01
Commercial & offices
Fit-out and core-and-shell coordination, ceiling void congestion, tenant variation.
High element count, repeated coordination cycles — automated QA pays back fastest here.
Where coordination difficulty actually sits
Sectors differ less in the software used than in services density, clearance tolerance and validation expectation. These are the building types our discipline mix is set up for, and where automation earns its place.
Sector capability
Services density, not building type, sets the difficulty
Two buildings of identical size can be an order of magnitude apart in coordination effort. What varies is how much plant is in the ceiling, how tight the clearance requirement is, and how much of the checking has to be evidenced.
02
Residential & mixed use
Repeatable unit typologies, riser coordination and high documentation volume.
Repetition is the ideal condition for design automation and rule-based checking.
03
Healthcare
Dense services, strict clearance and access requirements, demanding validation.
Clearance and maintenance-access rules matter more than hard clashes.
04
Data centres
High-density mechanical and electrical distribution with tight tolerance coordination.
Parameter completeness and sizing consistency are the dominant risk.
05
Industrial & warehousing
Long-span structures, process services and fire protection routing.
Fire protection coordination against structure is the recurring conflict.
06
Hospitality
Back-of-house services, guest-room repetition and finish-critical coordination.
Room typology repetition suits generated content and automated checking.
07
Education
Phased delivery, standardised room types and ventilation-led services.
Phasing makes model status and revision discipline critical.
08
Retail
Landlord and tenant interfaces, rapid fit-out programmes, shopfront coordination.
Short programmes reward automated documentation over manual production.
09
Public & government
Civic offices, courts, libraries and public service centres with many stakeholders.
Traceable revisions and maintainable asset data matter as much as coordination.
10
Transportation buildings
Terminals, stations, depots and car parks — building services only, not infrastructure.
Large-volume ventilation and access for maintenance in buildings that never close.
What this page does and does not say. It describes the building types our disciplines and workflows suit. It does not claim completed projects in each sector, and there are no sector case studies on this site yet because none have been released for publication.
The second line under each sector is where automation is most useful in that building type — a statement about workflow, not about work we have already delivered there.
Sector pages
Each sector in detail
What drives coordination difficulty, which discipline dominates, what the model has to be able to answer, and where automation earns its place — per building type.
Commercial & offices
The sector where the same ceiling void is coordinated four times, for four different tenants, against a core-and-shell design that was fixed before any of them existed.
Dominant constraint: Ceiling void depth
Residential & mixed use
Repetition is usually described as the easy part of residential. It is actually the part that decides whether the project is efficient or expensively wrong two hundred times.
Dominant constraint: Riser coordination
Healthcare
The sector where clearance and maintenance access matter more than hard clashes, and where the evidence that a check was performed is part of what is being bought.
Dominant constraint: Clearance & access
Data centres
The highest services density we work at, where the dominant risk is not spatial conflict but sizing and parameter inconsistency across a large repeated electrical and mechanical topology.
Dominant constraint: Tolerance & consistency
Industrial & warehousing
Long spans, few ceilings, and one conflict that recurs so predictably it should be designed for at zoning stage rather than resolved forty times at coordination stage.
Dominant constraint: Structure vs fire protection
Hospitality
Two buildings in one: a repeated guest-room typology where the engineering is decided once, and a back-of-house where the services density rivals healthcare.
Dominant constraint: Finish-critical ceilings
Education
Phased delivery on a site that cannot close makes model status and revision discipline more important than coordination complexity — which is an information management problem, not an engineering one.
Dominant constraint: Phasing & status
Retail
Programmes measured in weeks against a landlord shell that cannot change — which makes documentation speed, not coordination depth, the thing that decides whether the appointment works.
Dominant constraint: Programme
Public & government
Public buildings are owned and run for decades, documented for audit and handed between many teams. The model has to be coordinated, traceable and usable long after the project team has gone.
Sector scope: All core MEP disciplines
Transportation buildings
Terminals and stations are buildings first: long spans, large volumes, high occupancy and long operating hours. We model and coordinate their building services — not the track, roads or airside systems around them.
Sector scope: Building services only