Skip to content
Use case 01 · Engineering / Design

AI-assisted fire design and engineering

A workflow that turns drawings, specifications and your configured requirements into a draft fire design basis where every assumption is linked to the evidence behind it. It flags gaps and conflicts for a fire engineer to resolve. The engineer still decides, and still approves.

Get the requirements document See the flow
Runs standaloneUploads and manual entryFire engineer signs
Workflow 01 · demo runAwaiting sign-off

Fire engineerEarly design decisions sit across unstructured drawings, specification clauses and jurisdictional requirements.

  1. Load the inputsDesign team
    QueuedWorkingDoneSign-off
  2. Build the criteria registerAutomated
    QueuedWorkingDoneSign-off
  3. Surface gaps and conflictsAutomated
    QueuedWorkingDoneSign-off
  4. Draft the design basisAutomated
    QueuedWorkingDoneSign-off
  5. Route for approvalFire engineer
    QueuedWorkingDoneSign-off
Stopped for the fire engineer to sign
  • Who uses itFire engineer, design engineer, engineering manager
  • Lifecycle stageEngineering / Design · also Pre-Sales / Tendering
  • Buyer groupTrack A · Engineering & Design
  • RequirementsBRD v0.1, sent as written
At a glance

What goes in, what comes out

Goes in
Drawings
Specifications
Jurisdiction standards
AI Fire Design & EngineeringFive steps · one approval gate Fire engineer signs
Comes out
Design basis report
Criteria register
Open conflicts
Engineer sign-off
What it does

AI Fire Design & Engineering, step by step

Five steps, one decision point. The last step is a person, every time.

  1. 01
    Design team

    Load the inputs

    Drawings, specification sections, client requirements and the configured standards for that jurisdiction.

  2. 02
    Automated

    Build the criteria register

    Each design criterion recorded with the clause or document it came from, so a reviewer can trace it back.

  3. 03
    Automated

    Surface gaps and conflicts

    Where two sources disagree, or a criterion has no source, it is raised rather than quietly resolved.

  4. 04
    Automated

    Draft the design basis

    Assumptions, the selected concept and the criteria register assembled into a reviewable document.

  5. 05
    Fire engineer

    Route for approval

    A named fire engineer works through the open items and signs. Nothing is issued before that.

    Every open item resolved and signed?

    Yes Design basis issuedNo Back to the conflict list
  6. Output

    What lands at the end

    A design basis report carrying assumptions, the selected concept, the criteria register, the open conflicts, the sign-offs and an evidence manifest.

Who’s involved

Fire engineerDesign teamEngineering manager

What you get

  • Design basis report
  • Criteria register
  • Open conflicts
  • Engineer sign-off

In the wireframe

A disputed requirement and the drawing evidence supporting it, resolved on one screen.

Use case diagram

Who does what, and who signs

Automated steps prepare the evidence. People make the calls.

Swipe to see the whole diagram

Use case diagram: AI Fire Design & Engineering People: Fire engineer, Design team, Engineering manager. Steps: 1 Load the inputs; 2 Build the criteria register; 3 Surface gaps and conflicts; 4 Draft the design basis; 5 Route for approval. Fire engineer approves the final step. AI Fire Design & Engineering«workflow, built with DeX»«inputs»01 Load the inputs02 Build the criteria register03 Surface gaps and conflicts04 Draft the design basis05 Route for approvalDesign teamEngineering managerFire engineer«approves»«documents»Drawings, …
Automated step Done by a person Approval gate Takes part Leads to
What changes

Why this costs you time today

Early design decisions sit across unstructured drawings, specification clauses and jurisdictional requirements. An overlooked conflict at this stage does not stay at this stage — it propagates into procurement and shows up as a variation months later.

Task
Today
With this workflow
Finding the criteria
Scattered across drawings, clauses and emails
One register, each criterion linked to its source
Conflicting sources
Found late, often as a variation
Raised as open items before procurement
Sign-off
Implied by an email reply
A named engineer signs every item
The line we do not cross

What this software will not do

Life-safety work. These limits are written into the requirements, not added as a disclaimer.

Specific to this workflow

It does not produce a sealed design, a hydraulic calculation or a definitive sprinkler layout. It prepares the basis on which a qualified engineer does that work.

It does not decide compliance

The software assembles evidence, retrieves source clauses and shows conflicts. It does not determine whether anything complies. A named engineer does.

It does not stand in for an authority

An approval recorded in the software never implies consent from an AHJ, Civil Defence, building control or a building surveyor.

Nothing leaves without a named reviewer

Every output carries who approved it. Anything unverified keeps a draft marker until someone signs it.

It does not do sealed engineering

Hydraulic network calculation, definitive sprinkler layout, sealed design, BIM geometry authoring and final cost estimates are all out of scope by design.

Your standards, not ours

NFPA, EN, BS, ISO, FM, UL, LPCB and Civil Defence appear in the requirements as examples. None is assumed to apply to your projects until you say so.

~1/10of traditional build time
~30%of traditional cost

That is a claim about how fast Colakin builds software with DeX, and it is supported by delivered projects. It is not a claim about what any of these fifteen workflows will save your business. The requirements deliberately leave that to a pilot, measured against your own baseline.

How an engagement runs

From a question to a pilot, in five steps

Nothing hidden behind a discovery call. Stop at step one and keep the document.

  1. 01

    You ask for the requirements document

    The full BRD for the workflow you care about, sent as written.

    Same day
  2. 02

    A ten-minute wireframe walkthrough

    A clickable prototype of that one workflow.

    10 minutes
  3. 03

    The Fire Fit Check

    Five questions: fit, hours lost, who approves spend, whether your documents can be shared, and timing.

    One call
  4. 04

    A scope built on your rules

    Your standards, your document formats, your approval gates.

    Within a week
  5. 05

    A pilot against your own baseline

    One workflow, your data, your engineers.

    Q1
Same buyer, same week

Also in Engineering & Design

Each one stands alone. Take one first, then decide whether a second earns its place.

02 · Engineering & Design

Intelligent Drawing Review

Candidate clashes pinned to sheet, revision and coordinate.

Issue registerPinned coordinatesReviewer decisions
Open the workflow
03 · Engineering & Design

Code & Specification Compliance

A clause-by-clause matrix. The reviewer decides, never the software.

Compliance matrixExceptionsEvidence links
Open the workflow
09 · Engineering & Design

Engineering Drawing Automation

Draft placement against approved criteria. The designer accepts.

Draft layoutScheduleRevision clouds
Open the workflow

All fifteen workflows

Questions

AI Fire Design & Engineering: questions

Does it decide whether a design complies with the code?
No. It retrieves the relevant clauses, maps the evidence against them and shows you where sources conflict. The determination is the engineer's, and the record shows whose.
What happens when the project specification and the adopted code edition disagree?
The conflict is raised as an open item rather than resolved automatically. The engineer records a disposition, and that disposition — with its reasoning — becomes part of the design basis.
Do we have to adopt all fifteen workflows?
No. Each one works on its own, from uploads and manual entry. None is a prerequisite for another. Most teams start with the single workflow costing them the most time.
Which standards does it support?
Whichever ones you use. The requirements name NFPA, EN, BS, ISO, FM, UL, LPCB and Civil Defence as examples only. Your standards and editions are configured during scoping, not assumed.
Next step

Ask for the AI Fire Design & Engineering requirements document

The business requirements document as written, including what it refuses to do. No brochure, no drip sequence.

  • The requirements document, usually the same working day
  • A ten-minute wireframe walkthrough with the people who specified it
  • No claimed percentage saving — your pilot measures it

Request the document

One working day. A person replies, not a sequence.

We use this to reply, nothing else. No list, no newsletter.