XR-penter: Material-Aware and In Situ Design of Scrap Wood Assemblies

TL;DR

The paper tackles the challenge that DIY woodworkers face when designing with irregular scrap materials in constrained spaces. It introduces XR-penter, an XR-based workflow that registers physical scraps as virtual twins, supports in situ spatial design, and generates 2D cut plans aligned to the real environment, enabling iterative, material-aware design. Through formative interviews and a case study involving a chair and a slant shelf, the authors demonstrate how the system supports improvisational, material-first design while providing real-time feedback on material availability and grain direction. The findings suggest XR-penter can reduce waste and enhance planning and visualization for casual makers, with future work spanning multi-user collaboration, scanned inventory, and expanded modeling capabilities to broaden real-world impact.

Abstract

Woodworkers have to navigate multiple considerations when planning a project, including available resources, skill-level, and intended effort. Do it yourself (DIY) woodworkers face these challenges most acutely because of tight material constraints and a desire for custom designs tailored to specific spaces. To address these needs, we present XR-penter, an extended reality (XR) application that supports in situ, material-aware woodworking for casual makers. Our system enables users to design virtual scrap wood assemblies directly in their workspace, encouraging sustainable practices through the use of discarded materials. Users register physical material as virtual twins, manipulate these twins into an assembly in XR, and preview cuts needed for fabrication. We conducted a case study and feedback sessions to demonstrate how XR-penter supports improvisational workflows in practice, the type of woodworker who would benefit most from our system, and insights on integrating similar spatial and material considerations into future work.

Figures (15)

• Figure 1: XR-penter's three woodworking design contexts. We label each context interaction with the challenge it addresses, as identified from our formative interviews.
• Figure 2: Virtual inventory and scrap registration interface.
• Figure 3: Spatial modeling utilities provided by our system. (a) Face manipulation. (b) Edge manipulation. (c) Restricted resaw cut. (d) Bare cut joints made with our system. (e) Linked cuts being edited simultaneously. (f1) Part options. (f2) Scene options.
• Figure 4: We used the scene mesh to design a bedroom canopy in situ. (a) The canopy design and scene mesh. (a1) A part intersects with the scene mesh. (a2) An intersection with the scene-mesh is resolved once the user releases the part. (b) The canopy design without the scene mesh. (b1) Top of the canopy frame intersects with an existing horizontal beam along the wall, and therefore, can be fastened to the beam when fabricated. (b2) The frame avoids an unwanted intersection with an existing vertical beam. (b3) The design of the frame provides enough space to push a piece of luggage underneath the bed. (c) A photo-illustration imagining the design in use.
• Figure 5: (a) Cut plan interface. (b) Our two collision modes: (b1) Parts overlap in the manual collision mode. (b2) Parts redistribute themselves in the auto-resolve mode. (c) Reassigning parts. (c1) Part b is too big for scrap #1. (c2) Previewing if part b fits onto other scraps. (c3) Reassigning part b to scrap #13.