Engineering the Engineering

AI design review for electrical power systems

Catch the error before
it gets energized.

Upload a drawing set — single-line, cable schedule, panel schedules — and get a located redline report of every conflict, undersized conductor, and code gap. The review a second engineer should do, done in minutes instead of days.

Request early access See how it works

For design firms, EPCs, and solo power engineers who stamp their own work.

UTILITY 13.8kV MAIN 2000A BUS A — 2000A FDR-01 · XFMR 750kVA M FDR-02 · MTR 250HP FDR-03 · PANEL LP-2
  1. FDR-01 Transformer impedance missing — short-circuit study can't close.
  2. FDR-02 Feeder conductor undersized for 250 HP motor FLA + 125%.
  3. FDR-03 Panel tag on one-line doesn't match the panel schedule.

The second set of eyes never has enough time.

On a power project the drawings, the load schedule, the cable list, and the protection settings all have to agree. They rarely do on the first pass — and the person checking is the same person on a deadline, cross-referencing PDFs by hand.

Errors hide between documents

A feeder is 400A on the one-line and 350A on the schedule. Each sheet looks fine alone. The conflict only shows up when someone reads both at once.

Review doesn't scale

A thorough check of a full drawing set is days of tedious cross-referencing. So it gets sampled, or skipped, and the gap ships to the field.

The cost lands downstream

A missed undersize or a stale tag becomes a change order, a re-stamp, or a tripped breaker at commissioning — long after the drawing left the office.

Upload the set. Get it back redlined.

A review pipeline, not a chatbot. Deterministic engineering math does what math can; Claude does the reading and the judgment.

  1. 01

    Read the set

    Drawings, single-lines, cable and panel schedules — PDF, DXF, or a native EasyPower / PowerPro model. Every sheet and table becomes structured data.

  2. 02

    Cross-check

    Ratings, tags, and connectivity are reconciled across documents. Conductor sizing, voltage drop, and load totals are recomputed and compared against what's drawn.

  3. 03

    Redline, located

    Each finding points to the exact sheet, element, and value — with the rule or calculation behind it. You review a marked-up set, not a wall of text.

  4. 04

    Push the fix

    Accept a finding and the correction can be applied straight to the one-line model and re-checked — the drawing and the data stay in agreement.

Built on Claude

Claude is the engineer in the loop — not a feature bolted on.

Reviewing a drawing set is a reasoning problem over messy, visual, interlinked documents. That is the work Claude is uniquely suited to, and it's the core of the product.

  • Reads the drawings. Claude's vision parses scanned and vector sheets — symbols, callouts, and schedule tables — into the structured model the checks run on.
  • Holds the judgment. Where a rule needs interpretation — an ambiguous tag, an exception, intent across sheets — Claude reasons about it and shows its reasoning.
  • Writes back safely. Through a tool interface over the one-line model, Claude proposes edits that are applied as reviewable, versioned changes — never a silent overwrite.

Request early access

Early access is opening to a small group of power design firms and independent engineers. If you review drawing sets — or wish someone did — get in touch with the kind of work you do.

hello@engineeringtheengineering.com