Module 2 · Working with Nomic
Putting it all together
One project, every lesson.
The situation
A mid-rise mixed-use project is at 90% construction documents. The permit set is due in three weeks, submittals and RFIs are already coming in, and you have just joined the team. Autodesk Forma holds the drawings and SharePoint holds the spec book.
Three people join the same week: an architect, a structural engineer, and a general contractor's project engineer. Pick the seat closest to yours. The prompts change. The sequence does not.
Understand the project before reviewing it, scope before spending, verify before exporting, and capture what worked.
1. Set up the project
Create the project with your project number. Link the Forma project so the set syncs and keeps syncing. On the project's Files page, add only what this job is about. Leave the client's general library out.
The Forma sheet folder, the SharePoint specifications folder, and the firm's drawing standard.
The structural sheets, the architectural sheets that show the structure (slab edges, openings, grids), the geotech report, and the specification divisions for concrete and steel.
The full drawing set, the project manual, every addendum, and the RFI log.
Make sure the spec folder is ready: if any files show a blank status, run Index Folder on it. The one-time parsing cost is covered in lesson 3.
2. Survey the set
Start a session from the project page.
I am new to this project. Before we review anything, give me the lay of the land: sheet sets by discipline with counts, spec divisions present, and anything that looks missing. Cite the sheets you used.
I am reviewing the structural design on this project. Before we review anything: list the structural sheets with counts, what the geotech report recommends for foundations, which architectural sheets show slab edges and openings, and anything that looks missing. Cite the sheets and pages you used.
I am the new project engineer. Before we review anything: sheet sets by discipline with counts, spec divisions present, each addendum and the sheets it revises, and anything that looks missing. Cite the sheets you used.
Open a citation and confirm it says what the survey claims. Then find out what changed:
What do the general notes and the most recent revision clouds tell me about what changed between 60% and 90%? Which sheets carry the most revisions?
Here the approach comes from Understanding your project: specific when you know the term, broad when exploring, cited either way.
3. Scope and run the review
A milestone set calls for Comprehensive at Extra High. Scope it to the sheets you actually own or need today.
Comprehensive drawing review of the architectural sheets only (A-series in the project files) against Drawing Standards v4. Extra High effort. Confirm the sheet count and estimate before you start.
Comprehensive review of the structural and architectural sheets for cross-discipline conflicts: slab edges, openings, column and grid alignment, and member sizes shown differently on plans and schedules. Extra High effort. Confirm the sheet count and estimate before you start.
Comprehensive review of the full set, every discipline, for scope gaps and conflicts that would become RFIs or change orders. Rank by cost risk. Extra High effort. Confirm the sheet count and estimate before you start.
The agent surveys, proposes scope, and pauses with a sheet count and cost. Check the count against the survey. If it matches, confirm. Do something else while it runs.
4. Answer an RFI
While the review runs, an RFI arrives. Open a second session for it, because it is a new task.
RFI 112 from the contractor: "Section 09 65 19 specifies 1/8" VCT, but the finish schedule shows LVT in Multipurpose 120. Which governs, and what moisture testing is required on the new slab?" Find the spec sections and drawing references I need to answer it, then draft the response with a citation for each statement.
Open each citation. Confirm the spec paragraph and the schedule row say what the draft says. The draft is yours to send. Submittals, RFIs, and codes: search, compare, cite.
5. Review a submittal
A door hardware submittal is waiting.
Review submittal 042 (attached) against Section 08 71 00 in the project files and the door schedule on A-601. Approval determination, findings with citations, and a stamp comment.
Read the findings and citations. Agree with the determination or not. Paste the stamp comment into Bluebeam, edit it, stamp it.
Review the attached door hardware submittal (08 71 00, submittal 042) against Section 08 71 00 in the project files and the door schedule on A-601, before I send it to the architect. List every deviation with the submittal page and the paragraph or sheet it conflicts with.
Fix the deviations with the supplier, then transmit. The architect gets a submittal that is already checked.
6. When a question turns on code
The building official raised travel distance at the last meeting. Code is the one place in the sequence that needs Codes Search and a jurisdiction.
On A-201, check the exit access travel distance from the farthest point on Level 2 to the nearest exit stair against the adopted code for this jurisdiction, for the occupancy on the code summary sheet. Cite the code section and show the path you used.
Open the retrieved excerpt. Confirm the edition matches the cover sheet. The number comes from the code, and the sheet establishes the occupancy.
7. Verify and export
Open the Drawing Review artifact. Sort by severity. For every High finding, click the drawing citation and any spec, standard, or code citation. Accept what holds. Ignore the noise. Send back a wrong citation:
Finding 14 cites Section 09 65 19 paragraph 2.2 but that paragraph is about adhesives. Re-check the citation for finding 14 and for every other finding that cites Section 09 65 19.
Spot-check the Mediums. When the table is Accepted and Ignored rather than New, Create RFI in Forma for Accepted findings that need an answer from another party, and download the annotated PDF for the ones fixed in-house. Verifying results: the status flow is the record of what was checked.
8. Capture it
Today taught three things about this project: citations need checking, reviews have to be scoped to the sheets on hand, and the team wants findings phrased a particular way. Put them in a workflow.
Clone Drawing Standards Review from Workflows → Nomic. Attach Drawing Standards v4 as Context and add a required multiple-file Drawing Set slot.
Clone Drawing Revision Analysis from Workflows → Nomic. Keep the baseline and revised sets as required slots, and attach the structural notes as Context.
Clone RFI Anticipator from Workflows → Nomic. Keep the drawing set and specifications as required slots, and attach your RFI log template as Context.
Keep the five instruction sections tight, and add to Verification: "confirm every citation's section title matches the finding before recording it." Set effort to Medium for weekly runs. Scope it to the project. Invite the other two people on the job.
Next week the next set arrives and someone else runs the review from the form. Same checks, same table. Building workflows covers the details.
Next
Start on the next project small: one discipline, one standard, ten sheets. Learn how the Nomic agent scopes and what it finds. Then widen.
The habits to keep: manage context, scope the work, ask for evidence, and delegate with checkpoints.
Step-by-step reference is in Docs. Bring the rest to Office Hours.