Mechanical Design / CAD Expert

$60–130/hrrate as listed

micro1 is contracting mechanical designers to write, critique, and grade AI-generated engineering content — CAD modeling reasoning, drawing interpretation, GD&T callouts, tolerance stacks, and DFM judgment. Work is remote, output-based (paid per accepted task) with a weekly minimum submission requirement, and observed rates for this listing run $66–130/hr.

Summary, eligibility guidance and screening preparation are prepared by Sidequest from the platform's posting. Check the source listing before applying.

What the work actually looks like

You will not be doing production design work for a client. You'll be producing the reference material an AI system learns from: writing realistic mechanical design prompts, working problems the way a practicing engineer would, and grading model output against what a competent designer would actually accept. Typical tasks include critiquing an engineering drawing for datum scheme errors and unmanufacturable callouts, running or checking a worst-case and RSS tolerance stack, judging whether a proposed feature can be molded, cast, or machined as drawn, and explaining the reasoning behind a modeling approach — feature order, sketch constraints, assembly mating strategy — in prose clear enough to train on. Some tasks are open-ended authoring; others are side-by-side comparisons where you rank two model responses and write the rationale.

What the screen is looking for

micro1's process is an AI-led interview followed by task calibration. It probes depth: expect follow-ups on ASME Y14.5 specifics, position vs. profile tolerancing, bonus and datum shift, material selection under wear or contact loading, and how you'd handle a stack that closes on paper but fails in the shop. Vague answers get pressed. The other half of the assessment is evaluation judgment — whether you can separate a confident-sounding wrong answer from a correct one, articulate why a model's GD&T callout is invalid rather than just flagging it, and write feedback a non-engineer reviewer can audit. Communication carries real weight here; unclear rationales are the most common reason otherwise-qualified engineers wash out.

Logistics

Fully remote, asynchronous, contractor engagement — no fixed shifts.
Compensation is output-based: paid per task that meets spec, not per hour logged. The $66–130/hr band reflects observed effective rates and depends on your throughput and task tier; it is not a guaranteed wage.
A weekly minimum task submission applies. Treat this as a consistent part-time commitment rather than occasional pickup work.
Hiring moves fast — roles typically fill within 48 hours, with first tasks expected 24–48 hours after onboarding.
No prior AI or ML experience is required or expected.

What they look for

Mechanical Design
CAD

Before you apply

Would you pass this screen?

Drawn from what this listing actually requires. Answered in your browser — nothing is sent to us, and we do not store your answers.

Do you have production-level hands-on experience with at least one industry-standard CAD platform (SolidWorks, CATIA, NX, or equivalent)?
CAD platform proficiency · required
Do you hold a BS or MS degree in Mechanical Engineering, Aerospace Engineering, or a closely related discipline?
Mechanical or Aerospace Engineering education · preferred
Do you have hands-on experience applying GD&T standards and tolerance analysis in a production or design-engineering role?
GD&T and tolerance analysis experience · required
Are you available to submit a minimum number of completed tasks per week and start your first tasks within 24–48 hours of onboarding?
Availability for weekly task submission · required
Do you hold CSWP (Certified SolidWorks Professional) or CSWE (Certified SolidWorks Expert) certification?
CSWP or CSWE certification · preferred

0 of 5 answered

Included with this listing

Interview prep — 11 questions

Matched to what this platform's screening actually measures. Answer each out loud in 60–90 seconds: claim → concrete example → implication.

What it tests: Can you articulate the gap between theoretical design and production reality, and demonstrate the specific CAD or GD&T reasoning that caught the problem?
A strong answer: Describe a concrete example where you spotted a tolerance stack-up, undercut, or assembly sequence problem by reasoning through the design intent and manufacturing constraints—not just listing tools used, but showing how you diagnosed the root cause and what corrective feedback you gave.
Where people lose it: Candidates often name a tool ("I used tolerance analysis software") without explaining what the actual manufacturability risk was or how you reasoned about it; the screener needs to hear your judgment, not your software library.