18 ms·

CADmium: A local-first CAD program built for the browser

669 points by samwillis 2y ago

jesperwe 2y ago
I have to say I love your approach to solving sketch constraints. Many times I have used traditional solvers to map out an old building where no angles are 90°. I measure a bunch of distances (with some inaccuracy of course) and spend hours fighting with the solver to get to something that satisfies most of the measurements. This takes time because I am in essence doing exactly the converging spring forces simulation that you propose. Except much slower :-)
phero_cnstrcts 2y ago
I dislike the browser idea but I’ll take it over any subscription based app.
fahhem 2y ago
The claim that onshape runs in a gpu-enabled AWS instance and 'streams the result' to your browser seems far-fetched. I haven't investigated, but I don't have the best internet connection and onshape isn't laggy like anything else built like that. It's possible the core solvers run elsewhere, but the UI and other interactions are definitely all rendered locally.
jpm_sd 2y ago
What a great piece of writing. Clearly explained, nicely illustrated, got me really excited about the project.
MCLAU155 2y ago
onShape has been great
- cassianoleal 2y ago
  Onshape is great but it's neither open source nor local-first.
- daemonologist 2y ago
  Onshape is definitely great, but it could go away or have its free version cut down (like Fusion 360) at any time. Having an open source alternative that's less of a slog than FreeCAD would be awesome.
  - tjoff 2y ago
    You know, like they already did previously? It is utterly insane to me how onshape even consider luring folks in again after absolutely ruin their userbase and community. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9hmi1leU2s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9hmi1leU2s
andybak 2y ago
Weirdly hard to find the actual project urls: https://mattferraro.github.io/CADmium/ https://mattferraro.github.io/CADmium/ https://github.com/MattFerraro/CADmium https://github.com/MattFerraro/CADmium
- Jhos 2y ago
  Quoting directly from that github: "Status: Early prototype. This tool is not yet an MVP, but is being developed in the open. Please do not share this to HN or Reddit or things like that."
  - andybak 2y ago
    Whoops
gen3 2y ago
As someone who learned CAD on autodesk (inventor) ages ago, the only free modeling software I could grasp after working for a few hours was Onshape. Usability seems to be a real problem in this space, Freecad for example seemed to have a billion ways to do the same thing, but in the end only one of them was the real way, some tutorials leaving me with a model that doesn't conform. Awesome work! It seems like a hard problem Repo: https://github.com/MattFerraro/CADmium https://github.com/MattFerraro/CADmium
- nicce 2y ago
  Onshape is an excellent tool in terms of performance and usability. As total newbie I was able to design fully working robot arm with 3d printed joints, design all the motors, their placements and other stuff and even animate movement. The model even worked on my phone, while it was not very practical...
  - jwr 2y ago
    I used OnShape several years ago and loved it. Unfortunately, they priced me out — I'm in the "intensive hobby" segment, which means I'm fine with paying $500/year, but not OK with $1500/year. And OnShape is either free or $1500/year. Another consideration for many is a good integrated CAM. This is where Autodesk Fusion, much as I dislike the company and the software, is unbeatable today.
    - nicce 2y ago
      Isn't the only difference between the free and $1500 tiers the private projects and direct support? Or did you specifically need the private projects.
  - loughnane 2y ago
    I had 10y or so experience with CAD when onshape showed up around 2014. You could tell from the beginning that they cared a ton about usability and had their minds wrapped around how people use CAD. It’s only got better since. I highly recommend the cadmium folks just soak themselves in onshape’s UX.
ecjhdnc2025 2y ago
Outstanding writing that is clear and convincing. I am a mostly (and increasingly) happy FreeCAD user (though I agree with your framing) but OMG I am happy for you, and I will try to get involved when I can. Best of luck.
rjsw 2y ago
We spend a lot of time working on the correct type system for STEP, I don't think that using an untyped format like JSON is a good idea. I know that ISO 10303-243 uses JSON but in hindsight I think that was a mistake.
- andybak 2y ago
  Doesn't JSON plus a schema give you typing?
- SV_BubbleTime 2y ago
  Agreed. I saw “CADmium will use JSON for everything.” and cringed a bit. This seems like a mistake.
sliptonic 2y ago
It's great to see others investing time and talent into open-source CAD. At Ondsel, we believe open-source CAD is incredibly important and we're thrilled to see innovation in this area.
- krastanov 2y ago
  I am trying to look you up, but I am not sure I completely understand your organization and offering. Is Ondsel to FreeCAD the same as Codeweavers to Wine?
  - GiorgioG 2y ago
    Ondsel is FreeCAD without the sadistic UX.
    - ecjhdnc2025 2y ago
      No, it's not, not really -- because the UX work going into Ondsel is going into mainstream FreeCAD (if it didn't originate there, and a lot of recent work did). I am sure Ondsel will vary somewhat in UX over time (because they will be somewhat ahead of what they upstream) and because a few things may be unavailable for open-source licensing. But most of what has changed in terms of UX is already in 0.22-dev. For example OpenTheme will work (don't know if it is included by default), the "glass" tree overlay from RealThunder is there, the overlay panels, the sketcher improvements, the new integrated Assembly workbench etc. Ondsel is a commercial distribution of FreeCAD with a cloud-based engineering suite integrated -- file sharing, cloud compute (for parametric recalculations and STEP export) etc. Here is how they describe themselves -- in some useful detail: https://ondsel.com/handbook/About/about_ondsel/ https://ondsel.com/handbook/About/about_ondsel/
      - ecjhdnc2025 2y ago
        Aside from the cloud bits I think the most notable way they are different at the moment is that they have their new configuration variable sets functionality, which maybe core FreeCAD hasn't agreed on yet (it's also not finished I believe). Ondsel are seemingly using that to integrate with recalculation of designs in the cloud compute facility (think Thingiverse customiser but a bit less basic). I eagerly anticipate that in mainstream FreeCAD, because none of the alternatives are great -- e.g. Spreadsheet is simultaneously cool, powerful and utterly exasperating once it's well-integrated. I am sure we will see it.
peppertree 2y ago
Plasticity was open source before it abandoned c3d in favor of Parasolid. The repo can still be found here: https://github.com/nkallen/plasticity https://github.com/nkallen/plasticity
xipix 2y ago
Getting negative vibes from the name. Cadmium's a nasty substance. I mean, you wouldn't call an augmented reality app ARsenic, would you? Constructive, I hope, criticism.
- mbonnet 2y ago
  sure, why not?
- andybak 2y ago
  A great pun overrides all other concerns.
- echoangle 2y ago
  You could add even more punniness to the AR name by calling it ARscenic. I don’t think anyone wouldn’t use the software just because it’s named after a toxic substance.
- gaudystead 2y ago
  I suspect naming it after a substance that's poisonous to humans isn't an issue for most average users, and for the users who are even aware what cadmium is, might just improve memory retention when trying to think of the name again further in the future. Personally, I think it's a catchy name.
dvh 2y ago
Are boolean operations working yet?
JeremyHerrman 2y ago
What an excellent summary of the CAD kernel landscape. Favorite quote from this: "The only popular open-source b-rep kernel is OpenCascade, which is the Pontiac Aztek of b-rep kernels: It is ugly, barebones, and it might break down on you, but it is drivable and you can get one for free." SO true!
- CrimsonCape 2y ago
  I laughed out loud at the tuk-tuk analogy.
adastra22 2y ago
It appears to be written in Rust. Why package it as a wasm app inside of electron instead of compiling to native and using wgpu directly?
- nicce 2y ago
  You can have much better OS level integrations with Electron (e.g. filesystem), also assuming that you want to reuse as much code as possible.
- roarcher 2y ago
  Presumably because there aren't many mature Rust GUI options at the moment. Egui is pretty good for what it is, but it's "immediate mode" which comes with some restrictions. Slint seems promising but the developer experience was a little rough when I tried it a couple months ago. Not sure the licensing is compatible with this project either.
alright2565 2y ago
I think this is amazing. I'd love to get to the point where we are with open source EDA with open source physical CAD. > Another downside is that solving this kind of matrix equation gets prohibitively slow when you have a lot of unknowns, which gives rise to the conventional wisdom that individual sketches should be small and simple. I've gotten quite deep into this, and this is really not a problem in practice[1] 1. FreeCAD's main issues with constraint performance come from a redundant & unnecessary GUI layout algorithm, which falls over with just a few hundred constraints. 2. Eigen's sparse QR decomposition benchmarks at 18s for 2200 constraints, which is really not too bad 3. There are sparse QR decomposition libraries that can handle 500k-1M constraints in about 18s. I can't imagine a CAD sketch with more than a few thousand constraints. [1]: https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD/issues/11498#issuecomment-1832892073 https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD/issues/11498#issuecomment...
- JBits 2y ago
  Without knowing anything about CAD, it's surprising to me that the author didn't try any of these matrix solvers. Particularly since the case of non square matrices with iterative methods is common to many fields.
- aiksiongkoh 2y ago
  OndselSolver at https://github.com/Ondsel-Development/OndselSolver https://github.com/Ondsel-Development/OndselSolver can do redundant constraint removal and handle under constrained systems readily using direct Gauss Elimination on sparse matrices. It is used in FreeCAD and Ondsel ES for Assembly constraints.
samwillis 2y ago
I'm very excited about what Matt is building, the world desperately needs a good open source parametric CAD package. One where the UI/UX is designed to be as "easy" to use a SolidWorks. The biggest reason this hasn't happened so far is the lack of a truly capable parametric kernel, Truck, the kernel that Matt is using looks like an incredible project and exactly whats needed. The only other kennel till now that been close to being whats needed is OpenCascade, but its lacks important features, is buggy and at times quite unstable. Once Truck (and CADmium) lands stable fillets (surprisingly one of the hardest features to make stable) it will prove itself as the perfect successor to OpenCascade and and the perfect platform to build the future of open source parametric CAD upon.
- Arthur_ODC 2y ago
  Even better if it were as easy and intuitive to use as IronCAD. It's by-far the best UI/UX CAD software and I'll never understand why it doesn't get more recognition.
- beeboobaa3 2y ago
  > lands stable fillets (surprisingly one of the hardest features to make stable) Interesting. Any chance you could explain why fillets are hard(er)?
  - samwillis 2y ago
    For fillets to work well they have to connect three important features of a parametric CAD package: 1. Surface tangency matching - perfectly matching the tangent of the connecting surface on either side of the corner. 2. Edge tangency following - you select an edge, and the fillet should be able to follow along all connected tangent edges. 3. Edge reference tracking - when you modify the model further up the feature tree the kernel needs to keep track of that edge, even if the surfaces that make it drastically change or are split. All three are hard problems on their own, once you connect them all it becomes a great indicator of the capabilities and stability of a parametric kernel.
    - 2y ago
stirfish 2y ago
Inequality constraints! This makes me really excited
porphyra 2y ago
I like how the Truck kernel's github [1] says that their choice to use Rust and WGPU is due to "Trendy Tools" being a core principle. I'm super excited about this. [1] https://github.com/ricosjp/truck https://github.com/ricosjp/truck
WillAdams 2y ago
Why in a browser if it's local-first? Solvespace has the benefit of being a single download/executable. It also has a constraint solver which has been used in a couple of projects: CADsketcher as you noted, and Dune 3D: https://github.com/dune3d/dune3d https://github.com/dune3d/dune3d where the author noted: >I ended up directly using solvespace's solver instead of the suggested wrapper code since it didn't expose all of the features I needed. I also had to patch the solver to make it sufficiently fast for the kinds of equations I was generating by symbolically solving equations where applicable. Any relation to: https://github.com/jay3sh/cadmium https://github.com/jay3sh/cadmium ? Also, for CAD kernels, Manifold was not mentioned: https://github.com/elalish/manifold/wiki/Manifold-Library https://github.com/elalish/manifold/wiki/Manifold-Library --- while I understand it to have many of the same disadvantages as OpenCASCADE, it does seem worth mentioning. Interestingly the kernel was previously discussed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35071317 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35071317 It seems really interesting/promising, esp. the compleat history and editability (I'd love to see that history listed in a pane which could be opened/closed --- add a series of disclosure triangles which would allow hiding finished elements so that one could focus on the current task and it would be a dream come true for me --- if I can puzzle out the 3D stuff, so far I've crashed and burned on all the apps I've tried (BRL-CAD, FreeCAD, Solvespace, Alibre Atom...) --- the only thing I've been successful w/ is OpenSCAD and similar coding tools).
- tgsovlerkhgsel 2y ago
  > Why in a browser if it's local-first? Because it means it'll work regardless of whether I have a Linux, Mac, Windows, ChromeOS, iPad, or just try to check some detail of my part on my phone. When I design a part at home, need to make an adjustment at work, and then need to make it using whatever is available in the makerspace, not having to install something is a big win.
- phkahler 2y ago
  >> Manifold was not mentioned Manifold is a triangle mesh library. CAD should use NURBS surfaces and only triangulate them for rendering. I had looked at replacing the solvespace triangle mesh code with Manfold, but it's a lot of work and what we really need is to fix the NURBS bugs so we don't need to lean on the mesh code so much. BTW the solvespace constraint solver is also used in the Assembly 3 workbench of FreeCAD ;-) It's really getting around these days.
sliptonic 2y ago
A 2D solver works great for sketches and some kinds of assemblies. However, it is insufficient for many kinds of 3D assemblies. The solver Ondsel released (LGPL) which underlies the new integrated assembly workbench is a true 3D solver. https://github.com/Ondsel-Development/OndselSolver https://github.com/Ondsel-Development/OndselSolver
PrivateButts 2y ago
I recently messed around with using OpenSCAD's WASM build to make a serial plate generator for Voron printers[1], and the one take away from it is that we desperately need a cad export format that preserves variables and history so that parts can be regenerated with new parameters. OpenSCAD, or some other project built on top of it could get there, but not without some major work. Currently building complex projects in OpenSCAD feels like a form of self harm. [1] https://serial-generator.privatebutts.dev/voron https://serial-generator.privatebutts.dev/voron
s1mon 2y ago
It's exciting to see a new entry into this space, especially one that is trying to create a new kernel. Unfortunately, it seems unlikely to be successful. The top kernels in the industry have been in development for decades by armies of CAGD PhDs and programmers, with funding from automotive and aerospace companies. Getting to table-stakes with the feature set will take a long time. I also question what user problems this is trying to solve. CAD users don't necessarily need things to be open source. They may have limited budgets, but open source is not a user facing feature in this space the way it might be for some developers. Plasticity has shown that it is possible to license Parasolid and make money at a very low price point. I've been using parametric CAD tools for 30+ years. I find that Onshape is a pretty amazing solution to many of the issues that exist with Creo or Solidworks. I never loose data. Having the equivalent of Google Docs for collaborative CAD with unlimited undo based on a ground up database instead of a file system is life changing. That said, its modeling capabilities are still playing catch up with other tools. A big downside to Onshape (and Creo and Solidworks) is that it started as 2D sketches to extrude/revovle/loft etc into 3D objects. 3D tools are an add on and afterthought to the fundamentals. Plasticity (and Rhino and Alias) are all much more 3D first. Onshape's FeatureScript is really cool and powerful, but it is not as good for CAD users to build their own tools as say Grasshopper in Rhino. I would focus on what user problems are being solved. How will CADmium be a better CAD tool for a certain market than any of the others paid or free? Even though this is very early days in the development process, it's not too early to try to understand user needs. Open source is not in and of itself a goal.
- rjsw 2y ago
  I don't think it is healthy for most of the commercial CAD industry to rely on one proprietory kernel and exchange file format like Parasolid.
- mr_machine 2y ago
  > CAD users don't necessarily need things to be open source... Open source is not in and of itself a goal. While there are certainly challenges to open source development, there are no downsides to using open source software. It works just as well for people who don't know what it is or means and just as well for people who are indifferent to it. There are great reasons to avoid proprietary software, though, and they're even stronger when you're talking about SaaS (as we increasingly are nowadays, and specifically are in this case). CAD software is an area where many users have /already/ been burned by proprietary systems changing their offerings /after/ they've invested hundreds of hours learning and using their platform. I'm aware I'm in the minority, but open source is absolutely a goal in and of itself for me. I've been using open source software exclusively for a very long time.
syntaxing 2y ago
Absolutely amazing. I have high hope for this project to be a real OnShape competitor!
phkahler 2y ago
As one of the Solvespace maintainers I have a few comments: 1) You don't want just 2D constraints, 3D is better. If you were writing in C++ I'd say just take our constraint solver (Like Dune3D did). Since you're loving Rust, I can point you to the work of Michael F Bryan who wrote one in Rust and blogged about it here: https://adventures.michaelfbryan.com/posts/constraints-part-1-expressions/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=constraint-solver-1-expression-trees https://adventures.michaelfbryan.com/posts/constraints-part-... I think his code is over at gitlab. I haven't looked at it in a couple years. He wrote that after I nerd-sniped him ;-) 2) For geometry kernels... I've got 3 classes of bugs I want to squash in the Solvespace kernel and then it should do booleans pretty reliably, but I haven't had the time. Ours is just under 6k LOC so you could learn a lot from it. My email is the same ID at gmail if you want to ping on this topic. Its been a while since I looked at Truck and I thought it had stagnated a bit. This is a really hard problem, which is why there are so few options out there even in the commercial world. Even triangulating a trimmed NURBS shell is tricky. 3) History/feature tree is closely related to the "topological naming problem" that FreeCAD has. Solvespace handles this by creating each entity from a set of known things. If you try to recreate (regenerate in our lingo) it will just return a handle to the existing entity rather than creating a new one. In other words, every entity "came from something" and that relationship is remembered. Where we handle topological naming it works perfectly. But not everything in solvespace is covered by this. You need to bake this in from the start, it's not something you can easily bolt on afterward. 4) where is the link to try out CADmium?
- highdeserthackr 2y ago
  Solvespace is freaking awesome. I tried so many different tools and it hits the sweet spot for reasonable learning curve (esp. for someone that is not a mech engineer), power, Linux, cost (free), and safe from disruption (no way I'm subjecting designs to all the risks of hosted offerings). Keep up the great work!
- WillAdams 2y ago
  I can at least help on 4: Github: https://github.com/MattFerraro/CADmium https://github.com/MattFerraro/CADmium has the link: https://mattferraro.github.io/CADmium/ https://mattferraro.github.io/CADmium/
blt 2y ago
> 3D CAD apps are among the most complex UIs that exist. I agree. > If you want to make a good one and you only have a small team, the framework had better do a lot of heavy lifting! I am skeptical that general-purpose UI frameworks can be a good long-term solution for 3D CAD. At times, a nice UX will need to think about many of the following at once: - the parametric 3D model - its mesh approximation - its hidden-surface projection into lines and patches - the pixels in the frame buffer - UI widgets. The frameworks make too many assumptions about information being easily partitioned and limited in size. Maybe the frameworks will help for prototyping, but if the project grows, I expect at some point they will end up ditching frameworks for the core 3D viewport interactions, and have mostly their own code in between OpenGL (or similar) and mouse/keyboard events. Frameworks for buttons, lists, etc. will probably be fine, but even those tend to be much more dynamic in 3D CAD than in average apps.
- spookie 2y ago
  The only real solution is imgui
  - virtualritz 2y ago
    You meant egui. ;)
    - prokoudine 2y ago
      Aren't there Rust bindings to ImGui?
      - virtualritz 2y ago
        There are but as a user of both I would be really curious to hear a good reason to use imgui over egui when writing stuff in Rust and to use egui over imgui when writing stuff in C++. In general, egui IMHO has better ergonomics. Partly because of Rust and partly because it's newer.
RobotToaster 2y ago
> In contrast, the open source CAD landscape looks like this: He missed BRL-CAD, which also does brep. The interface is clunky but the kernel seems advanced.
- spookie 2y ago
  BRL-CAD is a true gem
  - 0x0203 2y ago
    Do you have any preferred guides for getting started wtih BRL-CAD? I've tried a couple of times, but it seems like it's more a large collection of various tools and it's hard to know where to start. Or even what the general design philosophy is. It looks like the core functionality is more a code-driven approach to modeling? With UI driven design (archer) only in the experimental/early-development stage?
  - bauta-steen 2y ago
    And interestingly "the oldest known public version-controlled codebase in the world that's still under active development" dating back to 1979. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRL-CAD#toc-History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRL-CAD#toc-History
    - RobotToaster 2y ago
      Unfortunately it's interface doesn't seem to have been updated since then...
JAlexoid 2y ago
Hopefully it's an easy to use CAD, because my preferred CAD right now on Linux is FreeCAD is way too complex and the user input in the UI horrendously clunky. The good side is that all CADs have a very steep learning curve, with most tutorials made by people who are oblivious to the ignorant masses. The landscape is so complex today, that it's easier to use a vector drawing tool and transform it into a 3D model than to use any CAD to make a cylinder.
- zihotki 2y ago
  Ondsel, built on top of FreeCad, aims to make free ad more user friendly and easy to collaborate on projects. Plus Freecad is close to propose a solid solution for topological naming issues. It will be this year, fingers crossed
  - JAlexoid 2y ago
    TBH at this point I'd pay for anything better on Linux.
logrot 2y ago
Totally going to check this out. I've been rooting for FreeCAD but I think it's just going to be consumed by Ondsel in the next few years. Does CADmium suffer from a topological naming problem like FreeCAD?
- prokoudine 2y ago
  > I've been rooting for FreeCAD but I think it's just going to be consumed by Ondsel in the next few years. Extremely unlikely. Also, no such plans :)
  - logrot 2y ago
    I appreciate the sentiment. But we both know that plans change. Especially in the software world and even more so in the startup business. Also, "no plans" doesn't really mean much. "I guarantee" is a lot more meaningful.
    - prokoudine 2y ago
      Well, I could go on and on about this, but consuming FreeCAD is not just unrealistic, it's undesirable. The best a startup company can do is work in quick iterations: throw things at the proverbial wall to see what sticks, then scale up development accordingly. "Consuming FreeCAD" is the opposite of that. It's how you paint yourself into a corner and die a horrible death. A much healthier approach is to build a great working relationship with the community: lead the way in a few areas where you have great expertise and encourage development in other areas. It has worked nicely so far. So no, sorry, I don't see Ondsel consuming FreeCAD over the next few years (or ever). But we can agree to get back to this conversation in, oh, 5 years time would be enough?
- delfinom 2y ago
  If you worry about freecad/ondsel Well this article talks about revisiting venture capital in the future. Which pretty much means the end of cadmium at that point haha
  - 2y ago
xinayder 2y ago
Seems like an exciting project, I'd like to try it out as soon as there's a public testing phase. On another note, please don't use Discord for development: https://drewdevault.com/2021/12/28/Dont-use-Discord-for-FOSS.html https://drewdevault.com/2021/12/28/Dont-use-Discord-for-FOSS... use IRC or Matrix but not Discord.
hathawsh 2y ago
I really hope CADmium can wean me off of OpenSCAD. With OpenSCAD, I don't really have to think at first; I use a simple language to write modules that build on other modules. The problem with OpenSCAD is there's no solver: I have variables, but no constraints. As I make changes, suddenly I have to think hard and solve the constraints manually and it's easy to introduce errors. However, the problem isn't severe enough to get me to use something else, because starting a model with OpenSCAD is IMHO far easier that anything else I've tried.
- btreecat 2y ago
  FreeCAD has a built in OpenSCAD engine. I started with OpenSCAD but found FreeCAD to be way more productive for me when it came to actually producing 3d objects. Sometimes I want to start with a square, then delete a line, and add a semi circle. But I don't always know that until I start sketching. With OpenSCAD I feel you have to know the shape primitive you need, then the exact way to modify it, and the fact that it encourages 3D primitives over 2d w/ extrusion and rotating was kinda annoying imo.
  - ecjhdnc2025 2y ago
    Belatedly: this engine has one absolutely fantastic advantage, too. Because it interprets the file as a sequence of Part object manipulations, it's a very useful way of getting a bRep representation of an OpenSCAD document, so you get the opportunity to generate a clean, minimal STEP file. OpenSCAD cannot do this itself, and the other conversion approaches just get you a triangle mesh packaged in a STEP file. It's not perfect -- you get a mesh if you use Minkowski or hull operations. But it's good.
- ipsod 2y ago
  I'd add PyMadCAD, to those already mentioned.
- bilsbie 2y ago
  Can you explain the problem with openscad a little more? I’m not quite following.
bilsbie 2y ago
Why should I use this over openscad?
ryukoposting 2y ago
Good to see someone is making this. Losing free student access to Autodesk Inventor exposed me to the hideous world of free-as-in-money 3D CAD software, and my interest in 3D CAD fizzled pretty quickly as a result. On a related note, we really, really need a worthy replacement for EAGLE. It's only a couple years away from EOL, and KiCAD is light years away from being feature-equivalent.
- nhwangus 2y ago
  Which specific features are keeping you on Eagle? Most of my more "serious" work is still in Altium, but I've been really pleased with a lot of the QoL features KiCAD has been picking up on as of the later releases (bulk sheet symbol entry placement) and feature coverage is good enough that I'm happy doing mixed signal boards with a few high speed interfaces.
  - ryukoposting 2y ago
    Live synchronization of layout and schematic files. I consider this essential to circuit design, especially in later iterative stages. That alone totally eliminates KiCAD as a professional EDA in my opinion.
    - pointhi 2y ago
      Live synchronization of layout and schematic files is a feature you find in EAGLE, but in almost no other EDA program. If you say KiCAD is not an professional EDA due to missing live synchronization, the same argument applies also to Altium, Cadence Allegro, and most other EDA systems which are considered as professional by most people.
      - ryukoposting 2y ago
        Fine. KiCAD's manual tool still gives me more trouble than Altium ever has. How about the lack of a built in autorouter? Infuriating wire placement UX? We can keep going here.
bee_rider 2y ago
I’m slightly confused by the 2D constraint problem solver, it seems to me like they have a probably sparse, possibly banded problem. Of course, in a high level description a whole lot can be excused under > In practice many optimizations are made. And I’m sure there’s a good reason to do physics. But, do iterative solvers like gmres or whatever have trouble with these kinds of problems?
eschaton 2y ago
Why would anyone want to do CAD in a web page? JavaScript should be limited to 1997 Netscape 3.0 performance to stop this kind of garbage. And WASM should never have been attempted, and should be removed. Write real native software if you’re trying to make something good for end users.
- bee_rider 2y ago
  It looks like they also have an electron program. It might be sensible to run CAD in a web page hosted by a server on your local network? I have no idea if they added functionality to have the crunchy bits run on the server instead, that’d be a neat trick.
juliangmp 2y ago
>If you'd like to join the effort, join the Discord! Why is it that open source programs always want me to use an awful (and proprietary) chat app?
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
TaylorAlexander 2y ago
This looks great! I hosted some discussion about open source cad late last year on this GitHub discussion board. People tend to say that building a new CAD kernel would take ten full time engineers ten years. I like where truck is going and I’m curious to see what its current limitations are. Sadly I haven’t had as much time as I’d like to evaluate the various options. (The other promising option for a complete package is Ondsel). See that discussion forum here: https://github.com/tlalexander/open-cad-foundation/discussions https://github.com/tlalexander/open-cad-foundation/discussio...
bimguy 2y ago
This is an awesome project. I work with Revit(Python coded) so immediately tried shift + mouse wheel click drag. If you can get anywhere near Revit that would be impressively scary for Autodesk.
mijoharas 2y ago
This looks cool. What would people recommend for a CAD program to run on Linux that I could use now (that is either free or cheap). I have simple requirements, I want to make a box for some electronics, but need the ability to import (and extrude etc) SVGs. I couldn't see the SVG feature when I looked at dune, and I had some problems when I used freeCAD, but was planning on looking into it again. What would people suggest?
- btreecat 2y ago
  FreeCAD is my go to currently but you can also do all that in OnShape if you can swallow the public only files and always online requirements. FreeCAD has really good file format support in my XP. https://wiki.freecad.org/SVG https://wiki.freecad.org/SVG

669 points by samwillis 2y ago

I have to say I love your approach to solving sketch constraints. Many times I have used traditional solvers to map out an old building where no angles are 90°. I measure a bunch of distances (with some inaccuracy of course) and spend hours fighting with the solver to get to something that satisfies most of the measurements. This takes time because I am in essence doing exactly the converging spring forces simulation that you propose. Except much slower :-)

phero_cnstrcts 2y ago

I dislike the browser idea but I’ll take it over any subscription based app.

fahhem 2y ago

The claim that onshape runs in a gpu-enabled AWS instance and 'streams the result' to your browser seems far-fetched. I haven't investigated, but I don't have the best internet connection and onshape isn't laggy like anything else built like that. It's possible the core solvers run elsewhere, but the UI and other interactions are definitely all rendered locally.

jpm_sd 2y ago

What a great piece of writing. Clearly explained, nicely illustrated, got me really excited about the project.

MCLAU155 2y ago

onShape has been great

cassianoleal 2y ago
Onshape is great but it's neither open source nor local-first.
daemonologist 2y ago
Onshape is definitely great, but it could go away or have its free version cut down (like Fusion 360) at any time. Having an open source alternative that's less of a slog than FreeCAD would be awesome.
- tjoff 2y ago
  You know, like they already did previously? It is utterly insane to me how onshape even consider luring folks in again after absolutely ruin their userbase and community. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9hmi1leU2s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9hmi1leU2s

andybak 2y ago

Weirdly hard to find the actual project urls: https://mattferraro.github.io/CADmium/ https://mattferraro.github.io/CADmium/ https://github.com/MattFerraro/CADmium https://github.com/MattFerraro/CADmium

Jhos 2y ago
Quoting directly from that github: "Status: Early prototype. This tool is not yet an MVP, but is being developed in the open. Please do not share this to HN or Reddit or things like that."
- andybak 2y ago
  Whoops

gen3 2y ago

As someone who learned CAD on autodesk (inventor) ages ago, the only free modeling software I could grasp after working for a few hours was Onshape. Usability seems to be a real problem in this space, Freecad for example seemed to have a billion ways to do the same thing, but in the end only one of them was the real way, some tutorials leaving me with a model that doesn't conform. Awesome work! It seems like a hard problem Repo: https://github.com/MattFerraro/CADmium https://github.com/MattFerraro/CADmium

nicce 2y ago
Onshape is an excellent tool in terms of performance and usability. As total newbie I was able to design fully working robot arm with 3d printed joints, design all the motors, their placements and other stuff and even animate movement. The model even worked on my phone, while it was not very practical...
- jwr 2y ago
  I used OnShape several years ago and loved it. Unfortunately, they priced me out — I'm in the "intensive hobby" segment, which means I'm fine with paying $500/year, but not OK with $1500/year. And OnShape is either free or $1500/year. Another consideration for many is a good integrated CAM. This is where Autodesk Fusion, much as I dislike the company and the software, is unbeatable today.
  - nicce 2y ago
    Isn't the only difference between the free and $1500 tiers the private projects and direct support? Or did you specifically need the private projects.
- loughnane 2y ago
  I had 10y or so experience with CAD when onshape showed up around 2014. You could tell from the beginning that they cared a ton about usability and had their minds wrapped around how people use CAD. It’s only got better since. I highly recommend the cadmium folks just soak themselves in onshape’s UX.

ecjhdnc2025 2y ago

Outstanding writing that is clear and convincing. I am a mostly (and increasingly) happy FreeCAD user (though I agree with your framing) but OMG I am happy for you, and I will try to get involved when I can. Best of luck.

rjsw 2y ago

We spend a lot of time working on the correct type system for STEP, I don't think that using an untyped format like JSON is a good idea. I know that ISO 10303-243 uses JSON but in hindsight I think that was a mistake.

andybak 2y ago
Doesn't JSON plus a schema give you typing?
SV_BubbleTime 2y ago
Agreed. I saw “CADmium will use JSON for everything.” and cringed a bit. This seems like a mistake.

sliptonic 2y ago

It's great to see others investing time and talent into open-source CAD. At Ondsel, we believe open-source CAD is incredibly important and we're thrilled to see innovation in this area.

krastanov 2y ago
I am trying to look you up, but I am not sure I completely understand your organization and offering. Is Ondsel to FreeCAD the same as Codeweavers to Wine?
- GiorgioG 2y ago
  Ondsel is FreeCAD without the sadistic UX.
  - ecjhdnc2025 2y ago
    No, it's not, not really -- because the UX work going into Ondsel is going into mainstream FreeCAD (if it didn't originate there, and a lot of recent work did). I am sure Ondsel will vary somewhat in UX over time (because they will be somewhat ahead of what they upstream) and because a few things may be unavailable for open-source licensing. But most of what has changed in terms of UX is already in 0.22-dev. For example OpenTheme will work (don't know if it is included by default), the "glass" tree overlay from RealThunder is there, the overlay panels, the sketcher improvements, the new integrated Assembly workbench etc. Ondsel is a commercial distribution of FreeCAD with a cloud-based engineering suite integrated -- file sharing, cloud compute (for parametric recalculations and STEP export) etc. Here is how they describe themselves -- in some useful detail: https://ondsel.com/handbook/About/about_ondsel/ https://ondsel.com/handbook/About/about_ondsel/
    - ecjhdnc2025 2y ago
      Aside from the cloud bits I think the most notable way they are different at the moment is that they have their new configuration variable sets functionality, which maybe core FreeCAD hasn't agreed on yet (it's also not finished I believe). Ondsel are seemingly using that to integrate with recalculation of designs in the cloud compute facility (think Thingiverse customiser but a bit less basic). I eagerly anticipate that in mainstream FreeCAD, because none of the alternatives are great -- e.g. Spreadsheet is simultaneously cool, powerful and utterly exasperating once it's well-integrated. I am sure we will see it.

peppertree 2y ago

Plasticity was open source before it abandoned c3d in favor of Parasolid. The repo can still be found here: https://github.com/nkallen/plasticity https://github.com/nkallen/plasticity

xipix 2y ago

Getting negative vibes from the name. Cadmium's a nasty substance. I mean, you wouldn't call an augmented reality app ARsenic, would you? Constructive, I hope, criticism.

mbonnet 2y ago
sure, why not?
andybak 2y ago
A great pun overrides all other concerns.
echoangle 2y ago
You could add even more punniness to the AR name by calling it ARscenic. I don’t think anyone wouldn’t use the software just because it’s named after a toxic substance.
gaudystead 2y ago
I suspect naming it after a substance that's poisonous to humans isn't an issue for most average users, and for the users who are even aware what cadmium is, might just improve memory retention when trying to think of the name again further in the future. Personally, I think it's a catchy name.

dvh 2y ago

Are boolean operations working yet?

JeremyHerrman 2y ago

What an excellent summary of the CAD kernel landscape. Favorite quote from this: "The only popular open-source b-rep kernel is OpenCascade, which is the Pontiac Aztek of b-rep kernels: It is ugly, barebones, and it might break down on you, but it is drivable and you can get one for free." SO true!

CrimsonCape 2y ago
I laughed out loud at the tuk-tuk analogy.

adastra22 2y ago

It appears to be written in Rust. Why package it as a wasm app inside of electron instead of compiling to native and using wgpu directly?

nicce 2y ago
You can have much better OS level integrations with Electron (e.g. filesystem), also assuming that you want to reuse as much code as possible.
roarcher 2y ago
Presumably because there aren't many mature Rust GUI options at the moment. Egui is pretty good for what it is, but it's "immediate mode" which comes with some restrictions. Slint seems promising but the developer experience was a little rough when I tried it a couple months ago. Not sure the licensing is compatible with this project either.

alright2565 2y ago

I think this is amazing. I'd love to get to the point where we are with open source EDA with open source physical CAD. > Another downside is that solving this kind of matrix equation gets prohibitively slow when you have a lot of unknowns, which gives rise to the conventional wisdom that individual sketches should be small and simple. I've gotten quite deep into this, and this is really not a problem in practice[1] 1. FreeCAD's main issues with constraint performance come from a redundant & unnecessary GUI layout algorithm, which falls over with just a few hundred constraints. 2. Eigen's sparse QR decomposition benchmarks at 18s for 2200 constraints, which is really not too bad 3. There are sparse QR decomposition libraries that can handle 500k-1M constraints in about 18s. I can't imagine a CAD sketch with more than a few thousand constraints. [1]: https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD/issues/11498#issuecomment-1832892073 https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD/issues/11498#issuecomment...

JBits 2y ago
Without knowing anything about CAD, it's surprising to me that the author didn't try any of these matrix solvers. Particularly since the case of non square matrices with iterative methods is common to many fields.
aiksiongkoh 2y ago
OndselSolver at https://github.com/Ondsel-Development/OndselSolver https://github.com/Ondsel-Development/OndselSolver can do redundant constraint removal and handle under constrained systems readily using direct Gauss Elimination on sparse matrices. It is used in FreeCAD and Ondsel ES for Assembly constraints.

samwillis 2y ago

I'm very excited about what Matt is building, the world desperately needs a good open source parametric CAD package. One where the UI/UX is designed to be as "easy" to use a SolidWorks. The biggest reason this hasn't happened so far is the lack of a truly capable parametric kernel, Truck, the kernel that Matt is using looks like an incredible project and exactly whats needed. The only other kennel till now that been close to being whats needed is OpenCascade, but its lacks important features, is buggy and at times quite unstable. Once Truck (and CADmium) lands stable fillets (surprisingly one of the hardest features to make stable) it will prove itself as the perfect successor to OpenCascade and and the perfect platform to build the future of open source parametric CAD upon.

Arthur_ODC 2y ago
Even better if it were as easy and intuitive to use as IronCAD. It's by-far the best UI/UX CAD software and I'll never understand why it doesn't get more recognition.
beeboobaa3 2y ago
> lands stable fillets (surprisingly one of the hardest features to make stable) Interesting. Any chance you could explain why fillets are hard(er)?
- samwillis 2y ago
  For fillets to work well they have to connect three important features of a parametric CAD package: 1. Surface tangency matching - perfectly matching the tangent of the connecting surface on either side of the corner. 2. Edge tangency following - you select an edge, and the fillet should be able to follow along all connected tangent edges. 3. Edge reference tracking - when you modify the model further up the feature tree the kernel needs to keep track of that edge, even if the surfaces that make it drastically change or are split. All three are hard problems on their own, once you connect them all it becomes a great indicator of the capabilities and stability of a parametric kernel.
  - 2y ago

stirfish 2y ago

Inequality constraints! This makes me really excited

porphyra 2y ago

I like how the Truck kernel's github [1] says that their choice to use Rust and WGPU is due to "Trendy Tools" being a core principle. I'm super excited about this. [1] https://github.com/ricosjp/truck https://github.com/ricosjp/truck

WillAdams 2y ago

Why in a browser if it's local-first? Solvespace has the benefit of being a single download/executable. It also has a constraint solver which has been used in a couple of projects: CADsketcher as you noted, and Dune 3D: https://github.com/dune3d/dune3d https://github.com/dune3d/dune3d where the author noted: >I ended up directly using solvespace's solver instead of the suggested wrapper code since it didn't expose all of the features I needed. I also had to patch the solver to make it sufficiently fast for the kinds of equations I was generating by symbolically solving equations where applicable. Any relation to: https://github.com/jay3sh/cadmium https://github.com/jay3sh/cadmium ? Also, for CAD kernels, Manifold was not mentioned: https://github.com/elalish/manifold/wiki/Manifold-Library https://github.com/elalish/manifold/wiki/Manifold-Library --- while I understand it to have many of the same disadvantages as OpenCASCADE, it does seem worth mentioning. Interestingly the kernel was previously discussed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35071317 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35071317 It seems really interesting/promising, esp. the compleat history and editability (I'd love to see that history listed in a pane which could be opened/closed --- add a series of disclosure triangles which would allow hiding finished elements so that one could focus on the current task and it would be a dream come true for me --- if I can puzzle out the 3D stuff, so far I've crashed and burned on all the apps I've tried (BRL-CAD, FreeCAD, Solvespace, Alibre Atom...) --- the only thing I've been successful w/ is OpenSCAD and similar coding tools).

tgsovlerkhgsel 2y ago
> Why in a browser if it's local-first? Because it means it'll work regardless of whether I have a Linux, Mac, Windows, ChromeOS, iPad, or just try to check some detail of my part on my phone. When I design a part at home, need to make an adjustment at work, and then need to make it using whatever is available in the makerspace, not having to install something is a big win.
phkahler 2y ago
>> Manifold was not mentioned Manifold is a triangle mesh library. CAD should use NURBS surfaces and only triangulate them for rendering. I had looked at replacing the solvespace triangle mesh code with Manfold, but it's a lot of work and what we really need is to fix the NURBS bugs so we don't need to lean on the mesh code so much. BTW the solvespace constraint solver is also used in the Assembly 3 workbench of FreeCAD ;-) It's really getting around these days.

sliptonic 2y ago

A 2D solver works great for sketches and some kinds of assemblies. However, it is insufficient for many kinds of 3D assemblies. The solver Ondsel released (LGPL) which underlies the new integrated assembly workbench is a true 3D solver. https://github.com/Ondsel-Development/OndselSolver https://github.com/Ondsel-Development/OndselSolver

PrivateButts 2y ago

I recently messed around with using OpenSCAD's WASM build to make a serial plate generator for Voron printers[1], and the one take away from it is that we desperately need a cad export format that preserves variables and history so that parts can be regenerated with new parameters. OpenSCAD, or some other project built on top of it could get there, but not without some major work. Currently building complex projects in OpenSCAD feels like a form of self harm. [1] https://serial-generator.privatebutts.dev/voron https://serial-generator.privatebutts.dev/voron

s1mon 2y ago

It's exciting to see a new entry into this space, especially one that is trying to create a new kernel. Unfortunately, it seems unlikely to be successful. The top kernels in the industry have been in development for decades by armies of CAGD PhDs and programmers, with funding from automotive and aerospace companies. Getting to table-stakes with the feature set will take a long time. I also question what user problems this is trying to solve. CAD users don't necessarily need things to be open source. They may have limited budgets, but open source is not a user facing feature in this space the way it might be for some developers. Plasticity has shown that it is possible to license Parasolid and make money at a very low price point. I've been using parametric CAD tools for 30+ years. I find that Onshape is a pretty amazing solution to many of the issues that exist with Creo or Solidworks. I never loose data. Having the equivalent of Google Docs for collaborative CAD with unlimited undo based on a ground up database instead of a file system is life changing. That said, its modeling capabilities are still playing catch up with other tools. A big downside to Onshape (and Creo and Solidworks) is that it started as 2D sketches to extrude/revovle/loft etc into 3D objects. 3D tools are an add on and afterthought to the fundamentals. Plasticity (and Rhino and Alias) are all much more 3D first. Onshape's FeatureScript is really cool and powerful, but it is not as good for CAD users to build their own tools as say Grasshopper in Rhino. I would focus on what user problems are being solved. How will CADmium be a better CAD tool for a certain market than any of the others paid or free? Even though this is very early days in the development process, it's not too early to try to understand user needs. Open source is not in and of itself a goal.

rjsw 2y ago
I don't think it is healthy for most of the commercial CAD industry to rely on one proprietory kernel and exchange file format like Parasolid.
mr_machine 2y ago
> CAD users don't necessarily need things to be open source... Open source is not in and of itself a goal. While there are certainly challenges to open source development, there are no downsides to using open source software. It works just as well for people who don't know what it is or means and just as well for people who are indifferent to it. There are great reasons to avoid proprietary software, though, and they're even stronger when you're talking about SaaS (as we increasingly are nowadays, and specifically are in this case). CAD software is an area where many users have /already/ been burned by proprietary systems changing their offerings /after/ they've invested hundreds of hours learning and using their platform. I'm aware I'm in the minority, but open source is absolutely a goal in and of itself for me. I've been using open source software exclusively for a very long time.

syntaxing 2y ago

Absolutely amazing. I have high hope for this project to be a real OnShape competitor!

phkahler 2y ago

As one of the Solvespace maintainers I have a few comments: 1) You don't want just 2D constraints, 3D is better. If you were writing in C++ I'd say just take our constraint solver (Like Dune3D did). Since you're loving Rust, I can point you to the work of Michael F Bryan who wrote one in Rust and blogged about it here: https://adventures.michaelfbryan.com/posts/constraints-part-1-expressions/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=constraint-solver-1-expression-trees https://adventures.michaelfbryan.com/posts/constraints-part-... I think his code is over at gitlab. I haven't looked at it in a couple years. He wrote that after I nerd-sniped him ;-) 2) For geometry kernels... I've got 3 classes of bugs I want to squash in the Solvespace kernel and then it should do booleans pretty reliably, but I haven't had the time. Ours is just under 6k LOC so you could learn a lot from it. My email is the same ID at gmail if you want to ping on this topic. Its been a while since I looked at Truck and I thought it had stagnated a bit. This is a really hard problem, which is why there are so few options out there even in the commercial world. Even triangulating a trimmed NURBS shell is tricky. 3) History/feature tree is closely related to the "topological naming problem" that FreeCAD has. Solvespace handles this by creating each entity from a set of known things. If you try to recreate (regenerate in our lingo) it will just return a handle to the existing entity rather than creating a new one. In other words, every entity "came from something" and that relationship is remembered. Where we handle topological naming it works perfectly. But not everything in solvespace is covered by this. You need to bake this in from the start, it's not something you can easily bolt on afterward. 4) where is the link to try out CADmium?

highdeserthackr 2y ago
Solvespace is freaking awesome. I tried so many different tools and it hits the sweet spot for reasonable learning curve (esp. for someone that is not a mech engineer), power, Linux, cost (free), and safe from disruption (no way I'm subjecting designs to all the risks of hosted offerings). Keep up the great work!
WillAdams 2y ago
I can at least help on 4: Github: https://github.com/MattFerraro/CADmium https://github.com/MattFerraro/CADmium has the link: https://mattferraro.github.io/CADmium/ https://mattferraro.github.io/CADmium/

blt 2y ago

> 3D CAD apps are among the most complex UIs that exist. I agree. > If you want to make a good one and you only have a small team, the framework had better do a lot of heavy lifting! I am skeptical that general-purpose UI frameworks can be a good long-term solution for 3D CAD. At times, a nice UX will need to think about many of the following at once: - the parametric 3D model - its mesh approximation - its hidden-surface projection into lines and patches - the pixels in the frame buffer - UI widgets. The frameworks make too many assumptions about information being easily partitioned and limited in size. Maybe the frameworks will help for prototyping, but if the project grows, I expect at some point they will end up ditching frameworks for the core 3D viewport interactions, and have mostly their own code in between OpenGL (or similar) and mouse/keyboard events. Frameworks for buttons, lists, etc. will probably be fine, but even those tend to be much more dynamic in 3D CAD than in average apps.

spookie 2y ago
The only real solution is imgui
- virtualritz 2y ago
  You meant egui. ;)
  - prokoudine 2y ago
    Aren't there Rust bindings to ImGui?
    - virtualritz 2y ago
      There are but as a user of both I would be really curious to hear a good reason to use imgui over egui when writing stuff in Rust and to use egui over imgui when writing stuff in C++. In general, egui IMHO has better ergonomics. Partly because of Rust and partly because it's newer.

RobotToaster 2y ago

> In contrast, the open source CAD landscape looks like this: He missed BRL-CAD, which also does brep. The interface is clunky but the kernel seems advanced.

spookie 2y ago
BRL-CAD is a true gem
- 0x0203 2y ago
  Do you have any preferred guides for getting started wtih BRL-CAD? I've tried a couple of times, but it seems like it's more a large collection of various tools and it's hard to know where to start. Or even what the general design philosophy is. It looks like the core functionality is more a code-driven approach to modeling? With UI driven design (archer) only in the experimental/early-development stage?
- bauta-steen 2y ago
  And interestingly "the oldest known public version-controlled codebase in the world that's still under active development" dating back to 1979. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRL-CAD#toc-History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRL-CAD#toc-History
  - RobotToaster 2y ago
    Unfortunately it's interface doesn't seem to have been updated since then...

JAlexoid 2y ago

Hopefully it's an easy to use CAD, because my preferred CAD right now on Linux is FreeCAD is way too complex and the user input in the UI horrendously clunky. The good side is that all CADs have a very steep learning curve, with most tutorials made by people who are oblivious to the ignorant masses. The landscape is so complex today, that it's easier to use a vector drawing tool and transform it into a 3D model than to use any CAD to make a cylinder.

zihotki 2y ago
Ondsel, built on top of FreeCad, aims to make free ad more user friendly and easy to collaborate on projects. Plus Freecad is close to propose a solid solution for topological naming issues. It will be this year, fingers crossed
- JAlexoid 2y ago
  TBH at this point I'd pay for anything better on Linux.

logrot 2y ago

Totally going to check this out. I've been rooting for FreeCAD but I think it's just going to be consumed by Ondsel in the next few years. Does CADmium suffer from a topological naming problem like FreeCAD?

prokoudine 2y ago
> I've been rooting for FreeCAD but I think it's just going to be consumed by Ondsel in the next few years. Extremely unlikely. Also, no such plans :)
- logrot 2y ago
  I appreciate the sentiment. But we both know that plans change. Especially in the software world and even more so in the startup business. Also, "no plans" doesn't really mean much. "I guarantee" is a lot more meaningful.
  - prokoudine 2y ago
    Well, I could go on and on about this, but consuming FreeCAD is not just unrealistic, it's undesirable. The best a startup company can do is work in quick iterations: throw things at the proverbial wall to see what sticks, then scale up development accordingly. "Consuming FreeCAD" is the opposite of that. It's how you paint yourself into a corner and die a horrible death. A much healthier approach is to build a great working relationship with the community: lead the way in a few areas where you have great expertise and encourage development in other areas. It has worked nicely so far. So no, sorry, I don't see Ondsel consuming FreeCAD over the next few years (or ever). But we can agree to get back to this conversation in, oh, 5 years time would be enough?
delfinom 2y ago
If you worry about freecad/ondsel Well this article talks about revisiting venture capital in the future. Which pretty much means the end of cadmium at that point haha
- 2y ago

xinayder 2y ago

Seems like an exciting project, I'd like to try it out as soon as there's a public testing phase. On another note, please don't use Discord for development: https://drewdevault.com/2021/12/28/Dont-use-Discord-for-FOSS.html https://drewdevault.com/2021/12/28/Dont-use-Discord-for-FOSS... use IRC or Matrix but not Discord.

hathawsh 2y ago

I really hope CADmium can wean me off of OpenSCAD. With OpenSCAD, I don't really have to think at first; I use a simple language to write modules that build on other modules. The problem with OpenSCAD is there's no solver: I have variables, but no constraints. As I make changes, suddenly I have to think hard and solve the constraints manually and it's easy to introduce errors. However, the problem isn't severe enough to get me to use something else, because starting a model with OpenSCAD is IMHO far easier that anything else I've tried.

btreecat 2y ago
FreeCAD has a built in OpenSCAD engine. I started with OpenSCAD but found FreeCAD to be way more productive for me when it came to actually producing 3d objects. Sometimes I want to start with a square, then delete a line, and add a semi circle. But I don't always know that until I start sketching. With OpenSCAD I feel you have to know the shape primitive you need, then the exact way to modify it, and the fact that it encourages 3D primitives over 2d w/ extrusion and rotating was kinda annoying imo.
- ecjhdnc2025 2y ago
  Belatedly: this engine has one absolutely fantastic advantage, too. Because it interprets the file as a sequence of Part object manipulations, it's a very useful way of getting a bRep representation of an OpenSCAD document, so you get the opportunity to generate a clean, minimal STEP file. OpenSCAD cannot do this itself, and the other conversion approaches just get you a triangle mesh packaged in a STEP file. It's not perfect -- you get a mesh if you use Minkowski or hull operations. But it's good.
ipsod 2y ago
I'd add PyMadCAD, to those already mentioned.
bilsbie 2y ago
Can you explain the problem with openscad a little more? I’m not quite following.

bilsbie 2y ago

Why should I use this over openscad?

ryukoposting 2y ago

Good to see someone is making this. Losing free student access to Autodesk Inventor exposed me to the hideous world of free-as-in-money 3D CAD software, and my interest in 3D CAD fizzled pretty quickly as a result. On a related note, we really, really need a worthy replacement for EAGLE. It's only a couple years away from EOL, and KiCAD is light years away from being feature-equivalent.

nhwangus 2y ago
Which specific features are keeping you on Eagle? Most of my more "serious" work is still in Altium, but I've been really pleased with a lot of the QoL features KiCAD has been picking up on as of the later releases (bulk sheet symbol entry placement) and feature coverage is good enough that I'm happy doing mixed signal boards with a few high speed interfaces.
- ryukoposting 2y ago
  Live synchronization of layout and schematic files. I consider this essential to circuit design, especially in later iterative stages. That alone totally eliminates KiCAD as a professional EDA in my opinion.
  - pointhi 2y ago
    Live synchronization of layout and schematic files is a feature you find in EAGLE, but in almost no other EDA program. If you say KiCAD is not an professional EDA due to missing live synchronization, the same argument applies also to Altium, Cadence Allegro, and most other EDA systems which are considered as professional by most people.
    - ryukoposting 2y ago
      Fine. KiCAD's manual tool still gives me more trouble than Altium ever has. How about the lack of a built in autorouter? Infuriating wire placement UX? We can keep going here.

bee_rider 2y ago

I’m slightly confused by the 2D constraint problem solver, it seems to me like they have a probably sparse, possibly banded problem. Of course, in a high level description a whole lot can be excused under > In practice many optimizations are made. And I’m sure there’s a good reason to do physics. But, do iterative solvers like gmres or whatever have trouble with these kinds of problems?

eschaton 2y ago

Why would anyone want to do CAD in a web page? JavaScript should be limited to 1997 Netscape 3.0 performance to stop this kind of garbage. And WASM should never have been attempted, and should be removed. Write real native software if you’re trying to make something good for end users.

bee_rider 2y ago
It looks like they also have an electron program. It might be sensible to run CAD in a web page hosted by a server on your local network? I have no idea if they added functionality to have the crunchy bits run on the server instead, that’d be a neat trick.

juliangmp 2y ago

>If you'd like to join the effort, join the Discord! Why is it that open source programs always want me to use an awful (and proprietary) chat app?

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

TaylorAlexander 2y ago

This looks great! I hosted some discussion about open source cad late last year on this GitHub discussion board. People tend to say that building a new CAD kernel would take ten full time engineers ten years. I like where truck is going and I’m curious to see what its current limitations are. Sadly I haven’t had as much time as I’d like to evaluate the various options. (The other promising option for a complete package is Ondsel). See that discussion forum here: https://github.com/tlalexander/open-cad-foundation/discussions https://github.com/tlalexander/open-cad-foundation/discussio...

bimguy 2y ago

This is an awesome project. I work with Revit(Python coded) so immediately tried shift + mouse wheel click drag. If you can get anywhere near Revit that would be impressively scary for Autodesk.

mijoharas 2y ago

This looks cool. What would people recommend for a CAD program to run on Linux that I could use now (that is either free or cheap). I have simple requirements, I want to make a box for some electronics, but need the ability to import (and extrude etc) SVGs. I couldn't see the SVG feature when I looked at dune, and I had some problems when I used freeCAD, but was planning on looking into it again. What would people suggest?

btreecat 2y ago
FreeCAD is my go to currently but you can also do all that in OnShape if you can swallow the public only files and always online requirements. FreeCAD has really good file format support in my XP. https://wiki.freecad.org/SVG https://wiki.freecad.org/SVG