Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Short TRIZ Workshop for the University of the Philippines

1,782 views

Published on

Published in: Business
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,782
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
16
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
94
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Not known to be repeatable How many different possible solutions will work, which one is better if you don’t know of other approaches to solving the problem We look at problems and the potential solutions the same way we always have, with the same tools that we have always had. Using the same hammer in the tool box is not always appropriate, sometimes a jewelers screwdriver is needed. Paradigms, Habits, (NIH mentality) Past Success, Rewards & Punishments Self Talk – “I am not that creative” “ Don’t go out of scope” “ Stay in your own turf” Intel hires bright people but there are very few Einstein's in the world, even at Intel. Ordinary in one field, Innovative in another Difficult for one person to be expert in many areas 5. One grand idea mind set A project will only produce one correct solution Don’t exceed the local budget If it looks like it will work, make it work Get on to the next problem
  • “TRIZ” is the acronym for the Russian terms " Teorijz Rezhenija Izobretatel'skich Zadach .” when translated into English equates to “Theory of Inventive Problem Solving.” A ll innovations emerge from the application of a very small number of inventive principles and strategies. T echnology evolution trends are highly predictable. T he strongest solutions transform the unwanted or harmful elements of a system into useful resources. T he strongest solutions also actively seek out and destroy the conflicts and trade-offs most design practices assume to be fundamental.
  • The Theory of Inventive Problem Solving is a powerful tool that has been developed over the last 50 years in the former Soviet Union. It is a structured methodology for a directed development of new products and processes, thereby guiding technological evolution. Altshuller’s TRIZ research began with the hypothesis that there had to be and are universal principles of invention that are the basis for creative innovations that advance technology, and that if these principles could be identified and codified, they could be taught to people to make the process of invention more predictable. TRIZ was developed to provide the innovator with reliable and repeatable results -results that do not depend on personal creative ability or psychological techniques such as brainstorming. TRIZ relies on proven knowledge that has been applied time and again throughout mankind’s history.
  • © 2002 Ellen Domb. PQR Group +1 (909) 949 0857 Intel is using this by permission to the course content owner Richard Platt The key findings of TRIZ research are that: A ll innovations emerge from the application of a very small number of inventive principles and strategies. T echnology evolution trends are highly predictable. T he strongest solutions transform the unwanted or harmful elements of a system into useful resources. T he strongest solutions also actively seek out and destroy the conflicts and trade-offs most design practices assume to be fundamental. TRIZ offers users access to the knowledge and experiences of the world's finest inventive minds. It is intended to complement and add structure to our natural creativity rather than replace it. TRIZ can be used in a number of different ways. An overall process enables users to systematically define and then solve any given problem or opportunity situation. Some users will rigorously apply this process. Others are happier extracting individual elements from the overall structure and using those. Although TRIZ is easily the most exhaustive creativity aid ever assembled, it does contain some gaps and holes. The overall aim of these training sessions has been to construct a problem definition and solving process that works for any situation users may care to throw at it - whether that be technical or non-technical, simple or complex, highly constrained or clean-sheet, step change innovation or incremental improvement, or focused on products, processes or services. TRIZ effectively strips away all boundaries between different scientific, engineering and creative discipline and its effectiveness has been proved across a broad spectrum of fields and problem types. TRIZ is both simple and complex. To learn and gather a working knowledge of the whole structure will probably take six months. Some people are prepared to make this investment, and others are not. Those that are not usually take great comfort from the fact that they will be able to learn and realize significant benefit from just a short exposure to individual elements of the overall structure. In many instances these benefits are enough. TRIZ is different to most other creativity aids, and quite appear a little unnatural at first. Here are some of the things that may help how you think about TRIZ and the way you will use it:
  • © 2002 Ellen Domb. PQR Group +1 (909) 949 0857 Intel is using this by permission to the course content owner Richard Platt 1. Problems and solutions were repeated across industries and sciences 2. Patterns of technical evolution were repeated across industries and sciences 3. Innovations used scientific effects outside the field where they were originally developed. To date over 3.0million patents worldwide have been analyzed to discover the patterns that predict breakthrough solutions to technical problems. This new science of creativity is based on the study of the patterns of problems and solutions, and is not dependent on the spontaneous creativity of individuals or groups. Much of the practice of TRIZ consists of learning these repeating patterns of problems-solutions and patterns of technical evolution, and methods of using scientific effects, and applying the general TRIZ patterns to the specific situation that has confronted technology developers, engineers, strategists and product architects alike.
  • © 2002 Ellen Domb. PQR Group +1 (909) 949 0857 Intel is using this by permission to content owner. Richard Platt Genrich Saulovich Altshuller developed this method with his colleagues, where they used it extensively from the late 1940’s through the late 1980’s. Genrich Altshuller, born on October 15th 1926, in Tashkent in the former USSR, began his career in the Russian Navy as a lieutenant in the patent department of the Caspian Sea Military Navy. Which is where he had concluded that there had to be a pattern and process for problem solving instead of the typical time-consuming trial and error approach. Altshuller was really the first known person that refused to embrace an unreliable, unrepeatable, and personality-dependent psychological approach to creativity. He reasoned that knowledge about inventions could be extracted, compiled and generalized in such a way that it was easily accessible by inventors in any area. This really was the birthing of the 1st known innovation knowledge base . It actually didn’t begin to gain acceptance until 1968 when he managed to get an audience at the Russian patent organization, VOIR, (All Union Society of Inventors Innovators), to review this methodology. It was officially adopted whereupon he and his collaborators began teaching this technique to scientists, engineers, inventors and a host of others on how to use the 40 principles and the contradiction matrix that were the original basis of TRIZ. After the fall of the former USSR in 1989, TRIZ migrated to the West where many consultants in the field of technology development began to adopt it. It was also at this time that the Russian TRIZ Association was established and Altshuller was named as its president, until his death on September 24th 1998. TRIZ development in the Soviet Union moved underground after Altshuller was imprisoned in 1950 for his "heretical" work, actually caused by making the naïve mistake of writing a letter to comrade Stalin criticizing the lack of innovation and ignorance in the process of inventing in the Soviet Union. Mr. Altshuller was later released from prison in 1955, a year and half after Stalin had died, and returned to Baku where he lived until he eventually moved to Petrozavodsk, in Karelia. During that period from 1955 to 1998 he refined the development of TRIZ, and its adjunct tools for forecasting technology known as ARIZ, (Algorithm for the Solution of Inventive Problems). n use in Finland, US, Canada, Israel, Germany, Sweden, Norway, Italy, Australia, Japan, UK, Mexico, Russia, and more
  • Ideality: Altshuller identified a trend in which systems always evolve towards increasing 'ideality' and that this evolution process takes place through a series of evolutionary S-curve characteristics. A key finding of TRIZ is that the steps denoting a shift from one S-curve to the next are predictable. A number of underlying technology evolution trends consistent with the ideality concept have been identified during the course of research on the global patent database. Used as a problem definition tool, the ideality part of TRIZ encourages problem solvers to break out of the traditional 'start from the current situation' type of thinking, and start instead from what is described as the Ideal Final Result (IFR). The simple definition of IFR is that the solution contains all of the benefits and none of the costs or 'harms' (environmental impact, adverse side-effects, etc). Although there are many instances where systems have been seen to evolve all the way to their Ideal Final Result, many have not. The method gets users to think about these situations by working back from the IFR to something which is practicably realizable. Contradictions: TRIZ researchers have identified the fact that the world's strongest inventions have emerged from situations in which the inventor has successfully sought to avoid the conventional trade-offs that most designers take for granted. More importantly they have offered systematic tools through which problem solvers can tap into and use the strategies employed by such inventors. The most commonly applied tool in this regard is the Contradiction Matrix - a39x39 matrix containing the three or four most likely strategies for solving design problems involving the 1482 most common contradiction types. Probably the most important philosophical aspect of the contradiction part of TRIZ is that, given there are ways of 'eliminating' contradictions', designers should actively look for them during the design process. Use of resources: The Resources part of TRIZ relates to the unprecedented emphasis placed on the maximization of use of everything contained within a system. In TRIZ terms, a resource is anything in the system which is not being used to its maximum potential. TRIZ demands an aggressive and seemingly relentless pursuit of things in (and around) a system which are not being used to their absolute maximum potential. Discovery of such resources then reveals opportunities through which the design of a system may be improved. In addition to this relentless pursuit of resources, TRIZ demands that the search for resources also take due account of negative as well as the traditionally positive resources in a system. Thus the pressures and forces we typically attempt to fight when we are designing systems, are actually resources. Patterns of Evolution: The 5 most useful patterns of evolution are the following: 1. Uneven evolution of the parts and features of the system. 2. Transition to the macro level or incorporation to the larger system of higher level. 3. Transition to the micro level or the segmentation of the system into smaller parts. 4. Increasing the interactions between systems. 5. Expansion and convolution of systems Functionality: Although the functionality aspects of TRIZ owe a significant debt to the pioneering work done on Value Engineering, the method of defining and using functionality data is markedly different; sufficient at the very least to merit discussion as a distinct paradigm shift in thinking relative to traditional occidental thought processes. Three aspects are worthy of particular note:
  • NOTE TO REMEMBER: The Ideal Final Result is critical: One for base-lining what the best design “could be” but also it helps to begin the solution provider with the initial map for functional analysis that we will touch on more in later sections and specifically in the software tools. Engineering is really all about functions. The main purpose of a technical system is to satisfy one or more functions. The result is a "form:" a technical design (technical system) that satisfies the required function(s). Architects know that "Form follows function." The use of the word "function" implies that the technical system "does" something. The engineer-designer's task is to conceive and build the form (i.e., the design) so that (1) each function works reliably, and (2) the design as a whole is perceived by its user (customer) as offering "value." It is important to know what function to work on. Towards this purpose, the approach called "functional analysis" or "functional cost analysis" is important. Functional analysis is an approach that has been successfully employed as a part of value analysis and value engineering. The "value" of a technical system lies in (1) its ability to satisfy required functions at a high level of reliability, and (2) its price (cost). From an organizational point of view, this means that the organization's technical challenge is to assure reliable functions at minimal costs. Total cost decomposes into the costs of each of the individual parts. To increase the value offered to customers, parts are eliminated or "pruned," without eliminating their required functions. If a specific part is pruned, then there may be another part, or sub-system, or system, that can satisfy the function of the part being pruned. Exploring pruning possibilities by using functional notations described in 3 above, is an important aspect of applying functional analysis to creative problem solving.
  • © 2002 Ellen Domb. PQR Group +1 (909) 949 0857 Intel is using this by permission to the course content owner Richard Platt One of the evolutionary patterns discovered by Altshuller can be stated as follows: Technological systems evolve in the direction of increasing ideality. In other words, systems evolve toward greater efficiency and effectiveness. The key to the ideality approach is to use the things that already exist in and around the system that we are attempting to “fix”. If these things already exist, then we don’t have to purchase them, and –AHA! – we have solved the problem without incurring additional cost. And since cost is a harmful factor, we have moved toward a more ideal system. In TRIZ terms, these things are referred to as RESOURCES. Hence the reason why will touch on systems thinking and analysis later on in this presentation. We know, however, that technological perfection is rarely achieved – there are always some “less than ideal” functions to be contended with. We can therefore derive a more practical definition from the Ideality formula. Begin drawing what the IFR would look like, use PowerPoint it’s what we use here @ Intel. Modify it when a solution has been identified, the T/O report generator is your working document, use what you can out of it and then use your slides to convey and convince. It will also likely be the best way in which you are able to communicate in the most clear way as possible to many audiences like your manager, other engineer’s, the instructor, etc.. This will help you sell the idea!!!! This is very important here @ Intel.
  • There are 40 inventive principles behind all inventive problems (problems that have technical conflicts). When "applied" to the important elements or objects of a technical system, these inventive principles solve complex problems, and great new designs are achieved. Altschuller and his associates discovered, one by one, the 40 basic principles that make the transition from problem to solution possible. They did this by examining the global patent collection. The list of the 40 inventive principles are listed here:
  • Over the period 1946 and into the 1970's, the Russians had been examining the global patent collection with several aims in mind, one of which was to "universalize the language of engineering parameters and characteristics used to address the important attributes of a technical system." The result was a listing of "39 standard features." Three engineers or scientists might describe a particular technical conflict using quite different words - and all three descriptions could be entirely correct. Genrikh Altschuller, however, posed the question: "Can all technical conflicts be boiled down (or condensed) to only a few, universal technical conflicts?" In other words, can all possible technical conflicts in the world be categorized into a limited number of "universal" conflicts, expressed in a "universal" parametric language? The answer to this question is "Yes!" Altschuller and his associates completed the Herculean task of establishing the minimum number of standard technical features that would, as a group, serve as category-titles for all possible engineering parameters. These he called the "39 standard features," and they are listed here: It behooves the conceptual engineer or designer or inventor to learn the 39 standard features well, and to practice categorizing ordinary parameters or characteristics into standard features.
  • Altshuller’s research revealed that Inventors through the ages had been employing a relatively small set of techniques to resolve contradictions, regardless of the industry or application in which they worked. From that Altshuller identified 40 Inventive Principles, which we’ll get to in a few slides.
  • © 2002 Ellen Domb. PQR Group +1 (909) 949 0857 Intel is using this by permission to content owner. What is the main weapon against competitors? What is the most critical success factor in your business? The answer is a company’s ability to innovate. Innovation is the ability to generate highly creative solutions to previously unsolved problems, and to bring those ideas to a point where they ARE implemented. Innovation can enable the achievement and maintaining a commanding position in the marketplace. This capability positions a company for controlled growth and profitability. Every business needs a powerful and organized method for systematically eliminating technological roadblocks related to the development and use of products. The very life of the corporation that you work for depends on it. Before moving on, you are urged to keep in mind that TRIZ is easy to learn, but requires on-going familiarity. If committed to the process, you will have little problem learning it. However as with any newly acquired language or skill, if you do not apply what you have learned on a regular basis, your ability to successfully benefit from your knowledge will diminish. As you proceed through the course, it is recommended that you “internalize” what you are learning by constantly looking for opportunities to fit TRIZ into your work & lives. This will provide you with the ROI for your time spent learning
  • Please refer to the 2 articles on TRIZ (a.k.a. TIPS in Engineering Education) that are written by Timothy G. Clapp PhD., PE Professor of Textiles North Carolina State University and Michael S. Slocum, PhD Adjunct Assistant Professor North Carolina University
  • © 2002 Ellen Domb. PQR Group +1 (909) 949 0857 Intel is using this by permission to the course content owner Richard Platt Review Ideality Ratio: this is not a quantifiable #, but is instead a qualitative assessment The costs and harmful effects denominator includes all factors associated with the “price’ of a systems functionality; the cost of the system, the space it occupies, the noise it emits, the energy it consumes, the resources needed to maintain it, etc… The ideal system is one that contains no harmful functions, or is a system that doesn’t exist, but whose functions are still performed. Perfection!! Ideality is dependant on point-of-view Look for where the benefit is, where is the harm & continue to keep getting rid of the harms. You are to use your own metrics here. Costs is a self explanatory value. Some examples of Benefit - Level of functionality is the best, performance, speed, etc.. Conduct an anti-FMEA, called a SMEA (Success Mode Effects Analysis) This is not a real course @ Intel, but you take an FMEA, add an additional page, formatted the same as the FMEA part and then begin evaluating the parts of the system that do work correctly. Some examples of Harm – safety impact, weight, failure mode. Data can also be derived from an FMEA, highly recommended. The Ideality equation is important since it helps us to break down psychological inertia because it impels us to set our sights on the ultimate goal of problem solving. Nothing changes, yet the problem is resolved. An extreme statement, in practice we can never achieve this ideal state. But this helps to push us toward innovative solutions. Many of us in the TRIZ community believe that if more managers focused on the hierarchy of Ideality then we would get better projects that were more effective in solving the problems. If I have to start from scratch on a process project then I start w/ looking at the existing process and apply TOC (Theory of Constraints) find the bottlenecks, and getting rid of the non-value added work. This is a 1 st step R/C analysis that I use.
  • © 2002 Ellen Domb. PQR Group +1 (909) 949 0857 Intel is using this by permission to the course content owner Richard Platt Achieving the IFR means the function is performed without using the object that usually performs it. In the IFR nothing has changed, but useful effects occur while harmful effects disappear Another interpretation of the IFR is an object meets contradictory requirements on its own, without changes to the system and without harmful side effects. (we will be addressing the subject of contradictions in a few moments)
  • Review each perspectives of the IFR This is the example of what “point-of-view” of ideality.
  • The notion of “performing the function without the existence of the system is a very high level objective, we often need to step back a little to identify the opportunities for real world solutions. Remember that the goal is to solve the problem with as close to an ideal solution as possible – to blindly pursue an unrealistic ideal.
  • Genrich Altshuller identified CONTRADICTIONS. A contradiction is not a tradeoff contest between two features or functions. In a contradiction, one part of the system demands diametrically opposed properties or characteristics Stating the problem as a contradiction pushes the designer to "go for broke," and not be trapped by ordinary (tradeoff) thinking. Contradictory thinking is "out of the usual box" thinking. Once contradictory thinking becomes a habit, the designer is far less likely to consider looking for partial (tradeoff) solutions. Instead he'll look for higher-level solutions. When this happens, the designer's productivity is significantly increased. I-Beam example: If we want to make the I-beam stronger, we must make it heavier – a change that often has counterproductive results. Imagine an I-beam of unsurpassed strength. It would be too heavy to lift. So there is a contradiction – or paradox – between strength and weight.
  • To guide engineers in developing solutions for inventive problems, Altshuller developed a contradiction table, which consists of the 39 system characteristics placed in rows under the heading of “Improving Feature” , and the same characteristics placed in columns under heading “Worsening Feature” . Each cell of the resulting matrix therefore represents a particular technical contradiction and contains one or more references corresponding to the Inventive Principles that had been successfully applied to resolve it.
  • 37
  • ×