Protect structural integrity from day one
Verify penetrations, connections, and coordination before they become field problems. Helonic reads structural, MEP, and architectural sheets together so issues never reach the fabricator.
What slows down structural engineers
The recurring coordination problems that turn into RFIs, rework, and structural risk.
MEP Penetrations
Unauthorized or poorly located penetrations compromise structural members and require costly remediation.
Dimension Verification
Mismatched dimensions between structural and architectural drawings lead to field conflicts.
Connection Details
Missing or incomplete connection details delay steel fabrication and erection sequences.
How Helonic helps
Where AI drawing review plugs into your structural QA/QC and consultant coordination workflow.
MEP Penetration Review
Cross-reference MEP routing plans against structural framing to identify penetrations that violate reinforcement zones, exceed allowable opening sizes, or lack proper reinforcement details.
Load Path Verification
Trace load paths from roof to foundation and flag discontinuities, missing members, or transfer conditions that are not detailed. Ensure lateral systems are continuous and properly braced.
Connection Detail Checking
Verify that every beam-to-column, beam-to-beam, and brace connection has an associated detail. Flag typical connections that may not apply to specific conditions.
Foundation Coordination
Check foundation plans against civil utility locations, MEP underground routing, and architectural slab edge conditions. Prevent conflicts between footings and underground infrastructure.
Structural Note Consistency
Ensure general notes, material specifications, and design criteria are consistent across all structural sheets and align with the project geotechnical report and building code requirements.
Common issues we catch
The structural-specific issues that turn into rework if they make it to the fabricator.
Coordination Conflicts
- Unauthorized MEP penetrations through beams and columns
- Dimension mismatches between structural and architectural
- Foundation conflicts with underground utilities
- Slab edge conditions not coordinated with architecture
Detailing Issues
- Missing connection details at non-typical conditions
- Incomplete reinforcement schedules
- Inconsistent member sizes across plan and elevation views
- Missing or unclear embed and anchor details
ROI for structural engineers
What teams running Helonic on structural sets are seeing across projects.
Frequently Asked Questions
What structural coordination issues does Helonic catch?
Does it check structural documents against the architectural set?
Can it help catch missing or inconsistent structural information?
Does it require a structural analysis model?
Manas Gandhi
Co-founder & CTO, HelonicManas is the co-founder and CTO of Helonic, where he leads engineering and AI research for construction drawing analysis. He works directly with structural, MEP, civil, and fire protection engineers to translate the way they review drawings into AI systems that flag the issues that actually matter in the field. Before Helonic, he built machine learning pipelines for technical document understanding and has spent the last several years interviewing licensed design engineers and discipline leads to ground product decisions in real practice rather than industry assumptions.
- AI for technical document understanding
- Cross-discipline coordination workflows
- Code compliance automation (IBC, NEC, NFPA, IPC, IMC, ASCE)
- Structural and MEP drawing review systems
How this page was researched: Structural coordination checks reference ASCE 7 load provisions, IBC structural requirements, and the architectural-structural interfaces where mismatches most often occur. Examples are drawn from Helonic's review of structural sets coordinated against architectural and MEP.
Last reviewed by Manas Gandhi · May 2026
Keep exploring
Related guides and adjacent solutions.