Engineering reviews provide a formal approval workflow for simulation cases. Before a simulation result is used for decision-making, it can be submitted for review -- ensuring that qualified engineers examine the setup, results, and validation evidence.
The /reviews page
Navigate to /reviews from the sidebar to view all pending and completed reviews across your projects. The page shows:
- Pending reviews: Cases awaiting your review or assigned to other reviewers
- Completed reviews: Past decisions with timestamps, reviewer names, and comments
- Your submissions: Cases you've submitted for review and their current status
Review workflow
Submit for review
When a simulation is ready, submit it as a release candidate. Select the case revision, attach any supporting evidence, and assign reviewers.
Review
Reviewers examine the case in a side-by-side diff view comparing the submitted revision against the golden baseline (if one exists). They see every change to mesh settings, boundary conditions, solver parameters, and results.
Decision
Reviewers choose one of three actions:
- Approve: The revision is accepted and can be used for engineering decisions
- Request changes: Specific feedback is provided; the submitter addresses the comments and resubmits
- Reject: The revision does not meet standards; a justification is required
Record
Every decision is recorded with the reviewer's name, timestamp, and comments. This creates an auditable approval history for the simulation case.
Approval rules
Configure approval requirements at the project or organization level:
| Setting | Description |
|---|
| Required approvers | Minimum number of approvals needed (e.g., 2 of 3 designated reviewers) |
| Designated reviewers | Specific team members who are qualified to review certain simulation types |
| Auto-assignment | Automatically assign reviewers based on simulation type or project |
Approval rules are configurable per project. A preliminary design study might require one reviewer, while a certification-grade analysis might require three independent approvals.
Regression testing
When a review is submitted, SimPilot automatically runs regression tests against the golden baseline:
- Metric comparison: Key outputs (forces, temperatures, flow rates) compared against baseline values
- Tolerance checks: Deviations flagged as warnings or critical based on configured thresholds
- Trust score: Overall compliance score computed and displayed in the review interface
Regression results are presented alongside the review so reviewers can quickly assess whether changes introduced unexpected behavior.
Diff view
The review interface provides a structured diff showing:
- Mesh changes: Cell count, refinement levels, quality metrics
- Boundary condition changes: Type, values, and patch assignments
- Solver setting changes: Numerical schemes, relaxation factors, convergence criteria
- Result differences: Metric deltas with percentage change from baseline
Changes are color-coded: additions in green, removals in red, modifications in yellow.
Notifications
Reviewers receive notifications when:
- A new review is assigned to them
- A previously reviewed case is resubmitted with changes
- A review they participated in reaches a final decision