Topology optimization was developed as an advanced structural design methodology to generate

innovative lightweight and high-performance configurations that are difficult to obtain with conventional
ideas. Additive manufacturing is an advanced manufacturing technique building as-designed structures
via layer-by-layer joining material, providing an alternative pattern for complex components. The
integration of topology optimization and additive manufacturing can make the most of their advantages
and potentials, and has wide application prospects in modern manufacturing. This article reviews the
main content and applications of the research on the integration of topology optimization and additive
manufacturing in recent years, including multi-scale or hierarchical structural optimization design and
topology optimization considering additive manufacturing constraints. Meanwhile, some challenges of
structural design approaches for additive manufacturing are discussed, such as the performance
characterization and scale effects of additively manufactured lattice structures, the anisotropy and fatigue
performance of additively manufactured material, and additively manufactured functionally graded
material issues, etc. It is shown that in the research of topology optimization for additive manufacturing,
the integration of material, structure, process and performance is important to pursue high-performance,
multi-functional and lightweight production. This article provides a reference for further related research
and aerospace applications.

Topology optimization is an advanced structural design method which can obtain the optimal structure
configuration via reasonable material distribution satisfying specified load conditions, performance and
constraints. Compared to sizing and shape optimization, topology optimization is independent of the
initial configuration and has a broader design space. Consequently, it has been developed as a mainstream
structural design technique for high-performance, lightweight as well as multifunctional structures and
been widely used in aerospace, automotive, architecture etc. A typical example of topology optimization
solution is the leading edge droop nose ribs for Airbus 380, which achieved structural weight saving
design meeting all mechanical performance requirements. A typical topology optimization design of an
aircraft pylon, which satisfied stiffness, strength and weight requirements. Since Bendsøe and Kikuchi
proposed the seminal work, topology optimization has been developed rapidly. Apart from compliance-
based structural topology optimization, periodic microstructure topology optimization for prescribed
performance (e.g. negative Poisson’s ratio, extreme thermal expansion, etc.) heat conduction structural
topology optimization layout optimization of complex multi-component system, concurrent optimization
of microstructure and etc. have also attracted attentions of numerous researches.

Topology optimization has already been applied to static problems such as stiffness maximization [2],
stress minimization [3], and stress constraint problems [4,5]. It is also being actively studied for dynamic
problems such as the frequency response [6,7] and transient response [8] with dynamic compliance as the
objective function. To apply topology optimization to thermal deformation and stress, a thermo-elastic
model needs to be considered. For static problems, many efforts have already been reported for
minimizing deformation and stress constraints. However, these approaches cannot be applied to more
advanced designs because the variation of external and thermal loads over time cannot be considered in
static problems. Gao et al. [9] considered the thermo-elastic behavior of multi-materials and proposed a
method for reducing deformation by minimizing structural compliance through topology optimization. In
the density method for topology optimization, the structure is represented by the shading of the element
density inside the design domain, so the material properties are related to the element density. Gao et al.
adopted a new variable called a thermal stress coefficient and extended the problem from a single
material to multi-materials. Furthermore, the RAMP method [10] was shown to be more effective than the
SIMP method [11] in regularizing the material properties. Zhu et al. [12] dealt with minimizing the
structure compliance under temperature constraints for coupled thermal and structural problems.
Regarding other problems, Yamada et al. [13] addressed the design problem of thermal actuators via
topology optimization of compliant mechanisms assuming thermo-elastic behavior. Deaton et al. [14]
proposed a method for solving Topology optimization has already been applied to static problems such as
stiffness maximization [2], stress minimization [3], and stress constraint problems [4,5]. It is also being
actively studied for dynamic problems such as the frequency response [6,7] and transient response [8]
with dynamic compliance as the objective function. To apply topology optimization to thermal
deformation and stress, a thermo-elastic model needs to be considered. For static problems, many efforts
have already been reported for minimizing deformation and stress constraints. However, these approaches
cannot be applied to more advanced designs because the variation of external and thermal loads over time
cannot be considered in static problems. Gao et al. [9] considered the thermo-elastic behavior of multi-
materials and proposed a method for reducing deformation by minimizing structural compliance through
topology optimization. In the density method for topology optimization, the structure is represented by
the shading of the element density inside the design domain, so the material properties are related to the
element density. Gao et al. adopted a new variable called a thermal stress coefficient and extended the
problem from a single material to multi-materials. Furthermore, the RAMP method [10]was shown to be
more effective than the SIMP method [11] in regularizing the material properties. Zhu et al. [12] dealt
with minimizing the structure compliance under temperature constraints for coupled thermal and
structural problems. Regarding other problems, Yamada et al. [13] addressed the design problem of
thermal actuators via topology optimization of compliant mechanisms assuming thermo-elastic behavior.
Deaton et al. [14] proposed a method for solving thermo-elastic problems considering stress constraints.
They considered the maximum stress constraint problem for finding a single material configuration
assuming a temperature difference from the uniform stress-free temperature in the design domain. A
constraint function for stress was defined based on the p-norm concept, and the effectiveness of the qp-
reduction method [15,16] at stress relaxation to eliminate singularities in the no-material domain was
demonstrated. Takezawa et al. [17] proposed a method for solving thermo-structural coupled problems
considering stress and heat transfer constraints. For the stress constraint, they applied the same qp-
reduction method as in Deaton et al. However, the treatment of stress as an evaluation function in the
above optimization problems has only been considered for a single material, and no studies have
considered multi-materials. Other stress relaxation methods have been proposed to eliminate the
singularity phenomenon, such as the epsilon relaxation method [18]. However, all of these assume a
single material, and the stresses evaluated by dynamic structural analysis and stress constraint functions
differ in the grayscale domain. The case of no stress relaxation is assumed to lead to excessive grayscale,
so the cause of this problem and its solution must still be explored. In topology optimization of density
methods, grayscale issues are well known. Therefore, there are several studies on grayscale removal
methods. Borrvall and Petersson [19] have proposed Explicit penalization. This method considers a
penalty function that has only grayscale values in the objective function, and removes grayscale by
including this function and minimizing it. Alternatively, Sigmund and Maute [20] have introduced
projection schemes. In addition to filtering the design variables, this approach uses the heaviside
projection to sharply represent the optimal configuration and remove grayscale. A new initiative is the
study of robust topology optimization in thermo-elastic models. Alacoque et al. [21] applied the robust
topology optimization to determine the microstructure of a multi-material problem and showed
computational examples such as negative thermal expansion materials. Similarly, Li et al. [22] proposed a
design method for meta-materials with negative thermal expansion, considering the uncertainty of
material properties. Compared with static problems, few studies have considered applying topology
optimization to thermo-elastic models of dynamic problems, and no studies have considered stress as an
evaluation function. Yang et al. [23,24] dealt with a dynamic compliance minimization problem that
considered a two-phase material for the equation of motion expanded in the frequency domain. They
showed that the optimization results for the soft structure differed when the effect of loading was
considered. However, their study was limited in that it focused on the frequency response and only
considered harmonic vibration loads such as sin(t), so their approach cannot be applied to loads with
arbitrary waveforms. Particularly, the thermal load in their numerical example was time-invariant. In
actual design problems, loads and thermal loads often have complex waveforms other than harmonic
vibration. Therefore, such methods need to be extended to consider loads and thermal loads with arbitrary
time-dependent profiles. Topology optimization can be applied to transient response problems with
arbitrary load profiles. This method is highly versatile because it can be applied to load profiles that
cannot be dealt with by frequency response problems; the equations of motion are directly solved by
using the step-by-step integration method. However, this leads to an optimization problem that depends
on all deformation histories considered in the analysis, which complicates the sensitivity analysis required
to obtain the structure. Two sensitivity analysis methods have been proposed: differentiate-then-discretize
approach [8] and discretize-then-differentiate approach [25]. Generally, transient response analysis
requires discretization in the time and space domains. The differentiate-then-discretize approach applies a
sensitivity analysis on the equations of motion before the discretization in the time domain. By contrast,
the discretize-then-differentiate approach applies the sensitivity analysis on the equations of motion after
discretization in the time domain. Jacob et al. [26] discussed the difference between the two approaches
for transient response problems. Particularly, they compared the accuracies of the two sensitivity analyses
with a one dimensional model. They showed that the discretize-then-differentiate approach is more
accurate than the differentiate-then-discretize approach because the equations of motion are discretized in
the time domain, and the resulting equations are the same as those solved in the numerical analysis. In
particular, it is advantageous in that it can ensure the accuracy of sensitivity even when the time
increment size is set large. As a result, the number of analysis steps can be reduced when performing
analysis on long time scales, which is highly effective from the perspective of reducing the computational
cost. As an application of topology optimization to actual transient response problems, Zhao et al. [27]
discussed minimizing deformation of a linearly elastic model by using the dynamic compliance and strain
energy as objective functions. They proposed setting the objective function by applying the KS function
and p-norm to minimize the maximum displacement occurring at all times. However, the previous studies
focused on displacements, and no studies have considered stress reduction or thermo-elastic behavior.
Therefore, topology optimization for transient response problems needs to be expanded in scope to reduce
both deformation and stress considering thermo-elastic behavior. In this study, we developed a
methodology for topology optimization of a transient response problem considering thermo-elastic
behavior, which is formulated as a multi-objective optimization problem to minimize the deformation and
maximum stress. Particularly, we developed an objective function for multi-objective optimization and
addressed stress minimization for two-phase materials, which has not yet been considered. We conducted
a sensitivity analysis to ensure that the optimized structure accurately considers the time-varying behavior
of the thermo-elastic model. Section 2 discusses the thermo-elastic constitutive law and governing
equations considered in the transient response analysis. Section 3 describes the setup for topology
optimization of two-phase materials using the density method. Section 4 defines the evaluation functions
and sets up the multi-objective optimization problem of minimizing both deformation and stress. Section
5 describes the sensitivity analysis of the optimization problem defined in Section 4. Section 6 validates
the sensitivity analysis based on values obtained from the finite difference method as a benchmark.
Sections 7 and 8 presents several numerical examples to demonstrate that the proposed method can
produce appropriate optimization results. Section 9 summarizes the conclusions and future work.

One of the significant challenges regarding the design of mechanical components is controlling the
characteristics of vibration. A design method based on experiments and empirical rules does not always
provide a structure with the desired vibration characteristics because these characteristics are determined
by the relationship between the stiffness and weight of the structural member. In addition, a large number
of deformations and rotations may be observed in the members. Finite deformation theory must be
applied in these cases; however, it is difficult to derive an optimal structure using this technique. In recent
years, structural optimization methods, based on numerical analysis and optimization mathematics, have
been used to derive optimal designs of various structures. Topology optimization, which is a structural
optimization method, has recently been gaining attention. It differs from parametric and shape
optimization techniques because it provides a high degree of freedom in its design by allowing structural
changes such as creation of new holes and shape boundaries. Most studies on topology optimization that
are based on the finite deformation theory focus on static problems.1,2 Consequently, there are limited
studies on dynamic problems, and their results are necessary to derive vibration control structures. Diaz et
al.3 and Ma et al.4 used topology optimization methods to control the natural frequency of an object and
attempted to solve a natural frequency maximization problem. However, the application of these methods
in problems containing eigenfrequencies is limited because an optimal structure that corresponds to the
time history response for a given dynamic load cannot be obtained. Ma et al.5 and Takezawa et al.6
reported on topology optimization for frequency response problems. In the frequency response problem,
the equations of motion are solved by expanding them in the frequency domain, and the optimization can
take into account the effect of vibration. However, the disadvantage is that it cannot handle loads with
arbitrary waveforms because it can only handle the external vibration forces of harmonic vibration loads.
The current study proposes the application of a topology optimization method for dynamic problems
through a step-by-step integration method. The equations of motion are directly solved by adding an
inertia term to the static equations of equilibrium, which allows the user to generate the time history
response of any dynamic load. Further, the same calculation scheme can be applied to nonlinear
problems, such as material constitutive laws and finite deformation problems, which are not solved by
using the linear elastic model. However, this method complicates the sensitivity analysis of the objective
function applied to the design variables, which is essential for the derivation of the optimal structure. The
optimization problem in the proposed technique is dependent on the deformation at all instants because
deformation in the current state depends on deformation in the previous state. Thus, this technique is a
complex formulation and requires a sensitivity analysis to consider the dependence of the deformation
state at all instants. There are only a few studies that have carried out a sensitivity analysis of dynamic
problems. Two approaches currently exist for performing a sensitivity analysis of a dynamic problem
based on topology optimization, namely, the differentiate-then-discretize approach7,8 and the discretize-
then-differentiate approach,8 both of which are based on the step-by-step integration method. The
difference between these two approaches lies in their procedures. In the differentiate-then-discretize
method, the differential calculation of the objective function obtained by the design variables is
performed first, followed by the discretization of the equations of motion. The discretized equations of
motion contain approximation errors associated with discretization in the direction of time, resulting in
sensitivity errors. The sensitivity is then discretized in the time direction and calculated numerically.
However, due to the low accuracy of this method, Jakob et al.8 obtained a large error when using this
technique. On the other hand, the discretize-then-differentiate approach uses equations of motion that are
already discretized in the time direction, and partial differentiation of the objective function is performed
after. The accuracy of the proposed sensitivity analysis method for the linear elastic model is verified by
using the discretize-then-differentiate approach.8 This is because the sensitivity analysis is performed by
using the discretized equations of motion in the temporal direction, which are perfectly consistent with
those considered in the discretize-then-differentiate approach. Thus, it is possible to perform a sensitivity
analysis that accurately considers the effects of the analysis results and accurately reports the sensitivity.
Sensitivity analysis methods for viscoplastic9 models have also been discussed for finite deformation
problems. These studies assume an equation of motion wherein the unknowns are expressed in terms of
acceleration by using the approximate equations of displacement and velocity introduced in Newmark’s 𝛽
method for discretization in the time direction. Since the values of displacement are unknown in the
general constitutive material law, expressing the displacement values in the constitutive law in terms of
acceleration is necessary. However, this method is not applicable for problems involving explicit
separation of displacement values, such as the application of the linear elastic model in calculating
internal forces. The adjoint variable method is generally applied in the sensitivity analysis of topology
optimization. It is necessary to consider the responses obtained at all instants as a single adjoint variable
because the unknown quantity is one of the acceleration values introduced in the adjoint variable method.
Thus, the derived sensitivity analysis equation is very complex and difficult to implement in an
optimization calculation system. Jakob et al.8 presented a method to reduce the equation complexity by
introducing multiple adjoint variables using three equations. These include the equation of motion and the
approximate equations for displacement and velocity obtained from the application of Newmark’s 𝛽
method wherein acceleration is the unknown quantity, independent of each other. Since sensitivity can be
calculated from the equations of the two time steps i and i–1, the coupling of several adjoint variables
simplifies the equation expansion. However, as mentioned above, the equation of motion considers
acceleration as an unknown quantity and deviates from the material constitutive law, which is defined as a
function of displacement. Thus, the current study discusses only those linear elastic materials for which
the displacement can be explicitly separated while calculating the internal forces. The current study
discusses a topology optimization method for dynamic problems based on the finite deformation theory
for the equations of motion by using the step-by-step integration method. This technique allows us to
develop a vibration control structure that accounts for responses to arbitrary dynamic loads. A generalized
sensitivity analysis method involving time discretization by using Newmark’s 𝛽 method for the unknown
values of displacement is proposed, assuming an extension to the general material constitutive laws. We
have adopted the discretize-then-differentiate approach to obtain accurate sensitivity values and
introduced multiple adjoint variables, based on the research of Jakob et al.,8 to construct a simple
mechanical formula expansion method. In the topology optimization of dynamic problems, verification of
the accuracy of the analytical model and the analysis has been discussed because of its impact on the
response of the structure. For example, Hoorickx et al.10 pointed out that geometric imperfections have a
significant impact on the optimal structural performance in a two-dimensional (2D) elastic wave barrier
problem using the density method. They investigated the effect of the projection filter threshold on the
binarization of the optimization results. In the density method, there is always a gray scale at the
boundary where the solid region switches to the void region. Since the projection filter threshold11 is
related to determining the void region, changing the value will affect the thickness of the component.
Therefore, analyses with different projection filter thresholds, which binarizes the topology, are
conducted to investigate the effect on the performance of the optimal structure. Elsewhere, Yun et al.12
discussed the effect of the fineness of the time step on the displacement for a one-dimensional model
considering viscoelastic materials. Additionally, Yun et al.13 investigated the effect of the fineness of the
mesh number of the optimization target on the optimization results for the multi-scale topology
optimization of viscoelastic materials in 2D problems. In this study, it is shown that when the number of
elements in the macro-structure is varied, the optimization results of the micro-structure are different.
This indicates that the fineness of the mesh has an impact on the response of the macro-structure.
Additionally, not only the mesh fineness but also the effect of time tick width on the response of the
macro-structure is investigated. The difference in the amount of displacement when different time
increments are considered is confirmed. This suggests the possibility that the fineness of the analytical
mesh and the size of the time tick width affect the optimization results.

The remainder of the manuscript is organized as follows. We define the hyperelastic constitutive laws that
are the subject of this study in Section 2. In Section 3, the equations of motion of the dynamic problem
are introduced, and the method of discretization in the time direction is described by using Newmark’s 𝛽
method by considering displacement to be the unknown quantity. In Section 4, the equations of motion
are linearized for a nonlinear structural analysis by using the finite deformation theory. Section 5 defines
the design variables necessary for the structural representation of the topology optimization of the
problem. Section 6 presents the problem setting for the topology optimization of the dynamic problem.
The specific objective function for deriving the optimal structure that minimizes the displacement as a
vibration control structure is first set up, followed by the definition of the general optimization problem.
In Section 7, the analytical sensitivity required for the topology optimization of the problem is derived by
proposing a sensitivity analysis method for the problem defined in Section 6. In Section 8, the accuracy of
the derived sensitivities is verified. In Section 9, the validity and effectiveness of the proposed method are
verified by presenting an optimization problem and deriving its actual optimal structure. Additionally, the
accuracy of the analytical model and the setting of appropriate interpolation functions for material
properties, which are necessary for topology optimization of dynamic problems, are discussed. The
concluding remarks are presented in Section 10. of the time tick width affect the optimization results. The
remainder of the manuscript is organized as follows. We define the hyperelastic constitutive laws that are
the subject of this study in Section 2. In Section 3, the equations of motion of the dynamic problem are
introduced, and the method of discretization in the time direction is described by using Newmark’s 𝛽
method by considering displacement to be the unknown quantity. In Section 4, the equations of motion
are linearized for a nonlinear structural analysis by using the finite deformation theory. Section 5 defines
the design variables necessary for the structural representation of the topology optimization of the
problem. Section 6 presents the problem setting for the topology optimization of the dynamic problem.
The specific objective function for deriving the optimal structure that minimizes the displacement as a
vibration control structure is first set up, followed by the definition of the general optimization problem.
In Section 7, the analytical sensitivity required for the topology optimization of the problem is derived by
proposing a sensitivity analysis method for the problem defined in Section 6. In Section 8, the accuracy of
the derived sensitivities is verified. In Section 9, the validity and effectiveness of the proposed method are
verified by presenting an optimization problem and deriving its actual optimal structure. Additionally, the
accuracy of the analytical model and the setting of appropriate interpolation functions for material
properties, which are necessary for topology optimization of dynamic problems, are discussed. The
concluding remarks are presented in Section 10. of the time tick width affect the optimization results. The
remainder of the manuscript is organized as follows. We define the hyperelastic constitutive laws that are
the subject of this study in Section 2. In Section 3, the equations of motion of the dynamic problem are
introduced, and the method of discretization in the time direction is described by using Newmark’s 𝛽
method by considering displacement to be the unknown quantity. In Section 4, the equations of motion
are linearized for a nonlinear structural analysis by using the finite deformation theory. Section 5 defines
the design variables necessary for the structural representation of the topology optimization of the
problem. Section 6 presents the problem setting for the topology optimization of the dynamic problem.
The specific objective function for deriving the optimal structure that minimizes the displacement as a
vibration control structure is first set up, followed by the definition of the general optimization problem.
In Section 7, the analytical sensitivity required for the topology optimization of the problem is derived by
proposing a sensitivity analysis method for the problem defined in Section 6. In Section 8, the accuracy of
the derived sensitivities is verified. In Section 9 the validity and effectiveness of the proposed method are
verified by presenting an optimization problem and deriving its actual optimal structure. Additionally, the
accuracy of the analytical model and the setting of appropriate interpolation functions for material
properties, which are necessary for topology optimization of dynamic problems, are discussed. The
concluding remarks are presented in Section 10. of the time tick width affect the optimization results. The
remainder of the manuscript is organized as follows. We define the hyperelastic constitutive laws that are
the subject of this study in Section 2. In Section 3, the equations of motion of the dynamic problem are
introduced, and the method of discretization in the time direction is described by using Newmark’s 𝛽
method by considering displacement to be the unknown quantity. In Section 4, the equations of motion
are linearized for a nonlinear structural analysis by using the finite deformation theory. Section 5 defines
the design variables necessary for the structural representation of the topology optimization of the
problem. Section 6 presents the problem setting for the topology optimization of the dynamic problem.
The specific objective function for deriving the optimal structure that minimizes the displacement as a
vibration control structure is first set up, followed by the definition of the general optimization problem.
In Section 7, the analytical sensitivity required for the topology optimization of the problem is derived by
proposing a sensitivity analysis method for the problem defined in Section 6. In Section 8, the accuracy of
the derived sensitivities is verified. In Section 9, the validity and effectiveness of the proposed method are
verified by presenting an optimization problem and deriving its actual optimal structure. Additionally, the
accuracy of the analytical model and the setting of appropriate interpolation functions for material
properties, which are necessary for topology optimization of dynamic problems, are discussed. The
concluding remarks are presented in Section 10. of the time tick width affect the optimization results. The
remainder of the manuscript is organized as follows. We define the hyperelastic constitutive laws that are
the subject of this study in Section 2. In Section 3, the equations of motion of the dynamic problem are
introduced, and the method of discretization in the time direction is described by using Newmark’s 𝛽
method by considering displacement to be the unknown quantity. In Section 4, the equations of motion
are linearized for a nonlinear structural analysis by using the finite deformation theory. Section 5 defines
the design variables necessary for the structural representation of the topology optimization of the
problem. Section 6 presents the problem setting for the topology optimization of the dynamic problem.
The specific objective function for deriving the optimal structure that minimizes the displacement as a
vibration control structure is first set up, followed by the definition of the general optimization problem.
In Section 7, the analytical sensitivity required for the topology optimization of the problem is derived by
proposing a sensitivity analysis method for the problem defined in Section 6. In Section 8, the accuracy of
the derived sensitivities is verified. In Section 9, the validity and effectiveness of the proposed method are
verified by presenting an optimization problem and deriving its actual optimal structure. Additionally, the
accuracy of the analytical model and the setting of appropriate interpolation functions for material
properties, which are necessary for topology optimization of dynamic problems, are discussed. The
concluding remarks are presented in Section 10. of the time tick width affect the optimization results. The
remainder of the manuscript is organized as follows. We define the hyperelastic constitutive laws that are
the subject of this study in Section 2. In Section 3, the equations of motion of the dynamic problem are
introduced, and the method of discretization in the time direction is described by using Newmark’s 𝛽
method by considering displacement to be the unknown quantity. In Section 4, the equations of motion
are linearized for a nonlinear structural analysis by using the finite deformation theory. Section 5 defines
the design variables necessary for the structural representation of the topology optimization of the
problem. Section 6 presents the problem setting for the topology optimization of the dynamic problem.
The specific objective function for deriving the optimal structure that minimizes the displacement as a
vibration control structure is first set up, followed by the definition of the general optimization problem.
In Section 7, the analytical sensitivity required for the topology optimization of the problem is derived by
proposing a sensitivity analysis method for the problem defined in Section 6. In Section 8, the accuracy of
the derived sensitivities is verified. In Section 9, the validity and effectiveness of the proposed method are
verified by presenting an optimization problem and deriving its actual optimal structure. Additionally, the
accuracy of the analytical model and the setting of appropriate interpolation functions for material
properties, which are necessary for topology optimization of dynamic problems, are discussed. The
concluding remarks are presented in Section 10.