Text-to-3D is generating real enthusiasm. If promises abound and some are already selling it as a revolution, it is nevertheless important to look behind the “WOW” effect!
Between distractive uses, favoring aesthetics over precision, and industrial requirements, there is still a whole world… This forum takes stock of the real state of technology and shows why the real progress today is taking place on the side of generative design with an AI that is invisible but which considerably enriches the palette of design engineers.
Text-to-3D is, for the moment, unsuitable for engineering. For a simple reason: the models generated from a prompt turn out to be unusable. They lack almost everything: clean mathematical surfaces, plans, references, or even watertight volumes… Try generating a simple bolt. The result will certainly “look” like the requested object, but, for example, its dimensions will be wrong and its threads will not respect ISO standards.
Is it coming soon? Nothing is less certain, and skepticism dominates. A prompt is, by nature, ambiguous. Qualifiers like “compact” or “resistant” do not constitute explicit constraints. As long as AI cannot reason about matter and processes, text-to-3D will remain the prerogative of entertainment, from video to games.
Do you want to ship 10,000 parts for a tractor?
Conversely, industrial generative design is based on explicit physical constraints, whether mechanical, thermal, linked to materials or manufacturing processes, etc. In industry, a product like a tractor brings together 8,000 to 15,000 parts which must fit together perfectly (mechanics, hydraulics, electronics, bodywork, safety, etc.). Each element is subject to very strict space, material and manufacturing constraints. However, current text-to-3D tools are incapable of generating geometry precise enough to be integrated into such a complex whole where the slightest geometric error creates a conflict, an interference or a functional defect. It is precisely this level of requirement that makes text-to-3D unsuitable for industrial design.
Forget prompts, think “constraints”
The true future of design does not lie in a magic prompt, but in the engineer’s ability to orchestrate a multitude of constraints and variables with extreme precision, a sine qua non condition for achieving the set objectives.
With AI, generative design allows the engineer to quickly explore thousands of options. But make no mistake: the responsibility remains that of the engineer, who is responsible for setting the requirements, validating the geometries and arbitrating the decisions. In fact, the more intelligent the tools become, the more the role of the designer shifts towards the fine formulation of constraints and the interpretation of the results.
Invisible, AI infuses generative design
By entering CAD, AI works behind the scenes to enhance the precision and reliability of engineering. For example, it automates repetitive tasks, suggests corrections compatible with the constraints of the model or even suggests optimizations. It can also act as a “companion” by assisting the user throughout their work, answering their questions or guiding them in their technical choices in real time.
The most advanced CAD solutions even integrate new “physics” such as thermal criteria or vibration constraints. More than ever, AI is opening up the field of possibilities by exploring scenarios that were previously unthinkable to test in such short time frames. In reality, this technology does not aim to replace the engineer but to give him the means to design with greater accuracy and speed.
