A revision-aware source index
Project, discipline, sheet, detail, issue status, and superseded versions stay distinguishable.
Production & field work / Construction RFI coordination
A site question. The right drawing beside it.
Prepare requests for information with the drawing references, revision history, and open questions a project team needs to route them correctly.
Discuss your project Start with an outline, not a perfect brief.
Where it gets stuckConstruction RFI coordination,
Construction RFI coordination,
with the context attached.
A field question can reference a superseded plan while a similar RFI already has an answer. Repeating or misrouting it creates avoidable coordination work. The goal is a traceable clarification request, not an AI interpretation that authorizes construction.
A good first scope
Choose one project, one discipline, and its approved document register. Name the RFI coordinator and the design authority responsible for answers.
The workflow
- 01 / The starting point
A superintendent raises a clash question with a marked-up drawing and location reference.
- 02 / The right context
Match sheet and detail identifiers to the approved revision register, check related RFIs, and surface superseded references or unclear locations.
- 03 / Prepared for review
Prepare an RFI draft with the question, source references, related responses, requested decision, and routing suggestion. Cost or schedule effects are questions unless confirmed by their owners.
- 04 / A person decides
The project coordinator checks and issues the request. The designated architect or engineer supplies the authoritative response; field changes follow the project’s approval procedure.
Tangible work
A useful working handoff
A reviewable RFI draft
Keep the actual field question beside marked-up evidence and potential duplicate requests.
A response and closure register
Track confirmed responses, unresolved questions, and revision changes without treating a draft answer as permission to build.
A focused engagementDefine the job.
Define the job.
Test the handoff.
- 01
Define the first boundary
Choose one project, one discipline, and its approved document register. Name the RFI coordinator and the design authority responsible for answers.
- 02
Build the inspectable handoff
Keep the actual field question beside marked-up evidence and potential duplicate requests.
- 03
Test before connecting actions
Include identical sheet numbers from separate projects, a sketch with no revision, an answered RFI later superseded by a bulletin, and a question requiring multiple disciplines.
How we would startMap it. Test it.
Map it. Test it.
Then decide.
Agree the trigger, source systems, reviewer, and acceptance criteria. Build the bounded preparation path, then test it with the person who will own it.
Include the awkward cases
Include identical sheet numbers from separate projects, a sketch with no revision, an answered RFI later superseded by a bulletin, and a question requiring multiple disciplines.
Keep this boundary explicit
No engineering advice, design approval, automatic change order, or instruction to proceed. The project’s licensed professionals and contractual authorities retain responsibility.
See how acceptance evidence works ↗A few useful answers
Before we begin.
Can it answer the RFI itself?
It can retrieve a previously approved response and show its context. A new design interpretation needs the authorized professional.
Can different projects share one index?
Only with explicit access separation and project identifiers. A correct-looking answer from the wrong project is an unacceptable handoff.