The original post on X
Markus J. Buehler @ProfBuehlerMIT
Grok @bot is incredible - and they can even manufacture real physical objects! Here is a little experiment I did last night: I created a team of bots and asked them to solve a complex engineering problem end to end - starting from four images as design cues, inferring transferable structural principles from the pixels, synthesizing an executable interactive physics simulator, running and reasoning over experiments, optimizing the design & finally manufacturing the best designs. The entire loop worked remarkably well - and I was even able to communicate with the agents from my Apple Watch. (Do we live in the future yet?) Team of agents 1⃣ Chief of Staff coordinates the workflow: watches the other agents, pulls results into the main chat, transfers files between them, and keeps the job moving. 2⃣ Physics Experimenter is the scientist-coder. It interprets the design cues and images, writes the simulator, runs experiments, analyzes the results, and produces a detailed LaTeX scientific report. 3⃣ 3D Printing Bot operates the fabrication workflow: prepares and slices the models, generates manufacturing code, sends the job, and monitors the printer. The workflow I provided an initial task based on four unregistered reference photographs containing different objects at different scales (pinnate leaf venation, a Voronoi-like areole mesh, a stochastic fibrous lattice, and a radial/circumferential web). The prompt asked the agents to infer transferable design principles - hierarchy, branching, interfaces, redundancy, disorder, load paths - and use them to build an interactive laboratory for hierarchical materials and fracture. The scientific question was: at fixed material budget, how do hierarchy depth, redundancy, disorder, and interlevel strength change stiffness, peak load, energy absorption, and the brittle-to-progressive transition? In ~20 minutes, the Physics Experimenter produced a 2D hierarchical Euler–Bernoulli beam-network laboratory. Coarse veins persist and remain thicker; finer infill is added inside cells; members connecting levels are treated as interfaces with relative strength κ; and total material volume is conserved. The four source photographs remain visible in an editable interpretation panel. The app generates geometry, steps or runs the network to failure, compares A/B/C designs, and exports JSON, CSV, PNG, and STL geometry for fabrication. After validation the Physics Experimenter used the app and conducted 47 simulation experiments, including six holdouts. It found something scientifically interesting: extra hierarchy is not "free" toughness. At fixed volume, initial stiffness changed by only about 20%, while work-to-failure varied by several-fold. Infill steals cross-section from the main axial veins, so deeper and more redundant networks often absorbed less energy than a simple depth-1 grid. Weak interfaces behaved as distributed fuses, producing more progressive failure and reducing localization. The specific H2 hypothesis - that hierarchy becomes detrimental primarily because interfaces form a mechanical bottleneck - was rejected; the dominant effect instead came from redistribution of a fixed material budget across structural levels. The Physics Experimenter then assembled the methods, tests, results, hypothesis evaluation, and conclusions into a detailed scientific report. The best designs were passed to the 3D Printing Bot. It opened Bambu Studio and brought the Bambu Lab H2D online. Both STLs were placed on one build plate at the same 50x scale and sliced using a 0.20 mm PLA process. The prints completed within less than an hour. The loop images → structural abstraction → executable physics → autonomous experiments → hypothesis testing → design selection → STL → slicing/manufacturing code → physical object That last transition is what I find especially interesting: AI is beginning to operate across the entire scientific and physical workflow - converting observations into models, models into experiments, experimental evidence into revised designs, and those designs into manufactured matter by directly operating machines. This starts to blur the boundary between AI that reasons about the physical world and AI that can actually act on it. Shoutout to the @bot team - you are building something very special here! The way these agents can move naturally from reasoning, to experiments, to operating machines in the physical world feels like an important step.
1,160 likes 150 reposts 86 replies 1,133,484 views View on X

What you need

Connected apps
Bambu Studio and a Bambu Lab H2D 3D printer, run by the printing bot.

What prompted it

The author wanted to see whether a team of bots could solve a complex engineering problem end to end, starting from images as design cues and ending with manufactured objects.

What Grok Bot did

  1. Gave the team four unregistered reference photos: leaf venation, a Voronoi-like mesh, a fibrous lattice and a radial web.
  2. Asked them to infer design principles (hierarchy, branching, interfaces, redundancy, disorder, load paths) and build an interactive lab around one question: at a fixed material budget, how do hierarchy depth, redundancy, disorder and interlevel strength change stiffness, peak load, energy absorption and how things break?
  3. In about 20 minutes the Physics Experimenter built a 2D beam-network lab that runs designs to failure, compares them and exports JSON, CSV, PNG and STL.
  4. After validation it ran 47 simulation experiments, six of them holdouts, and wrote the methods, results and hypothesis tests into a LaTeX report.
  5. The best designs went to the 3D Printing Bot, which opened Bambu Studio, brought the printer online, sliced both STLs at 50x scale with a 0.20 mm PLA profile and printed them.

Evidence and limits

  • Original post checked on X (Oct 18, 2026)
  • Outcome reported by the author
  • Not reproduced by anyone else yet

More in Engineering

View all

Other real runs in the same field.