
Dimensional verification against the source and, where available, the survey
Deviation report showing where the drawings and reality disagree
The honest caveat
Old drawings are frequently wrong. We will tell you where the source contradicts itself rather than silently picking one version — that report is often the most useful thing we hand over.
Linear and site infrastructure, set out to coordinates a surveyor can work from.
Scope
Road alignment, levels, cross sections and earthworks volumes
Surface water and foul drainage layouts with invert schedules
Utility corridors and service coordination
Bridge and culvert general arrangements
Site setting-out drawings with coordinate schedules
Coordination
Infrastructure fails at the interfaces: where a drainage run meets a foundation, or a service corridor meets a retaining structure. We model those junctions explicitly and issue an interface schedule alongside the drawings.
Specific experience in port and marine infrastructure design — a capability most design offices of our size do not carry.
Scope
Quay wall and berth general arrangements
Jetty, dolphin and fender layout drawings
Berth geometry against design vessel dimensions
Terminal and yard layout planning, including circulation and stacking
Bollard, crane rail and services arrangements along the quay
Dredge pocket and bathymetry coordination with survey data
How marine work differs
Datum discipline is everything. Levels are referenced to chart datum, not site datum, and tidal range drives the geometry of every access arrangement. We set the datum convention in writing at the start of the job and carry it consistently through every sheet.
What stays with the specialist
Wave modelling, mooring analysis, geotechnical design and navigational risk assessment sit with the appropriate specialist consultants. We produce the layout, geometry, coordination and drawing output around those inputs.
Extra drawing capacity for in-house teams, working inside your standards rather than imposing ours.
Typical engagements
Overflow drafting during a bid or a tender deadline
Revision rounds and comment incorporation
Detail library creation and standardisation
Title block, template and layer standard clean-up
Drawing register reconstruction for legacy projects
Working arrangement
Retainer by the day or by the sheet, whichever suits the work. We can operate inside your own environment where licensing and your IT policy allow it, so files never leave your system.
Software proposes the geometry. An engineer decides whether it is right.
Automated
Wall centreline and thickness detection from raster and vector sources
Door and window opening recognition
Room boundary and level extraction
Text and dimension capture for cross-checking
Done by a person
Choosing the correct family type for every recognised element
Resolving contradictions between drawing sheets
Setting constraints and host relationships
Dimensional verification and sign-off before issue
Why not fully automatic
Recognition accuracy on good drawings is high, and on poor drawings it is not. The failure mode is a confident wrong answer, which is worse than a slow correct one. The check stays with a modeller.
Generate widely, shortlist narrowly. The value is in the options you would not have drawn by hand.
How it runs
Constraints defined with you: site boundary, area targets, orientation, circulation, access
Scripted generation of layout or massing variants
Automatic scoring against the stated targets
Designer shortlist of three to five, developed properly
What you get
A comparison sheet showing every option against the targets, so the reasoning behind the shortlist is visible and reviewable rather than a matter of taste.
Find the conflict before the meeting, so the meeting is about the decision rather than the discovery.
Checks we run
Hard and soft clash across federated discipline models
A BCF issue set with priority and assignee, plus a one-page audit summary in the issue record. Issues are tracked to closure, not just reported once.
The model already knows the numbers. The job is making sure it knows them correctly.
What we deliver
Quantity take-off by element, type and phase
Parameter completion against your data requirement
Schedule consistency checks across views
Export to your cost or asset system format
Honest limits
Take-off from a model is only as good as the modelling convention behind it. We agree the measurement rules in writing first, because a quantity without a stated rule is not a quantity anyone can price.
