Verification

How the tools are built and checked

A wrong dimension in a generated file becomes wasted plate and machine time. So every tool here is built to be checked, repeated and corrected — and says plainly what it does not do.

How a tool is built

  1. Method first

    A tool starts as geometry, not as a page: the development method, the datum every dimension is measured from, and the cases where the method stops being valid.

    • Textbook methods only — parallel-line, radial-line and triangulation development, closed-form trigonometry. Nothing from any employer or client.
    • The reference cases are worked out by hand before any code runs, so the code is checked against an answer it did not produce.
    • What the tool does not account for is written down at the same time, and shown on the tool page next to the result.
  2. Build

    The geometry is pure code with no interface attached, so the same functions drive the preview, the DXF, the printable template and the tests. Outputs are deterministic and carry a version tag.

    • Same inputs, same file, byte for byte — no timestamps, no randomness in generated geometry.
    • A generator-version comment in every exported DXF, so a part can be traced to the code that made it.
    • All internal maths in millimetres; inches are converted at the edges and tested to round-trip.
  3. Verify

    Independent routes to the same answer: hand-derived golden cases, read-back with software that did not write the file, and — where the geometry is the product — a second implementation that re-derives the numbers.

    • Golden cases derived by hand: the 3-4-5 cone gives exactly 216°; the developed arc equals the true circumference; metric and imperial inputs produce identical millimetre geometry.
    • On every release ezdxf 1.4.4 reads back the DXF fixtures and every file the elbow, square-to-round, reducer, cone-segment and pipe tests write — every tool that exports DXF — checking version, units, entity counts, layers and that no entity is zero-length or zero-radius.
    • Renderer-parity suites for nine of the DXF tools: the preview and the exported file are decoded and required to describe the same geometry.
    • A real browser drives every tool — change inputs, download a DXF or CSV, print a template — under the site’s own content-security policy.
  4. Release

    A new tool ships only when all of its checks pass in the same run as the rest of the site, and the release can be rolled back in one command.

    • Where the geometry is the product, a second implementation written separately in Python must agree with the first — so far for the K-factor calculator and bend chart, cone in segments, lobster-back elbow, square-to-round and eccentric reducer.
    • New tools cite the published method they follow.
  5. Corrections

    When a tool is wrong, the report is reproduced first, a failing test is written for it, and the fix ships with that test, so the same mistake cannot come back unnoticed.

Evidence

The verification flow, and the reports behind it

The diagram shows the full set of checks. Not every tool has every one: the reference tools have no DXF to read back, and six tools have a second implementation so far. The figures below it are measured from this repository, not typed in.

inputsmm / in geometry corepure TypeScript DXF R12deterministic hand-derived golden cases3-4-5 cone = 216°, arc = circumference ezdxf read-backaudit · units · layers · entities cross-checkboth answers agree, within rounding second implementationindependent re-derivation same inputs
Independent routes to the same answer: the geometry core writes the file; software that did not write it reads it back; hand-derived cases and, where one exists, a second implementation re-derive the numbers.

Measured, from this repository

  • 1,805 automated tests across 74 test files — geometry, DXF, contact handling, headers and page content — all passing at the last release (regenerated by npm run proof, 2026-11-06).
  • 45 DXF fixtures read back and audited with ezdxf 1.4.4, last full run 2026-11-01 — full report in the fabrication geometry core study.
  • Renderer-parity suites for nine of the DXF tools: preview and DXF are decoded and compared.

Read the reports

  • Fabrication geometry core — the ezdxf audit, with the exact commands that regenerate it.
  • Fabrication Generator — 1,078 checks across four independent methods, including a second implementation in a different language and eight external calculators.

What is not claimed: that a physical part has been made from any of these files. The validation is mathematical and file-format. Your shop verifies before cutting.

Responsibility

Where engineering responsibility sits

Ruthen Systems publishes fabrication layout tools and references, and is not a licensed professional engineering practice. Engineering decisions — whether a design is adequate, safe or compliant — belong to you, the responsible engineer on your side, or a licensed engineer you retain. The tools compute geometry from the values you enter and are tested to do that. Nothing produced here is a certification, approval, stamp or sign-off.

In practice: a flat pattern or template from this site goes through exactly the check your own drawings go through before cutting. The tool disclaimer applies to everything the tools produce.

Found a result you do not trust?

Send the inputs and what you expected. It will be reproduced, and if the tool is wrong, the fix ships with a test that keeps it fixed.