Skip to content
Use case 10 · Engineering / Design

Fire protection technical submittal automation

A workflow that assembles a submittal package, classifies each document, validates that models and certificates are the current revision, routes technical review and issues a controlled, indexed package. Superseded certificates are caught before the package goes out, not after it comes back.

Get the requirements document See the flow
Runs standaloneUploads and manual entrySubmittal coordinator signs
Workflow 10 · demo runAwaiting sign-off

Technical submittal coordinatorSubmittals need consistent certificates, data sheets, drawings and compliance statements.

  1. Set up the packageCoordinator
    QueuedWorkingDoneSign-off
  2. Classify documentsAutomated
    QueuedWorkingDoneSign-off
  3. Validate models and certificatesAutomated
    QueuedWorkingDoneSign-off
  4. Route technical reviewEngineer
    QueuedWorkingDoneSign-off
  5. Issue a controlled packageCoordinator
    QueuedWorkingDoneSign-off
Stopped for the submittal coordinator to sign
  • Who uses itTechnical submittal coordinator, engineer
  • Lifecycle stageEngineering / Design · also Post-Sales / Project Delivery
  • Buyer groupTrack C · Project Delivery
  • RequirementsBRD v0.1, sent as written
At a glance

What goes in, what comes out

Goes in
Specification sections
Certificates
Data sheets and drawings
Technical Submittal AutomationFive steps · one approval gate Submittal coordinator signs
Comes out
Indexed package
Document register
Specification response
What it does

Technical Submittal Automation, step by step

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

  1. 01
    Coordinator

    Set up the package

    Specification sections, required documents and the response structure.

  2. 02
    Automated

    Classify documents

    Each uploaded document identified and placed against the requirement it answers.

  3. 03
    Automated

    Validate models and certificates

    Revisions checked; superseded documents flagged before issue.

    Every certificate current?

    Yes On to technical reviewNo Superseded document flagged
  4. 04
    Engineer

    Route technical review

    An engineer approves the specification response, not just the paperwork.

  5. 05
    Coordinator

    Issue a controlled package

    Indexed, versioned, with a document register.

  6. Output

    What lands at the end

    An indexed technical submittal with a document register, the specification response, certificate evidence and drawings, issued under version control.

Who’s involved

Submittal coordinatorEngineerConsultant

What you get

  • Indexed package
  • Document register
  • Specification response

In the wireframe

A superseded certificate is caught, the correct one uploaded, an engineer approves the response, and a versioned package is previewed.

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: Technical Submittal Automation People: Submittal coordinator, Engineer, Consultant. Steps: 1 Set up the package; 2 Classify documents; 3 Validate models and certificates; 4 Route technical review; 5 Issue a controlled package. Submittal coordinator approves the final step. Technical Submittal Automation«workflow, built with DeX»«inputs»01 Set up the package02 Classify documents03 Validate models and certificates04 Route technical review05 Issue a controlled packageSubmittal coordinatorEngineerConsultantSubmittal coordinator«approves»«documents»Specification sections, …
Automated step Done by a person Approval gate Takes part Leads to
What changes

Why this costs you time today

Submittals need consistent certificates, data sheets, drawings and compliance statements. Assembly is repetitive, versions diverge quietly, and one wrong-revision certificate sends the whole package back.

Task
Today
With this workflow
Assembling the package
Repetitive copy and rename
Classified against each requirement
Certificate revisions
Found when the package bounces
Validated before issue
Reissues
Replace and hope
Versioned, with what changed
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 checks that a certificate is current and in scope as far as the document states. It does not vouch for a certificate's validity or guarantee a consultant will accept the package.

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 Project Delivery

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

11 · Project Delivery

Procurement & Project Intelligence

Each shortage tied to the site milestone it actually moves.

Availability dashboardShortage logSchedule impact
Open the workflow

All fifteen workflows

Questions

Technical Submittal Automation: questions

How does it catch a wrong-revision certificate?
Documents are classified and validated against the current revision on file before the package can be issued. A superseded certificate is flagged at that gate.
Does it write the specification response?
It drafts the response structure against the specification sections. An engineer approves the content — the approval is on the response, not only on the document list.
Can we reissue a package cleanly?
Packages are versioned with a document register, so a reissue shows what changed rather than replacing the record.
Will the consultant accept it?
That is their call. The workflow makes the package consistent, complete against the specification and traceable; it cannot promise an approval.
Next step

Ask for the Technical Submittal Automation 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.