Catch errors before construction
AI Structural Drawing Checker
Detect load path conflicts, foundation dimension inconsistencies, over/under design issues, and drift + deflection conflicts with architectural plans. Prevent costly structural rework and support code compliance.
Best for: Structural engineers, EORs, Plan reviewers, GCs.
Why Structural Errors Cost So Much
Structural drawings define foundation depths, beam sizes, column locations, and load paths. One error can cause significant rework costs.
Common issues that lead to costly rework:
- Foundation depth conflicts between general notes and detail drawings
- Beam schedule mismatches with framing plan callouts
- Column schedule inconsistencies with plan dimensions
- Load path discontinuities and missing structural elements
- Dimension conflicts between structural and architectural plans
- Missing or incorrect structural details
- Material specification conflicts between drawings and specs
What the AI Structural Checker Catches
AI reviews structural drawings to identify issues that manual review might miss—dimension conflicts, load path issues, coordination problems, connection design rule violations, and spacing table inconsistencies.
- Footing depth conflicts between general notes and details
- Foundation dimension mismatches
- Missing foundation details
- Grading and drainage conflicts with civil drawings
- Anchor bolt schedule inconsistencies
- Beam callout mismatches with schedule
- Missing beam sizes in schedule
- Incorrect beam material specifications
- Beam depth conflicts with architectural ceiling heights
- Load path discontinuities
- Column location conflicts with architectural plans
- Column size mismatches between plan and schedule
- Missing column details
- Reinforcement schedule inconsistencies
- Column-to-foundation connection errors
- Missing structural elements
- Dimension conflicts with architectural plans
- Load path inconsistencies
- Missing or incorrect structural details
- Framing member size conflicts
- Structural-to-architectural dimension conflicts
- MEP coordination gaps (ductwork, piping conflicts)
- Missing structural openings for MEP
- Ceiling height conflicts
- Wall thickness mismatches
- IBC seismic design provision checks
- Local building code requirement verification
- Fire rating specification conflicts
- Accessibility path of travel structural barriers
- Egress width structural conflicts
- Connection design rule verification
- Welded connection detail conflicts
- Bolted connection specification mismatches
- Connection spacing table compliance
- Missing connection details
- Connection capacity conflicts with design loads
- Joist spacing table verification
- Reinforcement spacing table conflicts
- Anchor bolt spacing table mismatches
- Stud spacing table inconsistencies
- Spacing table conflicts with code requirements
Real Issues We've Caught
Actual issues found on real projects. Each one would have caused significant rework, change orders, or schedule delays.
What AI Found: General notes specified 12" minimum foundation depth, but detail drawings showed 18" minimum depth.
Impact: Prevented costly rework. Would have required foundation modification after pour.
What AI Found: Beam callout B-3 specified W12x26, but schedule showed W12x30 for the same location.
Impact: Significant material and labor costs. Would have caused field confusion and potential structural issues.
What AI Found: Column C-5 shown at grid intersection 3-B in structural plan, but architectural plan showed different location.
Impact: Significant layout corrections required. Would have caused trade conflicts and schedule delays.
What AI Found: Architectural plan showed load-bearing wall, but structural framing plan had no supporting beam or column.
Impact: Prevented costly structural redesign. Critical safety issue that could have caused building failure.
See It In Action
Watch a demo to see how InspectMind AI catches issues before they become costly.
Frequently Asked Questions
Related Checkers
Structural drawings often coordinate with other disciplines. Check these related checkers:
Related Case Studies
See how other teams have used AI to catch issues before construction
Multi-Floor Commercial TI
Commercial Office
Multi-Unit Development
Multifamily
Student Housing Apartments
Multifamily
ADU Plan Review (2025 CBC)
Residential ADU
Market-Rate Apartments
Multifamily
Affordable Housing LIHTC
Multifamily
Transportation Bridge QA
Infrastructure
Fire Station QA Review
Public Safety
Events Center
Commercial
Residential Addition
Residential
Manufactured ADU (SDC D)
Residential ADU
Railroad Bridge Project
Infrastructure
Utah Commercial (Ogden)
Commercial
Salt Lake City Plan Review
Commercial
Idaho Commercial / Industrial (Nampa)
Commercial
NSW Plan Review (East Lismore)
Mixed-Use
What Construction Professionals Say
GCs, architects, engineers, contractors, and developers use InspectMind AI to catch issues before they hit the field.
"InspectMind caught 47 critical issues on our cold storage project—conflicts that would have cost us millions in field rework. It paid for itself on the first review."
Aaron Bass
Director of Construction, Cold Summit Development
"We used to spend 40+ hours on plan review. Now I upload the drawings, and get back a complete issue report that catches code violations I would have missed. It's a no-brainer."
Julio
Owner, Pesco Engineering
Want to learn more about AI plan checking?
Read our complete guide to understand how AI reviews construction documents, what it catches, and how it fits your workflow.
Ready to catch issues before they cost you?
Protect margins, reduce risk, and improve quality. Pay and upload — results in 24 hours.
One issue found pays for the whole check