Status Scope of services. Nothing on this site is a record of completed work.
Capabilities and standards
The standards that govern steel design, fabrication and welding by region, the packages files are exchanged with, and a straight answer on who applies a seal and who holds a certification.
Which standard governs, and where
Which code applies is set by where the steel is erected, not by where it is designed or detailed. This table is about the standards, not about us: it is here so a reader can find their own job in it before asking us anything.
1
Design
2
Execution and fabrication
3
Welding
| Region | Design | Execution and fabrication | Welding | Units |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States | AISC 360 | AISC 303 | AWS D1.1 | US customary — inches, kips, ksi |
| Europe and the UK | Eurocode 3 | EN 1090-2 | EN 1090-2 | SI — millimetres, kilonewtons, N/mm² |
| United Kingdom, legacy work | BS 5950 | EN 1090-2 | EN 1090-2 | SI — millimetres, kilonewtons, N/mm² |
| India | IS 800 | IS 800 | AWS D1.1 where the specification calls for it | SI — millimetres, kilonewtons, N/mm² |
| Australia and New Zealand | AS 4100 | AS 4100 | Per the project specification | SI — millimetres, kilonewtons, MPa |
| Gulf and wider Middle East | AISC 360 or Eurocode 3, as the client specification names | AISC 303 or EN 1090-2, to match | AWS D1.1 or EN 1090-2, to match | Whichever system the named standard uses — US customary with AISC, SI with Eurocode |
Scroll the table sideways for every column.
A client specification routinely overrides the base standard in specific places — weld acceptance, bolt grade, coating system, minimum thickness. Where it does, the specification governs and the departures are listed at kick-off. The same applies to the units column, which states what each standard is itself written in: a job whose specification names its own units is produced in those.
The packages files are exchanged with
This is not a list of seats. It says which packages a job’s files can arrive from and go back to, and in what form. Every format named below is one the enquiry form accepts and one the exchange list in the next section publishes as issued, which is where a claim like this one is enforced rather than asserted.
| Package | Sent and returned as |
|---|---|
| Tekla Structures | Native model (.db1), or IFC |
| SDS2 | Native job (.sds, .sds2), or IFC |
| Revit | Native model (.rvt, .rfa, .rte), or IFC |
| AutoCAD, and anything that writes its formats | DWG and DXF |
Scroll the table sideways for every column.
This site publishes no software seat and claims no software licence. A package is named above because a file of its kind moves both ways, which is a fact about the exchange rather than about what is installed where.
Formats that move both ways
Models and drawings arrive and leave in the formats you already work in. A deliverable that can only be opened in our viewer is a deliverable that depends on us continuing to exist.
- IFC
- Tekla (.db1)
- SDS2
- DWG and DXF
- Revit
Platform connectors — Procore, Autodesk Construction Cloud, Tekla PowerFab — are roadmap rather than built. See integrations, which labels each one.
Licensure: who applies a seal, and why there is no coverage map
Analysis, modelling, detailing and documentation are produced by the engineers Seimora engages on a project. Where a project requires a professional or structural engineer's seal, that seal is applied by an individually licensed engineer holding a current licence in the jurisdiction whose authority will review the submission. A licence is granted by a jurisdiction to a person; a firm registration or certificate of authorisation, where a jurisdiction requires one, is a separate instrument. Seimora holds neither in any jurisdiction and publishes no coverage map.
Any firm publishing a map of jurisdictions it “covers” is describing individuals’ licences, and the map is only as current as those individuals’ standing. The region selector above leads with a region’s standards; it does not say anything about which jurisdiction grants a seal.
The jurisdiction matrix
JURISDICTION MATRIX — NOT ISSUED
Published only against verified licensure.What follows is not that matrix. It is the schedule the question is read with: what a jurisdiction question needs, and what each answer settles.
| What we need from you | What it determines |
|---|---|
| The jurisdiction the sealed submission goes to | Which authority's rules apply, and whether that jurisdiction also requires a firm registration or certificate of authorisation alongside an individual's licence. |
| The authority that will review it | Whose review the package is assembled for, and the form that authority expects it in. |
| What has to carry the seal — drawings, calculations, or both | Which discipline the reviewing jurisdiction licenses for that work, and how much of the package sits behind the seal rather than beside it. |
| Who your engineer of record is today | Where responsibility for the sealed work already sits, and what the reviewing jurisdiction requires before it sits anywhere else. |
Scroll the table sideways for every column.
Code compliance review is a separate act from sealing, which a jurisdiction licenses to an individual: checking a design against AISC 360, Eurocode 3, IS 800 or AS 4100 is engineering work. Taking legal responsibility for it is what the jurisdiction licenses. See PE/SE stamping and code compliance, which sets out who may seal a drawing.
Certifications, and who holds them
A code a firm works to and a certification a facility holds are two different kinds of fact, and on this site they are never in the same list. A caption qualifying one entry can be skimmed past; a column header cannot.
Codes we work to
- AISC 360
- AWS D1.1
- IS 800
Which of them governs a given job is set by where the steel is erected — the matrix at the top of this page says which document that is, region by region.
Certifications held by fabricating facilities — not by Seimora. No facility is named on this site.
EN 1090 is a certification held by a fabricating shop against its own execution and welding systems, and audited at that shop. Seimora owns no shop, holds none of them and claims none. The other three are codes work is performed to.
The instruments a specification usually names are EN 1090, ISO 3834, ISO 9001 and AISC certification. Each is held by a fabricating facility against its own welding, execution or management systems, and each is audited at that facility rather than at the firm that placed the work.
That is also why the region selector above flexes codes and units and stops there. There is no per-region position to lead with on the certifications a shop holds, and writing one that sounded right would be a claim rather than a fact.
Insurance and professional indemnity
No professional indemnity or liability position is published on this site: no insurer, policy, limit or period of cover has been confirmed to it, and a sentence implying cover exists would be a misrepresentation rather than loose copy.
Professional indemnity None published
Ask the specific question
Codes, jurisdiction, exchange formats, what your specification requires a facility to hold — a real scope gets a real answer, including when the answer is that this is not work we should take.