Detailing and engineering services, delivered as finished packages.

What we deliver

• Steel detailing — erection, assembly and single-part drawings, connection details, bills of material and the NC1/DSTV and DXF data the shop runs on.
• Rebar detailing — placing drawings, bar bending schedules and reinforcement models, scheduled to the standard your supply chain already works to.
• Precast detailing — element and mould drawings, reinforcement, cast-in items, erection sets and element schedules, detailed on your plant's rules.
• BIM services — discipline and federated models to an agreed level of detail, clash coordination that closes out, scan-to-BIM, and delivery inside ISO 19650.
• CAD services — drawing production, legacy and scan conversion, model to 2D output, and CAD standards enforced automatically rather than by whoever checks the sheet.
• Drafting services — the whole drawing set with its register: general arrangements, sections, details, schedules, revisions and transmittals.

Most engagements use more than one. They run as one package, on one register, against one programme.

How every package is delivered

The model is the same whichever service you start with. Intake reads your inputs and comes back with the ambiguities before production starts, because that conversation is cheap in week one and expensive in week nine. Production is AI-driven, which is what makes volume and consistency affordable at the same time. Automated checks then run across the model, the drawings and the schedules together — mark uniqueness, dimensional agreement, code rules, register and revision consistency — and the results go to the reviewer with the package.

A senior engineer reviews it and signs it. That signature is the deliverable. Everything before it exists to make the signature safe to give.

Standards, sectors and scale

The same package is detailed differently under AISC, Eurocode, British, Australian and ISO standards, and the differences are not cosmetic. Hole sizes, tolerances, scheduling rules, welding symbols, execution and construction classes, and who owns the connection design all move with the code. Checks are configured per code, so a programme spanning two standards is set up that way at intake rather than discovered at review — and a project detailed in one region for construction in another is a normal request rather than a surprise.

The work runs across eighteen sectors: commercial, industrial and residential buildings; data centres; hospitals; schools; airports, metros, tunnels, bridges and roads; stadiums and theatres; power plants, chemical plants and manufacturing plants; water and waste facilities; and defence. Sector is not decoration either: it decides which checks matter, what the intake questions are, and how the set is structured for the people who will read it on site. A repetitive data centre module and a one-off stadium roof are opposite problems — one rewards exhaustive automated checking because a single error repeats a hundred times, the other rewards engineering time on geometry that has to be solved before it can be drawn.

What you can see while it is running

The usual complaint about outsourced production is not quality. It is that between the kick-off call and the issue, nothing is visible, and the first honest signal about the programme is the issue itself arriving late.

So the instruments are part of the deliverable rather than a report someone writes on a Friday:

• a drawing register that lists every sheet, its revision, its status and who holds it, reconciled against the files actually issued rather than against a plan;
• a sheet list agreed as a document at intake, so progress is a count of drawings at each status — a fact you can check — instead of a completion percentage;
• transmittals recording which revision went to which recipient on which date;
• a submittal log showing what has gone for approval, what has come back, and what is now blocking fabrication;
• RFIs raised early, tracked to an answer, and shown as reflected in the model and the drawings before the next issue;
• the check record for every issue — what was verified automatically, what failed, and what was done about it.

Where you run a common data environment, all of this lives in yours and the register mirrors it. Where you do not, we run the exchange and hand over the complete issue history at close-out.

Your drawings, your data, your standards

Sending a project's structural information to a production partner is a security decision before it is a commercial one, and it deserves a straight answer rather than a badge.

Confidentiality is contracted once, with one company, rather than negotiated with each person who touches the work. Your models, your typical details, your CAD manual and your plant's or fabricator's conventions are configured for your engagement and stay inside it: they are not carried into anyone else's project, and they are not folded into a shared library. Project content is not used to train models that other clients' work runs through. Access is limited to the delivery team on your engagement and is recorded. At close-out, material is returned or destroyed to whatever the contract says, and you get the register that shows what existed.

Where a project is security-minded — defence, energy, data centres, critical infrastructure — ISO 19650-5 governs what is modelled, what is federated and who receives which container, and the engagement is set up that way from intake rather than retrofitted after a question at stage two.

One accountable partner

BuildTwin is the delivery partner for the whole scope: one delivery lead, one register, one programme, one company answerable for what is on the drawing — not a pool of people you have to manage. Confidentiality is contracted once. Your templates, standards and conventions are configured once and applied to everything after that.

When a programme accelerates, the system produces more; the review and the signature stay with the same senior engineers.