AutoReview Demo: First-Pass AI Checks for Engineering Drawings

In this AutoReview demo, you’ll see how AI-powered drawing checks can help engineering teams catch common 2D drawing issues before they delay release, create supplier confusion, or lead to manufacturability problems.

In the video, you’ll see how CoLab AutoReview performs a first-pass check on an engineering drawing, identifies potential issues, and connects each piece of feedback to the exact location on the drawing. The demo also shows how teams can apply their own internal standards and guidelines so feedback is tailored to the way their organization manages drawing quality.

Why Automated Drawing Checks Matter

Small drawing issues can create major downstream problems. A missing specification, tolerance mismatch, conflicting note, or unclear bill of materials can delay drawing release, slow down supplier communication, or introduce avoidable manufacturing risk.

AutoReview is designed to help engineering teams catch those issues earlier by providing an automated first-pass review before the drawing is released. Instead of relying only on manual checks, teams can use an AI engineering drawing checker to surface potential concerns, connect feedback to the exact drawing location, and route questions to the right people for review.

This page focuses on a short product demo of AutoReview in action. For a broader breakdown of where AI fits across the full drawing review workflow, read our full guide to AI for manufacturing drawing checks.

Video Transcript: AI Drawing Review Demo

AutoReview serves as the first-pass check for engineering drawings.

To get started, simply upload a drawing manually or push in a drawing from a PLM integration. Once the drawing is in CoLab, you can open the AutoReview panel and begin an analysis.

Running an Automated General Analysis

You can start with what we call a general analysis. This looks broadly across all aspects of the drawing by parsing it into different views and dimensions, understanding tolerances, notes, and title block information, and then providing feedback based on missing information, incomplete data, and inconsistencies between sheets.

The goal is to surface common mistakes that can delay product development.

After the analysis is completed, the engineer can walk through the generated feedback. When they click on a piece of feedback, AutoReview marks up the exact location on the drawing where there may be a potential concern.

In this example, AutoReview identifies material specification conflicts, finish specification conflicts, issues with the bill of materials, and conflicting angular tolerances between the title blocks on sheet one and sheet two.

These are the types of issues that can delay the release of a drawing or create confusion when a supplier goes to manufacture the part.

Applying Custom Company Standards and Guidelines

The general analysis looks at broad best practices across the industry. But companies can also make AutoReview more specific to their own engineering standards.

Within CoLab, you can upload your own standards, guidelines, and best practices. These provide extra context for AutoReview so it can understand how your company manages and maintains drawings, and what “good” looks like for your organization.

When running an analysis, you can then focus AutoReview on what matters most at that point in the product development process.

In this example, the analysis is focused on reviewing dimensions and tolerances against the company’s internal standards. Because AutoReview is being concentrated on specific aspects of the drawing, the number of feedback items is lower and more targeted.

AutoReview still catches the angular mismatch in the title block, but it also flags that the angular tolerance is quite tight and could potentially create problems for manufacturing.

Flagging True Position and GD&T Issues

Another example is a true position tolerance issue. In this case, the drawing includes a true position tolerance of one thousandth of an inch. AutoReview references the company’s guidelines that control tolerance limits for machined parts.

For the engineer, AutoReview flags the potential concern and surfaces the exact standard or guideline that explains what good looks like and how the drawing should be corrected to align with internal best practices.

Instead of flagging an issue and leaving the engineer to search for the relevant standard, AutoReview brings that guideline directly into CoLab. The engineer can review the guideline and see recommended actions from AutoReview.

In this case, AutoReview recommends either relaxing the positional tolerance or, based on the guideline, justifying that tolerance with a tolerance analysis and confirming that there is a qualified supplier capable of delivering that requirement.

Triaging Feedback and Collaborating With the Team

But what happens if the engineer does not know how to make the adjustment?

For example, a junior engineer may need help from someone with more experience in tolerance analysis. With CoLab, they can triage the feedback and bring a senior engineer directly into the conversation.

They can add another engineer to the specific piece of feedback. That engineer receives a link, opens it from their email, and is brought directly to the marked-up location on the drawing.

The original engineer can also tag them in the conversation to explain exactly what help is needed. For example, they may ask for recommendations on whether the tolerance can be relaxed and how far it can be backed off.

The senior engineer can then respond directly in CoLab, giving the team a clear justification for how the drawing should be corrected before release.

See AutoReview in Action

CoLab AutoReview helps engineering teams identify drawing issues earlier by checking 2D engineering drawings against general best practices and company-specific standards.

To see how AutoReview could fit into your engineering review process, book a demo with the CoLab team.

‍