AI for Design Quality & DFM
Compare topology optimization software on documented manufacturing controls and solver inputs, then run a 2-week test on one of your own parts.
·
⏱
6 min read
Michelle Ben-David
Michelle Ben-David is a mechanical engineer and Technion graduate. She served in an IDF elite technology and intelligence unit, where she developed multidisciplinary systems integrating mechanics, electronics, and advanced algorithms. Her engineering background spans robotics, medical devices, and automotive systems.
BOTTOM LINE
Choose topology optimization software by the manufacturing controls your process needs and by how much rework the result takes. Ansys documents the longest control list, Autodesk and SOLIDWORKS suit design engineers working in CAD, and Siemens offers OptiStruct and Inspire. Leo helps set up inputs and check results.
Pick topology optimization software by the manufacturing controls it enforces, then test two tools on one of your own parts. Autodesk, Ansys, Siemens and Dassault each document controls such as preserved regions, draw direction, member size and symmetry, and a result that ignores your process needs rework.
If your design engineers set up bracket studies in CAD while one simulation analyst owns the heavy runs, this guide compares six options on those controls. It then gives a two-week test with pass criteria you can run on your own geometry.
Four criteria decide which topology optimization software fits a team
One engineer can try any tool alone. A team needs four answers before it commits.
Solver inputs. The study needs loads and supports from an upstream analysis. Ansys says the optimization analysis must be linked to (preceded by) one of its listed analysis types, including Static Structural and Modal. Confirm your usual load case maps to one of them.
Manufacturing controls. Ansys states that "It is important to understand that a optimization solution could create unmanufacturable designs". Write down the controls your process needs: pull-out direction for casting, member size for machining, an overhang constraint for additive.
Protected geometry. Bolt holes and mating faces must survive the run. Autodesk documents a Preserve Region feature with box, cylinder and sphere shapes, and says "Any material that lies within the preserved region will remain intact".
Result hand-off. A study returns a shape, not a part. Someone must rebuild it as editable geometry and re-check stress, so count the rework hours per part during your trial.
The topology optimization vs generative design post covers where the two methods differ. The manufacturing constraints post lists controls by process.
IN PRACTICE
Documented manufacturing controls differ across six options
The table lists what each option documents. Facts come from the vendor pages linked under Sources, read on 2026-11-06, and the Leo row comes from Leo's own description.
Option | Where the docs place it | Documented setup and goals | Manufacturing controls documented | Best for |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Autodesk Fusion | Shape Optimization study in Fusion Simulate | Preserve Region with box, cylinder and sphere shapes | Preserved regions | Design engineers working in CAD |
SOLIDWORKS Simulation | Topology Study, introduced in SOLIDWORKS Simulation 2018 | Goals: minimize mass or displacement, or maximize stiffness | Preserved regions, thickness control, model symmetry, de-mold pull direction | SOLIDWORKS teams starting with brackets |
Ansys Mechanical | Structural Optimization in Mechanical, Release 2025 R1 | Upstream Static Structural, Modal, Harmonic Response or Steady-State Thermal system | Member size, pull-out direction, extrusion, cyclic repetition, symmetry, AM overhang | Teams with a simulation analyst |
Simcenter OptiStruct | Structural solver; Altair 2026 help describes its topology optimization | Optimized shape and material distribution within a given package space | Siemens lists symmetry patterns, draw direction and cavity avoidance for its topology tools | Analysts who need solver-level control |
Simcenter Inspire | Siemens platform; Inspire User Guide 2022.1 documents topology, topography, gauge and lattice optimization | Study setup beside CAD geometry | Shape controls such as draw directions and symmetry | Designers who want a dedicated study environment |
Leo AI | Assistant trained on 1M+ pages of standards, connected to your PDM, PLM, drives and ERP | Not a solver; answers material, load and standards questions with sources | None; it does not run the optimization | Setting up the study and checking the result against your records |
Dassault's Topology Study post dates from 2017, so confirm the current controls in your SOLIDWORKS release notes. Siemens lists OptiStruct and Inspire as Simcenter products, while Altair's help sites still use the Altair names.
How each option measures against the four criteria
The notes below rest on the vendor pages listed under Sources, read on 2026-11-06. Nothing here comes from hands-on testing.
Autodesk Fusion. Its documented strength is protected geometry. Autodesk says you may want to "preserve bolt holes or any other connection locations that are required in the final optimized part". The page read lists no draw-direction or overhang control, so check the current Shape Optimization docs before you rely on it for castings.
SOLIDWORKS Simulation. Dassault's launch post lists three goals and four manufacturing controls. It advises that "It is good practice to run a static study on your part prior to running a topology study", which doubles as your load-case check. For 3D printing, the exported mesh still needs "further validation of your component" against the printer's materials.
Ansys Mechanical. It documents the longest control list: member size, pull-out direction, extrusion, cyclic repetition, symmetry and an AM overhang constraint, by solver method (Ansys Release 2025 R1). The cost is setup: you build an upstream system first. That fits a team where an analyst owns the studies.
Simcenter OptiStruct and Inspire. Siemens names both on its topology page and lists "symmetry patterns, draw direction, cavity avoidance" among its manufacturing rules. Altair describes the OptiStruct method as "A mathematical technique that produces an optimized shape and material distribution for a structure within a given package space". The Inspire guide documents shape controls "such as draw directions or symmetry". Treat the split between analyst-level OptiStruct and designer-level Inspire as a hypothesis for your trial, not a vendor claim.
Teams already on NX can start from the generative design in NX post.
Run a two-week evaluation on one of your own parts
Use one released part with a known load case so every tool starts from the same facts. Follow these steps for two tools:
Days 1 to 2: pick a bracket or housing with a known load case. Record its mass in kg and the safety factor from its existing static study.
Days 3 to 5: define the same design space, loads, supports and mass target in each tool, for example 30% below current mass. Apply the controls your process needs and log setup time in minutes.
Days 6 to 8: run both studies. Log solve time, and check whether each tool enforced your pull-out direction, symmetry or overhang limit.
Days 9 to 12: rebuild each result as editable geometry and re-run a static study. Log rework hours.
Days 13 to 14: score each tool against the pass criteria below.
Check | Starting pass criterion |
|---|---|
Mass after rebuild | Within 5% of the target |
Peak stress after rebuild | Below allowable stress divided by the safety factor your standard requires |
Maximum displacement | At or below the existing part's value |
Manufacturing control | Zero undercuts along the pull-out direction in a section view |
Rework | Under 8 hours per part |
Set the thresholds from your own standards, because the figures above are starting values. The AI design optimization with FEA post covers how to automate the static re-check.
Leo sets up the study inputs and checks the result against your records
Run this evaluation with Leo as the preparation and review step, because Leo does not replace the solver. Before the study, ask Leo for the allowable stress and safety factor for your bracket material under the standard your company follows. Ask also for load cases from past designs on the same product line.
Leo draws on 1M+ pages of standards, books and articles it was trained on, plus the knowledge your team already stores in PDM, PLM, network drives and ERP. It answers with the source pages so you can open and confirm each one.
After the rebuild, give Leo the finished part's material, wall thickness and process, and ask which internal rules or earlier design decisions apply. It returns the matching records with citations. One limit: Leo does not run topology optimization or edit CAD geometry, so the studies stay in your solver. Data handling details are on the security page.
FAQ
Preserve Region, Autodesk Fusion Help, accessed 2026-11-06
Topology Optimization, Altair OptiStruct 2026 Help, accessed 2026-11-06
Manufacturing Controls, Altair Inspire User Guide 2022.1, accessed 2026-11-06
Structural Optimization in Mechanical, Release 2025 R1, Ansys Help, accessed 2026-11-06
My Highlights of SOLIDWORKS Simulation 2018: the New Topology Study, Dassault Systèmes SOLIDWORKS Blog, accessed 2026-11-06
Topology optimization, Siemens, accessed 2026-11-06
See Leo on your team's design data
A 30-minute walkthrough on your own files and how deployment works.
Book a 30-minute walkthrough. See Leo read your standards, past designs and PDM data, and learn how deployment and security work for your team.
#1 New AI Software Globally - G2 2026
Enterprise-grade security
Trusted by world-class engineering teams
