Shop drawings · Product data · Submittals
A shop drawing answers one question: does the fabricator or supplier’s interpretation match the contract documents it was prepared from? Groundbook compares the submittal against the contract set, the specification section, and the other trades it has to fit, and returns each difference with both references linked.
Inside Groundbook
Add the shop drawings, product data, or samples-in-PDF alongside the contract drawings, the specification section, and any related trades’ documents they have to agree with. Mark which files are the submittal and which are references, and note the transmittal or issue the submittal claims to be based on. Import from Autodesk Construction Cloud (Forma), SharePoint, Google Drive, Box, Dropbox, Bluebeam Studio, or email.
The submittal is checked against the contract requirement it is supposed to satisfy: sizes, marks, materials, performance criteria, and connections against the structural and architectural drawings and the specification section, then against the adjacent trades’ documents for openings, supports, clearances, and rough-in.
Each finding names the difference and shows both sources highlighted, so the reviewer decides what it means before responding. The engineer or architect of record still performs the submittal review for conformance with the design concept; Groundbook prepares that decision rather than replacing it.
A finding, with its sources
This hotel finding connected a door on the plan with its schedule row and the separation requirement that governed it. A submittal review works the same way: compare the shop drawing against the contract requirement and the trades around it. Open the image to inspect the evidence view.
What a shop drawing review compares
A shop drawing review is a set of comparisons, each running from what the supplier proposes back to what the contract requires. This is what Groundbook checks, and what the reviewer confirms.
| What is compared | Against | What the reviewer confirms |
|---|---|---|
| Contract basis | Structural, architectural, and MEP drawings; the specification section; the transmittal or addendum the submittal claims to follow. | Confirm the submittal was prepared from the current contract issue, not a superseded one. A shop drawing built on an old revision is a finding on its own. |
| Scope and quantities | The submittal schedule or index against the specification’s submittal requirements and the drawing’s scope of work. | Check that every required item was submitted and that none was substituted without a request. A missing submittal reads as an open item, not a pass. |
| Dimensions and marks | Member marks, sizes, and locations against the contract drawings and the schedules that reference them. | Every mark should resolve to one drawing location and one schedule row, with consistent sizes and quantities across all three. |
| Performance and materials | Stated performance criteria, ratings, and material or finish data against the specification section and any delegated-design criteria. | Where the specification gives a performance value and the submittal gives a product, confirm the product’s published data actually meets that value. |
| Connections, embeds, and interfaces | Connection design basis, embeds, and anchor points against the structural drawings and the trades that provide the receiving condition. | An embed shown on one discipline’s documents and missing from another is exactly the kind of gap a shop drawing review exists to catch. |
| Deviations and substitutions | Notes, cover letters, and redlines the supplier adds to the submittal. | A stated deviation still needs a decision from the responsible designer. Groundbook flags it; it does not approve or reject it. |
From published project reviews
These anonymized findings come from published Groundbook reviews of construction drawing sets. The same comparisons run on shop drawings and submittals: which issue governs, whether an interface is shown on both sides, and whether the equipment or schedule data agrees. They are potential issues for professional verification, not completed corrections.
Mixed-use residential
Two structural schedules carried different requirements, while the set did not clearly establish which version governed or update all downstream references.
See sources and verification stepsMixed-use residential
A sump shown in the mechanical/plumbing design was not represented in the corresponding structural slab and footing area.
See sources and verification stepsMixed-use residential
Equipment tags, quantities, duties, materials, and operating sequences did not consistently reconcile across plans, diagrams, schedules, and specifications.
See sources and verification stepsWhere this fits by trade
This page covers the comparison that applies to any shop drawing or submittal: contract basis, scope, dimensions, performance, interfaces, and deviations. Structural steel, curtain wall and façade, elevators and conveying, commercial kitchen equipment, and low-voltage, security, and AV systems have their own checklists with trade-specific prompts and a downloadable worksheet.
Subcontractors comparing shop drawings and submittals against the bid documents, and checking scope across disciplines, can start from the subcontractor review page. Not supported: quantity takeoff, pricing, generating a submittal register, or the engineer or architect of record’s formal conformance review.
Questions, answered
Yes, as documents: it compares the shop drawing or submittal against the contract set, the specification section, and the other trades it has to fit, and returns each difference with both sheets linked. Fabrication, engineering, and approval decisions stay with the responsible parties.
No. Reviewing shop drawings for conformance with the design concept is the engineer or architect of record’s responsibility under the contract. A Groundbook review prepares that decision by surfacing the places where the submittal and the contract documents disagree, so the reviewer spends time deciding rather than hunting.
Any trade that submits shop drawings, product data, or samples as PDFs. Structural steel, curtain wall and façade, elevators and conveying, commercial kitchen equipment, and low-voltage systems have their own checklists with trade-specific prompts; this page covers the general comparison, and mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and fire-protection submittals are checked the same way.
No. Groundbook compares documents and returns findings; it does not generate a submittal log, assign approval status, or replace your project’s submittal-tracking process. Use your existing register alongside the review.
Yes. Shop drawings often arrive as scans, photographs, or PDFs with reviewer stamps and clouds. Groundbook reads each sheet as an image, so a missing text layer or a hand-marked revision does not stop the review; see how <a href="/scanned-drawing-review/">scanned and hand-drawn sheets</a> are handled.
Eligible new customers who sign up with a work email and start within seven days get their first project free. After that, reviews are priced per page, with the exact price shown before payment.
Keep exploring
Twelve document checks: marks, connections, camber, bolting and welding, embeds.
Read the checklistScope gaps, shop drawings and submittals, and bid document review by trade.
See the subcontractor pageDrawings, specifications, reports, and requirements checked against each other.
Construction document reviewUpload it with the contract set it has to match.