The brace gussets are welded to the beams, but the beam end connections were designed for shear alone.
The fabricator’s delegated connection calculations for a steel-framed event facility were read against the contract drawings and the shop drawings they must agree with, and several connections are designed for less than the drawings ask or detailed differently from their calculation.
Delegated steel connection calculations
Delegated structural steel connection calculations for a multi-use event facility, read against the contract structural drawings and their latest addendum, the fabricator’s shop drawings for two areas, and the steel specification the customer uploaded.
What the review compared
The review read the fabricator’s delegated connection calculations, a main package and a truss connection package, against the contract structural drawings and their latest addendum, the shop drawings for two areas of the building and the steel specification the customer uploaded. Its instructions asked it to confirm that a calculation covers every delegated location, trace each design load to the contract, match the calculated bolts, plates, welds and stiffeners to the shop drawings, check the applicable limit states and report any demand the contract does not give as a question for the engineer of record. Code checking was not enabled; the steel specification was supplied as a reference document.
Where the calculations and drawings part ways
Several connections were designed for less than the drawings imply: braced-bay beam ends for shear alone, truss chord ends for a small shear tab, and moment connections for capacities the calculations flag for the engineer to verify. Elsewhere the calculation and the shop drawing describe different plates or gages, typical tables calculate one row that is not the worst case, some mapped locations point to the wrong calculation or to none, and one package carries no seal.
What to verify next
The engineer of record should supply the missing brace, collector, chord and moment forces, and the delegated engineer should revise the calculations, correct the mapping and seal every package before the shop drawings are approved. Examples that cite a requirement follow the steel specification the customer uploaded; every example is a question for the engineer of record and the delegated engineer.
9 selected examples from the review
Nine distinct findings, summarized for professional verification.
Braced-bay beam ends checked for shear only
Brace gussets weld to the beams; the beam end calculations ignore the brace force.
Why it matters: The brace force has no checked path to the columns.
What to check: Request collector forces and redesign those connections.
StructuralShort beams fall below the uniform-load rule
Each size gets one capacity, which meets the notes only at its tabulated span.
Why it matters: Many shorter beams fall short of the required end reaction.
What to check: Tabulate capacity by span, or design short beams separately.
StructuralBlock shear uses the wrong gage
A truss block shear check uses a gage the shop drawing does not show.
Why it matters: At the detailed gage, the connection falls below its demand.
What to check: Recheck with the detailed gage and revise the connection.
StructuralTruss gussets thinner than calculated
Shop drawings detail truss gussets thinner than the calculations need, with no chord welds.
Why it matters: As detailed, the gussets fail the calculation’s own buckling check.
What to check: Fabricate the calculated plates and add the chord welds.
StructuralChevron gusset half the calculated thickness
One chevron apex plate is half the thickness its calculation gives.
Why it matters: At that thickness, buckling capacity falls well below the brace force.
What to check: Detail the calculated plate and welds.
StructuralMoment connections have no design forces
The contract drawings mark moment connections but give no design moments or axial forces.
Why it matters: The calculations assume capacities flagged for the engineer to verify.
What to check: Request design moments and axial forces before approving them.
StructuralTube post mapped to a wide-flange calculation
Braces at a tube post use a calculation written for a wide-flange column.
Why it matters: No check covers the tube wall under the brace load.
What to check: Map the tube calculation and adopt its details.
StructuralTruss splice calculation is not sealed
The truss splice calculation carries no engineer’s seal, signature or date.
Why it matters: The general notes require signed and sealed connection design.
What to check: Resubmit it sealed by the delegated engineer.
StructuralBolt group eccentricity computed, then ignored
One calculation computes the bolt group eccentricity, then treats the group as concentric.
Why it matters: Its bolt capacity is overstated, though the connection still passes.
What to check: Recompute the group for its eccentricity.
StructuralReview scope and priorities
The review organized the questions by severity, discipline, and source context so the responsible designers could investigate them.
Structural
Check the findings with the responsible discipline designers.
High, Medium, and Low priorities
Selected examples retain their assigned priority.
Coordination and completeness within the set
This review checked the documents against one another. No code check was enabled.
Findings connected to their source context
Groundbook links each finding to the sheets it came from so the responsible designer can confirm or dismiss it.
Potential impacts describe the issue type. They are not verified outcomes from this project.
Follow the information across the complete set
Groundbook reads the documents you upload and reports where they disagree, where a reference does not resolve, and where a required value is absent.
See how a full set is reviewed or how interfaces are coordinated.
- 1Map the complete set
Identify sheets, disciplines, details, schedules, and notes.
- 2Connect repeated information
Follow tags, references, and requirements wherever they reappear.
- 3Check coordination and completeness
Compare the documents and identify missing or conflicting information.
- 4Return findings for verification
Organize potential issues by severity, discipline, and supporting context.
Questions for professional verification
The output supports the responsible designers as they review the source documents and decide what needs to change.
What this result means
- Groundbook surfaced potential issues for professional review.
- Severity helps prioritize which questions to investigate.
- The findings describe coordination and completeness questions in the uploaded set.
- Each finding includes source context for verification.
What it does not mean
- Every potential finding is a confirmed error or violation.
- The project was unsafe, unbuildable, or ultimately noncompliant.
- Groundbook replaced the responsible professionals or authority.
- A correction was made, or any cost or delay was avoided.
About this review
Is this a real review?
Based on a Groundbook review completed in November 2026. Findings are summarized.
Are these findings confirmed defects?
No. Each one is a potential issue for the responsible designer to verify against the source documents. Groundbook reports what the documents say and where they disagree. It does not make design decisions, certify compliance, or replace the authority having jurisdiction.
How long did the review take?
Turnaround runs from 20 minutes to 24 hours depending on project size.
Was a code check included?
No code check was enabled for this review. It covered coordination and completeness within the set. Code checking is available: Groundbook reads the building codes that governments publish online and uses licensed codes only where a license allows it. You can upload a copy you’re licensed to use.
Can I see a full report?
Yes. The sample plan review report shows all 79 findings from one review of a drawing set and its specifications, with the cited excerpts.
Continue from the case study
Explore the source-linked examples in the sample plan review report, or browse every published case study.
Give the next drawing set a connected first pass
Upload the project, choose the checks that matter, and receive structured potential findings with source context.