Logo
ScienceStack
Table of Contents
Fetching ...
Sign In

Lowering Barriers to CAD Adoption: A Comparative Study of Augmented Reality-Based CAD (AR-CAD) and a Traditional CAD tool

Muhammad Talha, Abdullah Mohiuddin, Sehrish Javed, Ahmed Jawad Qureshi

TL;DR

This study investigates whether an Augmented Reality CAD tool (AR-CAD) can lower entry barriers and complement traditional CAD workflows by comparing it to SolidWorks through a controlled user study. Using a within-subject design with 20 participants, the authors measure task completion, time, SUS, and NASA-TLX while performing two design tasks in AR-CAD and SolidWorks. Results show AR-CAD facilitates higher completion rates for novices and yields comparable overall task times with similar workload, suggesting AR-CAD is a viable entry point for CAD and a potential rapid-concept development tool, though experts still favor traditional CAD for precision and advanced features. The work highlights AR’s potential to broaden CAD adoption, while outlining the need for improved precision input, larger-scale studies, and hybrid workflows to optimize professional CAD pipelines.

Abstract

The paper presents a comparative user study between an Augmented Reality-based Computer-Aided Design (AR-CAD) system and a traditional computer-based CAD modeling software, SolidWorks. Twenty participants of varying skill levels performed 3D modeling tasks using both systems. The results showed that while the average task completion time is comparable for both groups, novice designers had a higher completion rate in AR-CAD than in the traditional CAD interface, and experienced designers had a similar completion rate in both systems. A statistical comparison of task completion rate, time, and NASA Task Load Index (TLX) showed that AR-CAD slightly reduced cognitive load while favoring a high task completion rate. Higher scores on the System Usability Scale (SUS) by novices indicated that AR-CAD was superior and worthwhile for reducing barriers to entering CAD. In contrast, the Traditional CAD interface was favored by experienced users for its advanced capabilities, while many viewed AR-CAD as a valid means for rapid concept development, education, and an initial critique of designs. This opens up the need for future research on the needed refinement of AR-CAD with a focus on high-precision input tools and its evaluation of complex design processes. This research highlights the potential for immersive interfaces to enhance design practice, bridging the gap between novice and experienced CAD users.

Lowering Barriers to CAD Adoption: A Comparative Study of Augmented Reality-Based CAD (AR-CAD) and a Traditional CAD tool

TL;DR

This study investigates whether an Augmented Reality CAD tool (AR-CAD) can lower entry barriers and complement traditional CAD workflows by comparing it to SolidWorks through a controlled user study. Using a within-subject design with 20 participants, the authors measure task completion, time, SUS, and NASA-TLX while performing two design tasks in AR-CAD and SolidWorks. Results show AR-CAD facilitates higher completion rates for novices and yields comparable overall task times with similar workload, suggesting AR-CAD is a viable entry point for CAD and a potential rapid-concept development tool, though experts still favor traditional CAD for precision and advanced features. The work highlights AR’s potential to broaden CAD adoption, while outlining the need for improved precision input, larger-scale studies, and hybrid workflows to optimize professional CAD pipelines.

Abstract

The paper presents a comparative user study between an Augmented Reality-based Computer-Aided Design (AR-CAD) system and a traditional computer-based CAD modeling software, SolidWorks. Twenty participants of varying skill levels performed 3D modeling tasks using both systems. The results showed that while the average task completion time is comparable for both groups, novice designers had a higher completion rate in AR-CAD than in the traditional CAD interface, and experienced designers had a similar completion rate in both systems. A statistical comparison of task completion rate, time, and NASA Task Load Index (TLX) showed that AR-CAD slightly reduced cognitive load while favoring a high task completion rate. Higher scores on the System Usability Scale (SUS) by novices indicated that AR-CAD was superior and worthwhile for reducing barriers to entering CAD. In contrast, the Traditional CAD interface was favored by experienced users for its advanced capabilities, while many viewed AR-CAD as a valid means for rapid concept development, education, and an initial critique of designs. This opens up the need for future research on the needed refinement of AR-CAD with a focus on high-precision input tools and its evaluation of complex design processes. This research highlights the potential for immersive interfaces to enhance design practice, bridging the gap between novice and experienced CAD users.
Paper Structure (46 sections, 8 figures)

This paper contains 46 sections, 8 figures.

Table of Contents

  1. Introduction
  2. Research Questions
  3. Related Work
  4. Augmented Reality in CAD
  5. AR in Manufacturing and Prototyping
  6. Rapid Prototyping and Visualization:
  7. Assembly Guidance:
  8. Training and Skills Development:
  9. Comparative Evaluations: AR vs. Traditional CAD
  10. AR as Complement, Not Replacement:
  11. Hybrid AR Workstations:
  12. Additional AR Interfaces
  13. Tangible AR Interfaces:
  14. Graspable User Interfaces:
  15. Augmented Reality World Editing:
  16. ...and 31 more sections

Figures (8)

  • Figure 1: AR-CAD Adjustable User Interface (UI)
  • Figure 2: Mean Number of tasks completed by participants Varying across cad expertise
  • Figure 3: Mean Time taken by participants varying across CAD expertise
  • Figure 4: Time taken by all participants to complete tasks
  • Figure 5: Mean System Usability Scores (SUS) varying across cad expertise
  • ...and 3 more figures