Your AI Twin trained on your specifications, your compliance frameworks, your engineering methodology — delivering cross-referenced technical reasoning with full traceability. No hallucination by design.
Why Generic AI Fails in Engineering Environments
Aerospace, manufacturing, construction, automotive, energy — engineering organizations operate under rigorous standards that evolve constantly. ECSS, ISO, industry-specific safety regulations, and internal specifications create a compliance landscape that generic AI tools were never designed to navigate.
A satellite mission starts under ECSS-E-ST-10-06C and the standard updates mid-development. A manufacturing process certified under ISO 9001:2015 faces new requirements. Generic AI doesn't know which version of a standard applies to your project phase, or what the delta-review implications are.
A design change in one subsystem cascades through interfaces, affecting thermal, structural, and electrical requirements simultaneously. Generic AI treats each query in isolation. Engineering requires reasoning across interconnected systems, not keyword matching within single documents.
When a senior engineer retires, 30 years of design intuition, failure mode knowledge, and "tribal wisdom" about what works in the field disappears overnight. No generic tool captures the hard-won lessons that prevent costly mistakes.
Verifying that a design meets all applicable standards requires engineers to manually cross-reference hundreds of requirements across dozens of documents. It takes weeks. Generic AI can't trace a requirement from standard to specification to test result.
Engineering doesn't need a faster document search.
It needs an AI that reasons like your best systems engineer — trained on your specifications, aware of your compliance obligations, traceable at every step.
Four Layers of Intelligence, Built for Engineering Precision
Define the engineering discipline, specialization level, applicable standards framework, and communication style. Your Twin becomes a systems engineer, a structural analyst, a safety expert, or a quality manager — with the technical precision your projects demand.
Upload your design specifications, standards libraries, interface control documents, test procedures, and lessons learned databases. The Twin knows your project's entire technical baseline — and critically, knows when a question falls outside its verified knowledge.
The Twin learns your documentation standards — your report templates, your requirement writing conventions, your way of presenting technical analyses. Design reviews, test reports, and technical memos read as if your most experienced engineer wrote them.
This is where PRISM transforms engineering practice. The Twin doesn't just find the relevant specification — it traces requirements through design, analysis, and verification, identifies cross-system impacts of proposed changes, and proactively flags compliance gaps before they become costly findings.
Single-Tenant Use Cases
Even a single project team, design office, or engineering department benefits from PRISM's technical reasoning. No organization-wide rollout required — just your specifications, your standards, your Twin.
The Twin traces requirements from applicable standards through your specifications to verification evidence — identifying gaps, inconsistencies, and missing test coverage before they become audit findings or mission risks.
Prepare for PDR, CDR, and other milestone reviews with AI that cross-references your design against requirements, interface agreements, and verification plans — surfacing issues before the review board does.
The Twin becomes an expert on your specific equipment, machinery, or systems — trained on manuals, maintenance records, failure histories, and operational procedures. Instant access to deep system knowledge, 24/7.
Support FMEA, FMECA, fault tree analysis, and hazard assessments with AI that reasons about failure modes, propagation paths, and mitigation effectiveness — grounded in your historical failure data and industry lessons learned.
Capture decades of engineering expertise — design rationales, failure mode intuitions, "what works in the field" knowledge — and make it accessible to junior engineers, new team members, and future projects.
Generate specifications, test procedures, design justifications, and review packages in your organization's standard formats — technically precise, properly cross-referenced, and ready for review.
When Multiple Engineering Twins Work Together
In complex engineering organizations — aerospace, automotive, energy, construction — PRISM connects intelligence across design, manufacturing, quality, and compliance teams. Standards changes propagate automatically, interface conflicts surface immediately, and cross-system impacts are visible before they become problems.
When an applicable standard updates mid-project, the Compliance Twin doesn't just file the change — it triggers an automatic impact analysis across all affected design documentation, identifying which specifications, analyses, and verification activities require delta-review.
ECSS-E-ST-10-06C Rev.1 released — updated debris mitigation requirements for LEO missions
Design Twin scans project baseline: PMD subsystem sizing, casualty risk assessment, ground track analysis — 3 areas require review
Delta-review schedule generated with earliest impact point (CDR in March), responsible engineers assigned, compliance matrix updated
Impact: Standards update assessed across entire project baseline in hours, not weeks. No requirement slips through. Delta-review initiated proactively — before customer audit discovers the gap. CDR proceeds on schedule with full compliance evidence.
The Manufacturing Twin optimizes production processes while the Quality Twin monitors compliance with specifications and certifications. Together, they ensure process improvements don't inadvertently violate qualification status or introduce non-conformances.
Proposes process optimization: reduce curing time from 4h to 3h based on new adhesive supplier data
Quality Twin flags: original qualification was at 4h cure; 3h requires delta-qualification per your process change procedure PCP-007
Process change request generated with required qualification tests, cost-benefit analysis, and customer notification requirements
Impact: Process improvement proceeds with full qualification traceability. No risk of shipping product outside qualified process envelope. Customer audit evidence prepared automatically. Estimated cost savings validated against re-qualification investment.
When R&D selects a new material or component, the Procurement Twin automatically verifies supplier qualification status, certification requirements, and long-term availability — preventing design choices that create supply chain risks downstream.
New thermal interface material selected for next-gen design: TIM-X from Supplier ABC, 30% better conductivity
Procurement Twin: Supplier ABC not on approved vendor list; material requires outgassing certification (ECSS-Q-ST-70-02); lead time 16 weeks vs. your 8-week standard
Alternative materials from qualified suppliers identified; supplier qualification timeline for ABC estimated; risk assessment for both paths prepared
Impact: Design selection informed by supply chain reality from day one. No late-stage redesigns due to material unavailability. Supplier qualification initiated early if new material is strategic. Program schedule protected.
Built for Engineering's Most Demanding Standards
Native support for the European Cooperation for Space Standardization framework — system engineering, product assurance, and domain-specific standards. The Twin understands requirement flow-down, verification methodology, and tailoring rationale.
Full support for ISO 9001 quality management, AS9100 aerospace requirements, IATF 16949 automotive standards, and domain-specific ISO frameworks. The Twin maps your processes to standard clauses and identifies compliance gaps.
Support for safety-critical development processes — functional safety (ISO 26262, IEC 61508), software assurance (DO-178C, ECSS-E-ST-40), and product assurance requirements. The Twin traces safety requirements through design and verification.
Every recommendation traces back to source requirements, standards clauses, and verification evidence. Audit-ready at any time — for customer reviews, certification bodies, or internal quality assessments.
See the Difference Between Retrieval and Engineering Reasoning
"The ECSS debris mitigation standard was just updated. What's the impact on our current satellite design?"
"ECSS-E-ST-10-06C addresses space debris mitigation requirements for LEO missions. Key requirements include post-mission disposal within 25 years, casualty risk assessment, and passivation of energy sources."
"You should review your debris mitigation plan against the updated standard and consult with your PA team for compliance assessment."
❌ No knowledge of your specific satellite design
❌ No awareness of which standard version you're currently baselined to
❌ No cross-reference with your project documentation
❌ No identification of specific affected subsystems
❌ Generic textbook answer — doesn't tell you what to actually do
Baseline check: Your project is baselined to ECSS-E-ST-10-06C (2019). The new Rev.1 (2025) introduces updated casualty risk thresholds and ground track analysis methodology.
Source: Project Standards Baseline Register — approved SRR Dec 2024Delta analysis: Key changes affecting your design: casualty risk threshold tightened from 1:10,000 to 1:15,000; new requirement for ground track uncertainty propagation; updated demisability assessment methodology.
Source: ECSS-E-ST-10-06C Rev.1 delta summary — uploaded Jan 2025Impact assessment: Cross-referencing your design documentation, I've identified 3 affected areas: (1) PMD subsystem sizing in Section 4.2 of your SRR, (2) casualty risk assessment currently at 1:12,000 — now non-compliant, (3) ground track analysis methodology requires update.
Source: System Requirements Document v2.1, Debris Mitigation Plan v1.0Schedule impact: Earliest impact point is CDR scheduled for March. Re-analysis of demisability requires updated DRAMA run with new inputs. Estimated effort: 3 engineering weeks.
Source: Project Master Schedule, Analysis Task DatabaseRecommendation: Initiate delta-review now. Priority actions: (1) Update casualty risk analysis with new threshold, (2) Re-run DRAMA with Rev.1 methodology, (3) Assess PMD sizing margin. Request PA review for tailoring rationale if 1:12,000 can be justified for your mission profile.
Source: ECSS tailoring procedure + lessons learned from Project ArtemisStandards baseline register, SRD, debris mitigation plan, and master schedule referenced. Document versions and approval dates verified.
ECSS-E-ST-10-06C Rev.1 delta analysis performed against previous baseline version. Specific clause changes identified and mapped to project requirements.
Tailoring rationale approach from similar Project Artemis referenced. Historical effort estimates for re-analysis activities provided.
See how PRISM's reasoning engine transforms your specifications, standards, and engineering expertise into an AI that thinks like your best systems engineer — deployed on your infrastructure.
Request a Demo