Branch
3D

Building the foundation for a next-generation structural design platform

Branch 3D (StructureCraft) set out to bridge the gap between traditional 2D structural engineering workflows and the spatial precision of 3D modeling — creating a hybrid platform where engineers could design, analyse, and visualise complex structures within a single environment.

The engagement was foundational: establishing the UX patterns, interaction model, and design system that would underpin the platform's long-term development.

The challenge was twofold — designing for users who think spatially but work in 2D, and setting conventions robust enough to scale with the product.

• Establish foundational UX patterns and a design system for the hybrid platform
• Define 3D interaction models for navigating and editing complex structural models
• Align early design decisions with long-term usability and scalability goals
• Partner with product, engineering, and project management across a compressed timeline

Understanding structural engineers' workflows

Structural engineering workflows sit at a unique intersection of precision, regulation, and creative problem-solving.

Engineers work across multiple tools — often switching between 2D drafting, analysis software, and 3D visualisation — carrying deep mental models of how geometry, loads, and connections behave in space.

Understanding this meant understanding not just the software gaps, but the cognitive model engineers bring to their work — and where a hybrid 2D/3D environment could support rather than disrupt that model.

The Branch 3D homescreen centralises the experience around project management — surfacing active projects, iteration history, and visual thumbnails for multi-file structural models in a single, scannable view. The goal was to reduce the overhead of navigating complex projects and give engineers immediate visual context before opening a file.

Early design notes capturing initial observations about the platform's structure, user expectations, and interaction priorities — the raw material that shaped foundational UX decisions before any pixels were placed.

An early concept application served as a point of departure — not a blueprint, but a baseline to pull insights from. It surfaced what was working, what wasn't, and where the real design opportunities lived before committing to a direction.

Where existing tools leave gaps

The structural engineering software landscape is dominated by tools that excel in analysis or drafting — but rarely both, and almost never in a fluid, spatially-integrated environment.

Tools like Revit and Tekla are powerful but carry significant UX debt. Newer entrants like SketchUp and Rhino offer 3D fluency but lack engineering-grade analysis integration.

Branch 3D's opportunity was in the space between — a platform purpose-built for the hybrid workflow that engineers increasingly need, without the legacy constraints of older tools.

Competitive solutions in the structural design space are often plugins hosted within applications like Rhino — inheriting both the limitations of the host API and the constraints of its existing UX. This creates a ceiling on what's achievable: the experience can only ever be as good as the host allows, and deep integration with the engineer's actual workflow is rarely possible.

Establishing the foundational design language

A short engagement demanded clear priorities. Rather than designing individual screens, the focus was on establishing the patterns, principles, and component conventions that would make every future design decision faster and more coherent.

• Clarity over density. Structural models can be visually complex — the interface needed to surface what matters without adding to the cognitive load
• Precision-first interaction. Engineers expect exact control. Every interaction pattern needed to support accuracy without slowing the workflow
• 2D and 3D as one. Rather than treating them as separate modes, the design system needed to make the transition between planar and spatial views feel seamless
• Scalable from day one. With a long product roadmap ahead, every component and pattern needed to be extensible — not just fit for purpose today

Design process

The process began with deep dives into the existing product and competitor tools, followed by rapid concept exploration in Figma. Early explorations focused on the core interaction model for navigating structural geometry — how users select, manipulate, and inspect elements in both 2D and 3D space.

Early exploration of how structural components are created and manipulated in a 2D grid layout — while the 3D view remains constantly in sync. The goal was to let engineers work in the precision of 2D while always maintaining a live spatial understanding of what they were building.

Exploration of context-sensitive functions surfaced through a right mouse button (RMB) menu — using progressive disclosure to reduce visual noise and keep persistent UI elements to a minimum. Rather than cluttering the interface with every available action, only the most relevant operations are offered based on what the engineer has selected and where they are in their workflow.

Defining how engineers navigate complex models

One of the most significant design challenges was establishing interaction patterns for 3D structural models — navigating, selecting, and editing geometry in a way that felt intuitive to engineers rather than to 3D artists or game developers.

The conventions of engineering software differ meaningfully from those of DCC tools. Selection behaviour, camera navigation, manipulation handles, and feedback mechanisms all needed to be considered through the lens of structural engineering workflows.

Rather than borrowing interaction patterns wholesale from adjacent domains, each convention was evaluated against how structural engineers actually think and work.

Areas of exploration included interactive 3D manipulation of the camera, structural layout, and massing — alongside in-context numeric value input, allowing engineers to work spatially and precisely without breaking flow to navigate to a separate properties panel.

Laying the groundwork for long-term scalability

In a compressed engagement, the work delivered a coherent design foundation — interaction patterns, component conventions, and a visual language the Branch 3D team could build on with confidence. Early alignment between design, engineering, and product meant fewer costly pivots later.

What this engagement taught

Working within a compressed timeline on foundational work demands a particular discipline — the ability to make principled decisions quickly, communicate them clearly, and resist the temptation to over-specify what should remain flexible for the team that follows.

The structural engineering domain also reinforced a recurring theme across complex technical products: expert users have deeply held mental models, and the designer's job is to understand those models before attempting to improve on them.

Coming in without deep structural engineering expertise turned out to be an asset rather than a liability. Fresh eyes on a specialist domain surface assumptions that have calcified into convention — the questions an insider wouldn't think to ask are often where the most useful design insights live.

It's a reminder that deep domain knowledge and strong UX instincts aren't the same thing, and that the latter travels across industries in ways the former doesn't.

Building the design system and interaction model rather than shipping visible features is a different kind of challenge. The measure of success isn't what users see on launch day — it's whether the team that follows can build confidently on what you established.

Getting the foundation right before adding structure on top of it is less visible work, but it's the work that determines whether everything built afterward holds.