Contact me:

Hanno Braun

making, automation, small-scale manufacturing

🢐🢐 back to Notes

My Criteria for CAD Software

Published: 2021-10-26 (updated 2021-11-01)

I've been doing CAD modeling for a while now, and although I'm far from being an expert, I have developed some opinions about how CAD software should work, and what it should provide. In this note, I lay out my own criteria by which I judge CAD software.

Before I start, I'd like to emphasize two things:

But enough prelude. Let's get into it.



Before I go into detail, here's a short overview of the criteria I have come up with so far:

  1. The software should be developed by a healthy project. Ideally, it is open source, actively developed, has a vibrant community, documentation is available, and it is packaged for a wide variety of platforms.
  2. Some basic features, like Constructive Solid Geometry and flexible extrude/sweep operations should be available.
  3. Models should be defined as code. The language of that code should be easy to use, powerful, and robust.
  4. The overall user experience should be conducive to working efficiently.
  5. It should be easy to view different aspects of your model.
  6. It should be easy to reference and manipulate existing geometry.
  7. It should support constraint-based modeling.

1. Project Health

Before getting into a new CAD program, it's worth considering how it is developed, and how viable that development is long-term. While many people make a whole lifestyle out of never upgrading anything, I'm firmly of the opinion that life is change, and to thrive we have to adapt. Doing that is much harder when using stagnant software.

There are a few sub-criteria that I judge the health of a software project by:

2. Basic Features

Some features are extremely useful in CAD software, but at the same time are so pervasive, it makes no sense to break them out as separate criteria. Among those are Constructive Solid Geometry and flexible extrude/sweep operations. I use both of those in most of my models.

3. Models Defined as Code

I believe that CAD models should be defined as code. But that alone isn't enough. The language that this code is written in should fulfil several criteria:

  1. It should be easy to use. Some general-purpose programming languages are very complex, syntactically heavy, or cumbersome (sometimes for good reasons). I don't think a lot of complexity is needed for this particular use case though. The language should put few hurdles in front of the CAD designer as is practical.
  2. At the same time, the language shouldn't be simplistic. Some models still benefit from non-trivial algorithms, and the language should be powerful enough to support that.
  3. Programming is an error-prone activity. To alleviate that, the language should be robust, meaning it should prevent as many errors as possible.

These three attributes can be in conflict with one another. Lots of Code-CAD programs use dynamically types languages that are easy to use and powerful, but not robust. Languages that are robust are often not easy to use.

Check out my note about Code-CAD software for an overview over existing solutions.

4. User Experience

The overall user experience of a CAD program should facilitate a convenient and efficient way of working. This means the UI in general should be easy to use. In Code-CAD programs that come with their own editor, this also applies to the editing experience.

Since I favor Code-CAD, one inherent weakness of that approach is worth a mention here: Creating 2D sketches can be extremely cumbersome. In this case (and others like it), it would be great to have a hybrid approach, where models are defined in code, but a visual editor allows you to create and modify sketches, automatically updating the code while you do that.

5. Different Views

It should be easy to view all different aspects of your model, including intermediate stages of modeling, not just the final result. This seems to be pretty standard in regular GUI-based CAD software, but not in Code-CAD software.

6. Manipulating Existing Geometry

Referencing and manipulating existing geometry can be very useful. Tasks like adding a feature to a specific face can become much easier that way. Other tasks, like adding a chamfer or fillet to an edge, can turn into a real pain without that capability.

7. Constraint-based Modeling

Constraint-based modeling means being able to define geometry by defining the relationship between different parts of it. "Line A must be parallel to line B", for example, or "Lines A and B must be orthogonal and have the same length". Since constraints reference existing geometry, this builds on criterion 4.

In GUI-based CAD software, constraints enable parametric modeling. In Code-CAD software, constraints are less essential, since that approach provides other ways of creating parametric models (and actually, if you keep your code clean, that aspect comes pretty natural).

But still, even in Code-CAD software, constraint-based modeling can be very useful. In some situations, a few well-placed constraints can save a lot of cumbersome code.


So there it is. The criteria by which I judge CAD software. Unfortunately, I haven't found a single program yet that meets all of them. The search continues.

If you think I'm missing something, please let me know. I'm always interested in learning more about the topics I write about.


2021-10-26 Initial release.
2021-10-28 Added project health as criterion.
2021-11-01 Replaced criterion about 2D sketches with more general criterion about user experience.
🢐🢐 back to Notes