Comparing the strategies and outputs of designers using Algorithm of Inventive Problem Solving, Axiomatic Design, or Environment-Based Design

The relevance of the research is determined by the complexity that secondary school students experience when they master the regularities of development and existence of technical systems as an important link in the creation of the structured knowledge system, abilities and the correct world perception, and training to search task solutions arising in technical systems. In this regard, the goal of the conducted research is to create approaches in teaching practices that will provide learner involvement in technical systems research and, consequently, will promote conditions for the solution of mathematical inventive problems. The main approach to the training of vocational technical creativity is G.S. Altshuller’s (1956) theory of inventive problem solving (TRIZ) that takes a specific place in Russia. Labor-intensiveness and complexity of application of TRIZ in the educational process determined the creation of simplified algorithms of inventive problem solving. . Malkin’s (2012) algorithm of inventive problem solving “Generator of ideas” was selected, which is based on a part of algorithms of inventive problem solving (ARIZ). The pilot study conducted since 2010 has helped to develop an approach to the organization of learners’ activities when working with the algorithm of inventive problem solving. Due to the approach that school students have formulated and solved tasks arising in technical systems, some solutions have been patented and certified by the Federal Service for Intellectual Property. The materials of this paper may be useful for teachers of general and supplementary mathematical education of school students, who are engaged in technical creativity, and for all those who study new opportunities of creative search in the sphere of mathematical apparatus of technical systems.

This paper analyzes existing design methods and their relationship. It is concluded that Axiomatic Design is the method that illustrates design process and design method clearly. Other design methods may belong to a kind of method for mapping between a special design requirement and its design solution in the process of Axiomatic Design. The design requirements and their design solutions should be decomposed into hierarchies from the abstract concepts to the detailed information, and, during the zig-zag mapping process, the most suitable design method should then be applied according to the given design requirement. After the solutions are generated at each level, two axioms can be applied to determine good design or the best. It is also verified, from the example of Design for Assembly, that Axiomatic Design can be also applied to develop new design methods systematically, quickly and successfully.

A case study of technological innovation practice by using Algorithm of Inventive Problem Solving (ARIZ) in IT sector

The work proposes a new design tool that integrates design-around concepts with the algorithm for inventive problem solving (Russian acronym: ARIZ). ARIZ includes a complete procedure for analyzing problems and related resource, resolving conflicts and generating solutions. The combination of ARIZ and design-around concepts and understanding identified principles that govern patent infringements can prevent patent infringements whenever designers innovate, greatly reducing the cost and time associated with the product design stage. The presented tool is developed from an engineering perspective rather than a legal perspective, and so can help designers easily to prevent patent infringements and succeed in innovating by designing around. An example is used to demonstrate the proposed method.

The tools of TRIZ, as described in Chapters 2 and 3, are very helpful when searching for new conceptual solutions. Their direct application to complex situations, however, can at times be rather perplexing: it may not be clear what system conflict should be resolved, or which component of the system should be modified, or what sufield model describes the problem most adequately. To assist the problem solver in making these and other important decisions, Altshuller developed the Algorithm for Inventive Problem Solving or ARIZ ( A lgoritm R eshenia I zobretatelskih Z adach – in its Russian abbreviation). Goals of ARIZ ARIZ pursues three major objectives: problem formulation, breaking psychological inertia , and combining powers of various tools of TRIZ . Problem formulation A conventional approach to problem solving is to jump to potential solutions once a problem has been presented. Solving a difficult problem may require numerous leaps. From a TRIZ standpoint, if a problem cannot be easily solved, it usually means that it is poorly formulated. A properly formulated problem can be easily solved automatically, or it becomes clear that there is no necessary scientific knowledge or technology available to find a solution. In many cases, the proper problem formulation includes the selection of a system's component to be modified, and the formulation of a physical contradiction for this component. For this reason, ARIZ contains a set of steps that lead the problem solver from the initial vaguely, or wrongly, defined problem to a lucid formulation of a system conflict and a physical contradiction.

Research on Optimization of TRIZ Application Driven by Design Needs and Targets

Research Progress Analysis of Reliability Design Method Based on Axiomatic Design Theory

This paper focus on certain design methods: Axiomatic Design (AD) and its comparisons with Quality Function Deployment (QFD). While there are other methods such as QFD is more suitable for problem identification, AD is more suitable for decision making of product development with high quality needs. The general observations on the similarities and differences among the two design methods based on steps are discussed, contrasting the basic performances of the design method. We can conclude that Axiomatic Design is more suitable for the decision stage on planning phase while QFD is more suitable as a tool of problem inquisition.

Design as integration of axiomatic design and design structure matrix

The appropriate selection of design concepts has a strong influence on product cost, durability, robustness and functionality. Effective tools to identify good design concepts are critical. Different design methodologies have different objectives to aid in making the right decision. Some design methods are complementary, whereas others may provide contradictory results. In this study, two design methods, concept scoring and axiomatic design, are compared for their ability to obtain good design concepts. Conceptual designs of micro-pumps, which provide pressure gradients to actuate the flow of liquids and gas, are used to evaluate the design methods. Metrics are used to compare these two design methodologies’ abilities to achieve objective evaluations. The concept scoring method is easy to use, especially when comparing different designs. The axiomatic design method provides a structured and mathematical design evaluation; however, achieving good design through the uncoupling or decoupling of matrices is challenging. Further study is required to integrate these two design methods.

Hybrid force-displacement-based design methods for self-centering wall structures

This research deals with a fonnal design method called "Design Equations for Systems Analysis", or DESA. This method reduces system complexity, and has been demonstrated to effectively reduce the complexity of human-machine systems. It also increases the usability of products. The author summarized two other design methods that reduce system complexity -Axiomatic Design (AD) and Design Structure Matrix (DSM) -and explained their differences from DESA. A case study was then presented to demonstrate the ability of AD and DSM to complement each other. Since DESA builds on AD, it can complement DSM similarly. The author revised the framework that DESA utilizes. A tenninology was established to define the technical tenns in DESA. DESA was then employed to design an inspection method that evaluates usability. It was also employed to reduce the complexity of an objectoriented software system. These two applications of DESA are presented as case studies. These two case studies respectively demonstrate that DESA designs for usability and effectively reduces the complexity of object-oriented software systems.

Concurrent engineering can help manufacturing enterprises to achieve shorter time to market, reduced development costs, and high‐quality products. In order to realize the concurrent engineering, a lot of integrations are required according to parallel development technique, such as the integration of the people with different disciplines, the integration of the software of design methods and design data, and so on. This paper discusses the integration of the software of existing design methods for concurrent engineering by using axiomatic design. The results show that a very complicated software system for concurrent engineering becomes simple and consists of 26 modules corresponding to 26 design methods and one main module which contains all the junctional properties at each level. The task of the programmer for the integration becomes clear and is mainly programming for the main module.

This chapter focuses on recent development of direct probability-based designmethods, including the expanded reliability-based design (expanded RBD) method, reliabilitybased robust geotechnical design (RGD) method, and the new safety standards for flood defenses in the Netherlands which is the first ever national standard that adopts direct (or full) probability-based design methods. One major criticism to the simplified semi-probabilistic RBD format is displacement of sound engineering judgment and lack of flexibility for practitioners. Because the simplified semi-probabilistic RBD format adopts the same trial-and-error approach as traditional allowable stress design (ASD) methods and it is developed to circumvent the need for practitioners to perform probabilistic analysis, these compromises seem unavoidable. An alternative solution to this dilemma is to maintain the engineering judgment and flexibility similar to ASD methods, but at the expense of performing probabilistic analysis using direct probability-based designmethods. It is shown that, with the aid of commonly available computers and widely used computer software such as Microsoft Excel, performing Monte Carlo Simulation (MCS)-based probabilistic analysis and design are becoming more and more straightforward and convenient. MCS is already available in some commercial geotechnical software programs. MCS can be comprehended easily as a repetitive computer execution of traditional ASD design calculation, and the reliability analysis background required for performing MCS is substantially reduced. A gravity retaining wall design example is used in this chapter to illustrate theMCS-based design method in Excel.

In the stage of a conceptual design, designers often stimulate and influence each other, and they must conceive a completely new idea and the outstanding idea. However, as a design problem, it is dependent on a designer's experience and intuition. Furthermore, the suggestion of an idea is sometimes plentifully performed by two or more persons, sharing of mutual knowledge or information for a smooth communication. Therefore, it is necessary to establish the reasonable design method to derive excellent idea, in this study, the new design approach which combined two design methods of an axiomatic design theory and TRIZ is proposed, the validity of a design method is confirmed. The axiomatic design theory clarifies the process in a design TRIZ offers the solution of a design which a designer didn't know. By combining these advantages, we will proposed a new method. The experiment using the proposed methods, technique nothing, TRIZ, the axiomatic design theory, and the TRIZ+ axiomatic design theory. And, it is verified what kind of difference the number of ideas or quality. As a result, TRIZ was able to conceive many ideas, but quality is inferior to other design methods. The axiomatic design theory could conceive the high quality idea, but a number of ideas are inferior to other design methods. Although the TRIZ+ axiomatic design theory had few ideas, the highest quality idea was able to be conceived.