Program
Distribution Center
In Development
Building-to-Foundation Designer Experience
See the design record, source conflicts, and professional handoff before anything is trusted
A preliminary planning workflow for organizing building geometry, loads, soils information, foundation options, quantities, assumptions, and engineer review. See how building information, manufacturer reactions, geotechnical inputs, Foundation Designer review, and a professional handoff fit together without presenting preliminary work as final engineering.
Built for manufacturers, contractors, owners, and engineering teams evaluating a connected PEMB design workflow.
Engineering boundary
Foundation Designer produces preliminary planning information for estimating, workflow validation, and licensed-professional review. It does not replace geotechnical services, manufacturer reactions, project-specific code review, or a licensed engineer. No output may be used for permit, procurement, fabrication, or construction without the required professional review and approval.
Designer Review Experience · Synthetic Controlled Demonstration
See the building record, source conflicts, and professional handoff in one view
This fixed walkthrough demonstrates the intended connection between Building Designer, Foundation Designer, source authority, and licensed-professional review. It does not run a live model, calculate a foundation, or use customer data.
The AI-style explanation is deterministic synthetic logic. No prompt is submitted, no provider call occurs, and no output is engineering authority.
Project twin · Synthetic
Distribution Center
Clear-span logistics facility
240 ft × 480 ft
36 ft eave
Dock and mezzanine zones
Review-packet completeness72% synthetic
The building geometry advanced, but the reaction package did not. The review must stop before a foundation option is represented as current.
Evidence-first workflow
Design review control surface
Review audience
PEMB manufacturer + design-build team
Building use
Clear-span logistics facility
Controlled identity
Building definition · Revision B
Governing rule
A building definition is useful only when revision, units, sources, assumptions, and responsible authority remain attached to every downstream review.
1
Verified
1
Review
1
Missing
1
External
Enterprise design-workflow review
Bring one real workflow. NovaRise will map the evidence, handoffs, refusals, and professional controls.
Any customer evaluation remains manually scoped. No production access, engineering reliance, private data ingestion, or AI-provider activation is implied by this public demonstration.
Permitted Public Capability
A controlled workflow for completeness, traceability, and review
Guide users through project, geometry, loading, soils, and foundation-system information.
Compare preliminary options and quantities while showing the assumptions used.
Organize a clear review packet for a licensed professional.
Keep final engineering authority with the licensed engineer rather than the software.
Controlled Workflow
Ten review stages from project context to professional handoff
The sequence is intended to prevent missing-source and out-of-order decisions. A later step does not convert preliminary information into final engineering authority.
Project Context
Record project identity, location, intended use, responsible parties, review status, and the scope of the preliminary evaluation.
Building Geometry
Organize width, length, eave height, bay layout, roof slope, column locations, openings, and other geometry needed for review.
Authority and Source Versions
Identify the applicable code edition, referenced standards, jurisdiction, manufacturer documents, and project-specific authority sources.
Loading Input Record
Capture wind, snow, seismic, dead, live, collateral, uplift, and reaction inputs with source, units, version, and uncertainty visible.
Site and Geotechnical Inputs
Record allowable bearing information, frost depth, groundwater, expansive-soil considerations, and the source of each site assumption.
Manufacturer Reactions
Associate the current approved column reactions and load cases with the correct building revision instead of relying on generic assumptions.
Foundation-System Options
Compare preliminary workflow categories while preserving professional authority over system selection, detailing, and final design.
Preliminary Quantity Review
Organize concrete, reinforcing, anchor, excavation, and related quantity assumptions for estimating and professional review.
Assumptions and Exceptions
Surface missing inputs, conflicts, overrides, governing assumptions, and conditions that require escalation before the workflow can proceed.
Licensed-Engineer Review Packet
Assemble source inputs, preliminary outputs, quantity information, assumptions, exceptions, and revision evidence for professional review.
Foundation-System Categories
Workflow categories do not make the final system decision
These categories organize preliminary comparison and review. System selection, detailing, calculations, constructability, and final approval remain with the applicable licensed professionals.
Isolated Footing
Required review focus
Column reactions, soil bearing, uplift, sliding, overturning, frost, reinforcement, anchor design, and interaction with slabs or grade beams.
Grade Beam
Required review focus
Continuity, differential movement, wall support, frost, reinforcing, column-load transfer, soil interaction, and construction sequencing.
Drilled Pier
Required review focus
Geotechnical parameters, lateral behavior, uplift, depth, diameter, reinforcement, groundwater, constructability, and inspection requirements.
Slab and Thickened-Edge System
Required review focus
Subgrade, settlement, slab support, concentrated reactions, reinforcement, joints, moisture, frost, and project-specific geotechnical recommendations.
Hybrid System
Required review focus
Compatibility between systems, load transfer, differential movement, transitions, sequencing, and the governing design authority for each portion.
Review Packet
Communicate sources and uncertainty, not false finality
A review packet is useful only when another professional can determine what was entered, assumed, calculated, changed, and left unresolved.
- Project identity, revision, responsible parties, and intended evaluation scope.
- Geometry, loading inputs, manufacturer reactions, geotechnical information, units, and source versions.
- Preliminary system options and quantity assumptions with no final-design representation.
- Assumption, override, conflict, exception, and missing-input register.
- Decision and revision trace showing what changed and who reviewed the change.
- Explicit statement that licensed professional review and approval are required before permit, procurement, fabrication, or construction reliance.
Put your real design workflow in front of NovaRise
Request a controlled enterprise review for a building-definition, manufacturer-reaction, foundation-planning, quantity, source-authority, or professional-handoff workflow. NovaRise will confirm scope and evidence boundaries before any private data or application access is considered.
View the full platform