I wanted to resize a tray.
Somehow, that became a professional qualification.
Sketches. Extrusions. Lofts. Surfaces. I respect the engineering behind these tools. I am less convinced that everyone who wants to change a small plastic part should have to learn their names first.
My bet is that traditional CAD companies have twelve months to rethink their interfaces. That is my prediction as the founder of Nora3D, not an industry deadline. Today’s update is a small example of why I believe it: describe a change to an existing model, let Nora handle the CAD operations, then adjust the dimensions yourself.
The object in this story is a storage tray. The ambition is slightly larger.
Describe the change instead of planning the operations
In the first demonstration, I start with a tray that already has four compartments. I select the floor of one compartment and send Nora this instruction:
Divide the selected partition into two equal sections.
The selection gives the request a location. I am not asking the software to invent a different tray. I want to change this part of the one already in front of me.
Nora pauses to ask a useful question: should it add a centered divider, or split that compartment into two separate parts?
I reply, “Add.”
A new divider appears in the selected compartment. The other compartments remain in view, and I can rotate the tray to inspect the result.
The clarification is part of the feature. “Divide this” can describe more than one modeling operation. I would rather answer a short question about what I mean than discover that the software confidently did something else.
This is the change I want from AI CAD: let the conversation concern the object and the intended result. The software should take on more of the work of choosing the operations that get us there.
Then change the numbers without another conversation
The second demonstration is just as important to me.
After adding the divider, Nora offers Adjust model parameters. I open it and change the divider’s width from 3 mm to 6 mm, then its height from 32 mm to 16 mm. Its depth remains 65.5 mm in the panel. The model updates to show a thicker, lower divider.
I do not need another prompt for either adjustment.
There is a temptation to make every interaction conversational once a product has an AI assistant. I do not want that. If I know the number, typing the number is a perfectly good interface.
The useful combination is a conversation when I need to explain a change, and direct controls when I know exactly what to adjust. Both should work on the model I already have.
That is what makes this more interesting than generating another version of a picture. The first result is a starting point I can continue working on.
Replace the compulsory workflow rather than the geometry
When I say AI can replace the old workflow, I do not mean that geometry stops needing to be constructed correctly. Sketches, extrusions, lofts, and surfaces do useful work. I want users to have fewer reasons to manage those operations themselves.
“Add a divider here” should be enough to start. “Make it 6 mm wide” should not require a tour of a feature tree.
Experienced designers may still want direct tools and detailed control. They should have them. My objection is to making that expertise the admission requirement for every small edit.
These tray demonstrations show a focused editing workflow, not a replacement for the assemblies, simulation, or manufacturing capabilities of a complete engineering system. But a focused improvement can still change what people expect from the interface.
Once I can describe a change, inspect it, and adjust its dimensions, being told to learn a long sequence of commands feels less inevitable.
The same idea on a tablet phone or computer
I want this way of working to feel natural on a tablet, a phone, or a computer. Nora3D supports those device categories; the two recordings here show the tablet workflow.
The goal is not to shrink a desktop toolbar until it technically fits. It is to make the important actions clear: select the relevant geometry, describe the change, answer a clarification when needed, and inspect the result. When a dimension is all that needs changing, change the dimension.
The clips are edited demonstrations, not timing benchmarks. They show the interaction I am building toward much better than a promise about how many buttons AI might remove.
My twelve month bet
I do not know which CAD company will move first, and I am not predicting that established engineering tools will disappear in a year.
I am betting that their interfaces will face a harder question: why should users still do work that they can explain clearly enough for software to do?
Today, my evidence is a tray with an extra divider, followed by two changed dimensions.
Not quite an industrial revolution. But at least I did not have to enroll in one to organize my screws.
Try Nora3D · See hand drawing and direct modeling on a phone