Research Report:

Lightweighting with
Generative Design

This report is sponsored by Dassault Systèmes.

RESEARCH REPORT: LIGHTWEIGHTING WITH GENERATIVE DESIGN

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Lightweighting is in great demand to save material, reduce costs and comply

with regulations. Generative design can help.

We set out to learn how engineers do lightweighting and if they use

generative design for that purpose. How many are using generative design
to help them reduce weight? How are they doing so? What is keeping them
from using generative design more? What are their perceptions of generative
design? What obstacles have they encountered?

We surveyed nearly three hundred designers, engineers, managers and

educators who lightweight designs to help us understand how lightweighting
is incorporated into design work in the field. 

We present the results in this report.

We uncover:
•T
 he most popular approaches to lightweighting.
•K
 ey obstacles to lightweighting.
•W
 hat users want in lightweighting software.
•H
 ow designs are typically optimized.
•H
 ow long it takes to create a detailed design.
•A
 nd much more.

Thanks to all our survey participants for sharing their experiences, and thanks
to you for reading.

Sincerely,
Roopinder Tara
Director of Content
engineering.com

2
RESEARCH REPORT: LIGHTWEIGHTING WITH GENERATIVE DESIGN

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2
PERCEPTIONS OF LIGHTWEIGHTING 4
How important is light weight in your product design? 5
How do engineers approach lightweighting? 6
What are the obstacles to lightweighting designs? 7
GENERATIVE DESIGN AND TOPOLOGY OPTIMIZATION SOFTWARE USAGE 8
Are generative design and topology optimization technologies being used? 9
What do users think about generative design software? 10
The need to use additive manufacturing hindering the use of generative design 11
What are the popular applications for generative design and/
or topology optimization? 12
GENERATIVE DESIGN PRACTICES 13
Use of generative design predicted to rise 14
What type of analysis do engineers prefer for design optimization? 15
Cloud-based workflow strategies gaining popularity 16

DEMOGRAPHICS 14
Industries Represented 18
Organization Size 19
Geographic Distribution 20
Job Roles Represented 21
What roles do our respondents take on in their organizations? 22
CLOSING COMMENTS 23

3
RESEARCH REPORT: LIGHTWEIGHTING WITH GENERATIVE DESIGN

Perceptions of
Lightweighting

4
RESEARCH REPORT: LIGHTWEIGHTING WITH GENERATIVE DESIGN

HOW IMPORTANT IS LIGHT WEIGHT IN

YOUR PRODUCT DESIGN?

Respondents who completed our survey were almost all concerned with the
weight of the products they design. Therefore, they are a good audience to
ask about how they lightweight.

Most (88%) are interested in reducing the weight of their products. Only
a small subset (12%) of the respondents don’t consider weight important.

37.9% 50.5% 11.6%

Very important Somewhat important Not important

Q: How important is light weight for your products? N = 301

5
RESEARCH REPORT: LIGHTWEIGHTING WITH GENERATIVE DESIGN

HOW DO ENGINEERS APPROACH

LIGHTWEIGHTING?

The most popular lightweighting methods include removing unnecessary

geometry or material (65%), switching to lighter materials (47%), setting
weight limits in the design specs (44%) and reducing mass by making the
part smaller overall (40%).

The least popular methods involve adding internal lattices (18%), adding
cell structure such as honeycomb and foam during manufacturing (20%),
trimming the design then testing to see if it works (21%) and relying on
intuition (24%).

Remove unnecessary geometry or material 65%

(adding holes, trimming)

Switch to light weight materials 47%

Weight constraints are established in the

44%
design spec
Reduce mass of the part by making it smaller
40%
overall
Trial and error (trimming the design then use
34%
simulation to see if it works)

Hollowing parts 33%

Add internal framing or supports to CAD design 28%

Topology optimization or other algorithms are

26%
used to remove unnecessary geometry

New ways of fastening 25%

Simple intuition (no testing or simulation) 24%

Trial and error (trimming the design then testing

21%
to see if it works)
Adding cell structure (like honeycomb, foam, etc.)
20%
during manufacture

Adding internal lattices 18%

Other 3%

Q: What measures do you take to lightweight designs? Select all that apply.
The chart displays the percentage of respondents who selected each option.
Because respondents can select multiple options, the total can go above 100%.
N = 297

6
RESEARCH REPORT: LIGHTWEIGHTING WITH GENERATIVE DESIGN

WHAT ARE THE OBSTACLES TO

LIGHTWEIGHTING DESIGNS?

A large subset of our audience (46%) worry that lightweighting will make parts
weaker, leading to safety and liability issues.

Some (39%) don’t have the ability to manufacture a part that has been
lightweighted using generative design.

A third of our respondents note that lightweighting takes too much effort
(30%) or that they lack effective software tools (29%). 

Only 12% of respondents consider regulations for lightweighting to be a

hindrance.

46% 39% 30% 29% 12% 8%

Worry about Inability to It takes too Lack of Lightweighting Other

unsafe parts manufacture much effort effective regulations too
from too much light software tools severe
light weighted
weighting design

Q: What challenges do you face in lightweighting designs? Select all that apply.
The chart displays the percentage of respondents who selected each option.
Because respondents can select multiple options, the total can go above 100%.
N = 300

7
RESEARCH REPORT: LIGHTWEIGHTING WITH GENERATIVE DESIGN

Generative Design and

Topology Optimization
Software Usage

8
RESEARCH REPORT: LIGHTWEIGHTING WITH GENERATIVE DESIGN

ARE GENERATIVE DESIGN AND

TOPOLOGY OPTIMIZATION
TECHNOLOGIES BEING USED?

Despite the benefits of generative design and topology optimization

technology, 61% of survey takers still have not tried it.

The minority (38%) that has used generative design and topology optimization
technology marks an opportunity to educate users about the advantages of
topology optimization as a design tool.

38% 48% 13%

Yes No Not sure

Q: Have you ever used generative design and/or topology optimization technology?
The chart displays the percentage of respondents who selected each option.
Because respondents can select multiple options, the total can go above 100%.
N = 299

9
RESEARCH REPORT: LIGHTWEIGHTING WITH GENERATIVE DESIGN

WHAT DO USERS THINK ABOUT

GENERATIVE DESIGN SOFTWARE?

We asked respondents to share the extent to which they agree or disagree

with several statements about generative design. Their feedback indicates
real obstacles to using generative design software in the field.

•O
 ver half (57%) of respondents believe that the software is too expensive to
buy or use; only 9% disagreed.
•A
 large percentage (41%) of respondents are not able to incorporate the
generative design solution into their design and 39% find it too difficult. Only
20% don’t see this as an issue.
•T
 he majority (41%) of respondents are concerned that generative design
takes too long to set up and/or run. Only 27% are okay with the setup time.
•L
 ikewise, the majority (45%) also have trouble manufacturing their designs.
•W
 hen it comes to robust value, respondents were split—31% feel that the
software is not robust enough and 40% are unsure. Only 29% are satisfied.

The software is too expensive to 57% 34% 9%

buy or use (AVG: 3.7 out of 4)

Results are too difficult to

incorporate into the design 39% 41% 20%
(AVG: 3.3 out of 4)

Studies take too long to setup 41% 33% 27%

and/or run (AVG: 3.2 out of 4)

Results are not able to be 45% 30% 25%

manufactured (AVG: 3.2 out of 4)

Generative design software is

not robust enough for my use 31% 40% 29%
(AVG: 3 out of 4)

Results don’t look right

(incorrect, ugly, different) 32% 35% 34%
(AVG: 3 out of 4)

The software is too difficult to 29% 36% 35%

learn or use (AVG: 2.9 out of 4)

n Agree n Neutral n Disagree

Q: Use the scale to indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with the
following statements about generative design software.

10
RESEARCH REPORT: LIGHTWEIGHTING WITH GENERATIVE DESIGN

THE NEED TO USE ADDITIVE

MANUFACTURING HINDERING THE
USE OF GENERATIVE DESIGN

Anticipating that generatively designed parts required engineers to use

additive manufacturing, we asked them if additive manufacturing was
available to them.

We found that subtractive manufacturing still rules. 19% rely entirely on

subtractive methods and 34% rely on them mostly.

Just over a fifth of respondents use an even mix of subtractive and additive
manufacturing methods. 

A much smaller portion (3%) of our audience relies entirely on additive

manufacturing, and 7% use mostly additive with some subtractive
manufacturing. 

19% 34% 21% 7% 3%

Entirely Mostly An even mix of Mostly additive Entirely additive

subtractive subtractive subtractive and manufacturing, manufacturing
manufacturing manufacturing, additive with some
with some manufacturing subtractive
additive manufacturing
manufacturing

Q: What type of manufacturing do you use for your products? N = 280

11
RESEARCH REPORT: LIGHTWEIGHTING WITH GENERATIVE DESIGN

WHAT ARE THE POPULAR

APPLICATIONS FOR GENERATIVE DESIGN
AND/OR TOPOLOGY OPTIMIZATION?

Several software solutions are employed in the field. However, the top
5 include SOLIDWORKS Simulation (25%), Altair Inspire (22%), Autodesk
Generative Design (22%), CATIA Function Driven Generative Design (22%) and
ANSYS Mechanical (21%).

SOLIDWORKS Simulation 25%

CATIA Function Driven Generative Designer 22%

Altair Inspire 22%

Autodesk Generative Design 22%

ANSYS Mechanical 21%

Siemens Generative Design 17%

Altair OptiStruct 15%

PTC Creo Generative Design 15%

nTopology Element Free/Pro 13%

MSC Nastran/Patran 10%

ANSYS Discovery AIM 8%

SIMULIA Tosca 8%

Frustum Generate 7%

COMSOL Multiphysics Optimization 5%

Vanderplaats Research and Development 4%

GENESIS
MSC Apex Generative Design 4%

ParaMatters CogniCAD 3%

Other (please specify) 9%

Q: Which software have you used for generative design and/or topology optimization?
Select all that apply.
The chart displays the percentage of respondents who selected each option.
Because respondents can select multiple options, the total can go above 100%.
N = 110

12
RESEARCH REPORT: LIGHTWEIGHTING WITH GENERATIVE DESIGN

Generative Design
Practices

13
RESEARCH REPORT: LIGHTWEIGHTING WITH GENERATIVE DESIGN

USE OF GENERATIVE DESIGN

PREDICTED TO RISE

Will generative design technology be popular five years from now?

The majority (67%) of those surveyed believe that software usage will increase
over the next five years. A third believe that it will continue as-is, and only 3%
believe that generative design will decrease in the next five years.

67% 30% 3%

Use of generative design Use of generative design Use of generative design

will increase will remain the same will decrease

Q: Do you expect your organization’s use of generative design technology

to change in the next five years? N = 279

14
RESEARCH REPORT: LIGHTWEIGHTING WITH GENERATIVE DESIGN

WHAT TYPE OF ANALYSIS DO

ENGINEERS PREFER FOR DESIGN
OPTIMIZATION?

By and large, the vast majority (93%) of users prefer structural analysis, but
there are still those who rely on thermal (39%) and fluid (31%) methods of
analysis.

93% 39% 31% 4%

Structural Thermal Fluid Other

Q: What type of analysis will you use for your design optimization? Select all that
apply. N = 277

15
RESEARCH REPORT: LIGHTWEIGHTING WITH GENERATIVE DESIGN

CLOUD-BASED WORKFLOW STRATEGIES

GAINING POPULARITY

Are engineers relying more on cloud-based systems to streamline their

workflow? Our survey results point to mixed usage. Less than half (41%) of our
respondents use some mixture of cloud and local applications, and only 7%
have fully adopted cloud-based workflows.

That said, the majority (52%) are still loyal to their local applications.

52% 41% 7%

None, we exclusively use Some, we use a mixture of Most or all of our workflow
local applications cloud and local applications is cloud-based

Q: How much of your software workflow is cloud-based? N = 280

16
RESEARCH REPORT: LIGHTWEIGHTING WITH GENERATIVE DESIGN

Demographics

17
RESEARCH REPORT: LIGHTWEIGHTING WITH GENERATIVE DESIGN

INDUSTRIES REPRESENTED

Though respondents work in a diverse range of industries, the largest

industries represented here are Engineering Design or Simulation Services
(22%), Manufacturing (15%), Aerospace (9%), Automotive (9%), Education (8%),
Medical Equipment/Devices (4%) and Consumer Products/Electronics (4%).

29% of respondents were spread across various other industries. Industries

that had less than 10 respondents each included:
•E
 ach representing 3% of respondents: Heavy Equipment, Industrial Machine
Tools, Oil & Gas.
•E
 ach representing 2% of respondents: Communications, Construction.
•E
 ach representing 1% of respondents: Food & Beverage, Government,
Biotechnology, Mining.

22%

29% n Engineering Design or

Simulation Services
n Manufacturing
n Aerospace
n Automotive
n Education
n Medical Equipment /
15% Devices
4% n Consumer Products /
Electronics
4% n Other

8% 9%

9%

Q: What industry do you work in?. N = 301

18
RESEARCH REPORT: LIGHTWEIGHTING WITH GENERATIVE DESIGN

ORGANIZATION SIZE

The survey sample represented large and small organizations alike.

Our respondents worked primarily for larger organizations (41%) with 500+
employees. A smaller percentage represented companies with 101 – 500
employees (17%) and 51 – 100 employees (8%).

Several respondents worked for smaller firms employing 21 – 50 (10%) or

micro-firms with only 1 – 5 employees (14%) or 6 – 20 employees (11%).

14% 11% 10% 8% 17% 7% 34%

1-5 6-20 21-50 51-100 101-500 501-1,499 1,500+

employees employees employees employees employees employees employees

Q: What is the approximate size of your organization? N = 310

19
RESEARCH REPORT: LIGHTWEIGHTING WITH GENERATIVE DESIGN

GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION

Survey takers were split between a single facility (44%) and multiple facilities
(56%).

Of those who had multiple locations, some locations were spread across
multiple countries (39%) and others were domestically positioned within one
country (17%).

44% 17% 39%

We’re based in a single We have multiple locations We have multiple locations

location within one country across multiple countries

Q: How is your
organization positioned geographically? N = 298

20
RESEARCH REPORT: LIGHTWEIGHTING WITH GENERATIVE DESIGN

JOB ROLES REPRESENTED

The majority group included in this survey are Engineers (53%). Of those,
26% work as Analyst Engineers, 14% are Software Engineers, 5% are Senior
Engineers, 3% are Systems Engineers, 2% are Electrical Engineers, 1% are
Mechanical Engineers and 1% identify in other engineering categories.

There is good representation from those in specialist roles such as designers,

technicians and consultants (22%), management (19%) and academia (5%).

53%

Other
engineer 1%

Mechanical
Engineer 1%

Electrical
Engineer 2%

Systems
Engineer 3%

Senior
Engineer 5%

Software
Engineer 14%

Analyst
Engineer 26%

2%
22% 19% 5%

Engineers Specialists Management Academics Other

(i.e., Designer, (i.e., Executive, (i.e., Student or
Technician, Director, Teacher)
Consultant) Manager)

Q: What is your job role? N = 301

21
RESEARCH REPORT: LIGHTWEIGHTING WITH GENERATIVE DESIGN

WHAT ROLES DO OUR RESPONDENTS

TAKE ON IN THEIR ORGANIZATIONS?
The majority (48%) of our audience were end users who do not have
purchasing power.

A large portion were in a position to influence (40%) or directly recommend

(43%) new software purchases, and 39% research and test new software and
tools that get introduced to their organization.

Some (35%) make the actual purchasing decision.

48% 43% 40% 39% 35%

I am an end user I recommend I influence the I research I decide what

and use software purchase of new and test new software and
whatever software software and tools
software is given tools need to be
to me implemented

Q: What role do you play in your organization? Select all that apply.
The chart displays the percentage of respondents who selected each option.
Because respondents
can select multiple options, the total can go above 100%. N = 301

22
RESEARCH REPORT: LIGHTWEIGHTING WITH GENERATIVE DESIGN

CLOSING COMMENTS

We conducted this survey to determine how companies today are

thinking about and incorporating lightweighting into their designs. While
lightweighting is clearly a concern at large companies, we discovered that
engineers have encountered several obstacles that keep them from fully
embracing generative design for lightweighting.

Here are a few additional key takeaways from the survey:

•M
 ost (88%) are interested in reducing the weight of their products. The most
popular lightweighting methods include removing unnecessary geometry
or material (65%), switching to lighter materials (47%), setting weight limits in
the design specs (44%) and reducing mass by making the part smaller overall
(40%).
•A
 large subset of our audience (46%) worry that lightweighting will lead to
safety issues. More may be willing to use lightweighting if they can be certain
that their designs can be manufactured (39%), if the process were easier (30%)
or if they had better software tools (29%).
•T
 he need to use additive manufacturing to produce generative designs is
hindering the use of generative design. Most of our audience (53%) still relies
exclusively or in large part on subtractive manufacturing.
•S
 till, 67% of respondents indicate they are keeping an eye on generative
design for the future.

Engineering.com would like to thank the participants of this study. By sharing

their knowledge and allowing others to see how they compare, they have
enriched the entire engineering community.

Thanks for reading,

Roopinder Tara
Director of Content
engineering.com

This report is sponsored by Dassault Systèmes. Learn More about

CATIA Performance Driven Generative Design Solutions.

23