speaker for day 3 at ETRIA TFC Paris is Professor Serge Tichkiewitch, President
of EMIRAcle (European Manufacturing and Innovation Research Association), who
was introduced by Denis Cavallucci as one of the primary champions for the recognition
of TRIZ in Europe. Prof. Tichkiewitch
spoke on 3 topics
ResEUr, an online course for development of
“valley of death” – barriers to acceptance of innovation
cutting issues for industrial innovation
He concluded with challenges to take advantage of the
publicly supported programs, and to overcome the weaknesses of lack of focus,
emphasis on current technology, and psychological and historical resistance to
risk. The partnerships between
research, government and industry of EMIRAcle are aimed at developing the
strengths of these systems and overcoming the weaknesses.
education using Pictographs and Music” by Jeongho Shin demonstrated his
approach to finding an engaging starting point for TRIZ for children and adults,
as well as his own entrepreneurial journey from conventional TRIZ in LG to the
music and art world. The clarity of the
simple examples (with design help from his young children to keep the
pictographs meaningful, clear and simple) were impressive. Segmentation—pictograph
cards for adults have words, the ones for kids have charming cartoons. They were tested at the National (Korean)
Science Museum recently with 200 children in 30 minutes sessions—each card stimulated
many inventions! The audience loved
singing Shin’s song of 8 principles!
announced a joint venture between KATA and TRIZ France to create new programs
for children. The audience donated 1
euro per pack of cards to support this effort.
We returned to conventional presentation
mode for Manabu Sawaguchi’s approach to TRIZ for risk prevention with new
technologies that have new kinds of risk.
KYK and KYT combine direct observation of the system in work at the
workplace with knowledge from past history of
problems. CRMART is a
complementary method that reverses thinking, asking “how can we create risks?”
in order to reveal vulnerability. This
is an application of principle 13, turning thinking
upside down, to challenge people to find potential risks. The harmful function diagram from value
engineering is then used for generating mitigation plans. (There appear to be some subtle difference
between CRMART and the AFD or Subversion method that has been used in TRIZ in
“The Value of TRIZ and Its Derivatives for
Interdisciplinary Problem Solving” is a fascinating project—a large, diverse
group of people were given a half day of TRIZ and USIT training, and another
group got classical creativity training, then placed in small groups and asked to solve
a biological problem (adenovirus attack on children with compromised immune
systems) for which none of them had any technical background, although research
materials on the details of the problem were provided. The multidisciplinary teams with TRIZ
training produced the greatest number of ideas, but the monodisciplinary teams
with conventional training produced the highest rated (by technical experts) idea.
No surprise since practical applicability
was one of the criteria for evaluation. Read this paper—lots of good analysis and
good experimental design in a field where we have only had people’s opinions in
The team from the host university
presented “TRIZ methodology adapted to hybrid powertrain evaluation.” Analysis of the designs based on
mathematical models of fuel use were compared to evaluation based in the ideal
final result, for traction, vehicle stop and coasting, and regenerative
braking, and the conclusions were used to suggest changes to powertrain
architecture. The method was then applied to 2 different situations
for the urban customer and the highway customer. Next steps will be to use the
TRIZ problem solving methods to design the powertrain defined in these
“Systematic search and ranking of physical contradictions using graph
theory principles: Toward a systematic analysis of design strategies and their
impacts” by a multi-disciplinary team from Aalto University and Tampere University
and 4 companies (Metso, Solving, Kone Cranes, and the Finnish Defense Forces.) Research problems:
How to improve paper roll cleanness and
minimize energy use
How to diminish energy
consumption of air bearing technology
How to develop
computer supported tools for use in early stage modeling and simulation (effects
of early decisions are usually not seen until late in the design phase)
presented “A quantifiable evaluation method for generated ideas with
many varieties.” The method is based on
the number and variety of ideas (which is challenged as relevant criteria by
those who want a small number of highly innovative and applicable ideas.)
They can integrate computer systems for requirement analysis and search
for contradictions. It became obvious
that they needed language tools to extract contradictions from the natural language
descriptions of the specific problems. The
results of this study are being incorporated into software being developed by a
start-up company being created by former students in the program.
“Measuring the efficiency of
inventive activities along inventive projects in R&D” Ali Taheria, Denis
Cavallucci, David Ogeta included extensive data from over 100 companies on
their experiences with multiple methods in R&D. The project is to create a metric for design
efficiency to compare methods, then to evaluate that metric vs. the opinions of
the designers. Efficiency in time and
cost are much easier to measure than the human aspect of the use of
brain-power. Refinements are expected
in the next phase of the work.
I will not be able to report on the afternoon papers or the membership
meeting, since I’m traveling to the UK for tomorrow’s UK TRIZ Forum—I’ll post a
report on Saturday for that one-day session.
This kind of sequential blog may not capture the spirit of either the
ETRIA or the UK meeting. Hearing the
papers in the words of the authors is useful, but the “gossip” and the
conversations and the fellowship of the meetings cannot be captured in the
papers. Hearing that TRIZ for
children has “escaped” from the TRIZ experts because 100 college teachers have
now taught many schoolteachers who are now teaching systematic methods to
17,000 students in France—WOW! Meetings
in Bavaria of dozens of companies to share innovation concepts (and not just
once, 4 or more a year for multiple years…) Wow! Formation of TRIZCampus, a community of practice—TRIZ
teachers sharing all their methods and materials. Internal TRIZ societies at GE and Phillips
and Siemens…Wow and wow and wow….
Blogger’s advice: Start now to
plan for the time and budget to attend at least one meeting in the next year to
be part of the Wow! Lots of choices:
Innovation Congress: November in Mexico
Institute: December on-line
Korea and Society of
Systematic Innovation (in the US this year) in July
And many regional
meetings ranging from TRIZ France and Apeiron (Italy) and Iran and Israel and India to “Pizza, Beer,
and TRIZ” in several cities.
I’ll be glad to host any reports of any of these meetings on this blog.
The Wednesday program began with Denis Cavallucci (Past
President of both ETRIA and TRIZFrance) introducing Dr. Ing. Mihai
SOCOLIUC - Head of Scientific Communities at PSA Peugeot-Citroën, and recalling
the role of the company in starting TRIZ activities in France. Dr. Socoliuc introduced the history of the
company, starting with Peugeot as a metallurgy company in 1810, with many
technological and scientific innovations.
The science activities of the company are now organized to emphasize
energy, mechanics, and fluidics, with major work in human factors and
interactive simulation. “OpenLabs” emphasize open innovation and partnerships
with other organizations—one in Marseilles for motion and in Bordeaux for
energy, and others around France for design, fluidics, etc.
Dr. Socoluic then surprised the audience with his
challenge to us—after 14 years of pioneering work with TRIZ, it is still not
part of the daily life at PSA Peugeot-Citroen.
He asked the audience 10 questions about how to re-birth the excitement
of TRIZ in all the OpenLabs, which resulted in a vigorous dialog and multi-log
with the audience.
The morning program continued
with 3 plenary sessions chaired by Paul Filmore. Paul-Armand
Verhaegen from the University of Leuven, presented “Organism
Aspects for systematic BID” which we
would call biomimetics. They have
developed extensive algorithms and adapted technology from text mining to
filtering biological data to identify the aspects of organisms that are
applicable to other kinds of problem solving.
These algorithms are very tolerant of high-noise situations. Paul gave a live demonstration of using the
databases to find a list of organisms to study for a particular display problem
(swallowtail butterflies, strawberry poison frogs and Steller’s jay were the
Bersano presented a joint French-Italian project “Supporting
ECO-innovation in SMEs by TRIZ Eco-guidelines.” Impressive results—companies generated
savings of 10-15x the money spent on training and workshops through improved
design incorporating the Eco-guidelines.
A simplified fast method designed to appeal to the SME companies was
tested with diverse companies (electronics, chemicals, machine tools, home
appliances,) and the assessment of the usefulness of the method was based on
life cycle analysis of the designs, not on the opinions of the SMEs or the
researchers. Reduction of weight and
power by 20% each and increase of re-usable parts by 50% are all impressive results!
The TRIZ emphasis was on ideality,
particularly full use of resources, and understanding why resources had not
been fully used in the older designs.
The session concluded with a
Samsung Electronics case study “Enhanced Unlatched Operation of Hard Disk
Drive” presented by Kyoung-Whan Oh.
He emphasized the primary role of ideality in developing and improving
the design. See the proceedings for a
pictorial explanation of the damage mechanism and the flux patterns for the
magnetic fields in the conventional design of hard disk head and disk. 3% of drives showed unlatch failure at low
temperature—with 5 million units a month produced, this kind of failure is
intolerable. Mr. Oh did a very thorough
job of defining the physical and technical contradictions of the latched and
unlatched states, and the practical limits of the time that each change would
take vs. the time available until product launch. Using
resources already in the system (especially using compression of a
rubber part as a source of energy!) made it possible to make the correction
without redesign and without delay to product launch. The insights came from su-field modeling,
“smart little people” modeling, detailed resource listing, and in later
iterations principles 9 and 14. The
audience appreciation was very visible.
the chair of the case study session, so I was unable to take notes – 4 case
studies with different lessons but one theme: TRIZ works! See the proceedings for full reports, and
for reports on the parallel sessions.
Michel Chaux from Michelin
was the afternoon keynote
speaker. He told us about Michelin’s 4
spontaneous, individual idea generation
Innov’Up, open challenges, both inside the
company and outside
Creativity events, which require strong
preparation and experienced facilitator
TRIZ, with supporting training and facilitation.
Europe, Japan, and US Michelin centers have the same basic
facilitator training, but each group is encouraged to modify their methods to
respect and take advantage of local culture.
Ekong, reported on the plans to use TRIZ
for airport management in Nigeria
Lepsik from the Czech Republic presented “Increasing of car seat safety using TRIZplus –
FOS Method” FOS is function oriented search, and adds depth to
the general TRIZ approach of looking outside the previous science and
Prof. Kyeongwon Lee from Korea Polytechnic
University presented both good and bad experiences with the propagation of TRIZ
into industry, and strategies based on lessons learned. In the early stage of deployment, LG
introduced TRIZ in 1996, and in 1996-2004 there were experiences of “overexaggeration” and expensive, un-workable proposed solutions
and overtones of Russian mysticism which were
in conflict with Korean engineering culture. In addition, both companies and universities
experimented with software such as TechOptimizer, Goldfire, and IWB, with
disappointing results (my comment:
because they just had software without real understanding of TRIZ!) TRIZ disappeared in Korea, and started to
re-emerge after 2004. Samsung’s TRIZ
system is well known, starting with cost reduction and using their own success
to move the method into all aspects of creativity. Hyundai incorporated TRIZ into Six Sigma, and
is experiencing growing world-wide recognition for creativity.
Prof. Lee’s conclusions are
The TRIZ users must understand the problem model and
contradictions and work with tools from other methods to develop practical,
fast solutions, rather than to emphasize learning many different tools.
TRIZ proponents should avoid criticizing Six Sigma and other methods
that have had demonstrated success.
Use my flow chart (he had the version from the TRIZ journal ) as a
starting point, to be modified for each company, with the emphasis on getting
early success on pilot projects that are meaningful to the company, and which
can be used by those who become TRIZ trainers as culturally-suitable
examples. Prof. Kim gave particular
attention to the idea that people, even at the very beginning of TRIZ study,
should solve their own problems rather than have the TRIZ experts solve
problems for them.
Pay attention to the company hierarchy—recruit support for projects
using the technical experts, their bosses, and their budgeting process.
Universities need standard textbooks and standard methods in order to
incorporate TRIZ into their curricula.
The disagreements between TRIZ experts cause the professors to avoid
He concluded by inviting
us to the 5th Global TRIZCON, July 8-10, 2014 in Korea. The audience was most appreciative of the
examination of failures, and Prof. Lee’s extraction of lessons from the
Ido Lapidot, the TRIZ advocate for Intel in Israel entertained AND educated the
group with “TRIZ is mostly dead, but mostly dead is partly alive.” His talk was inspired by a Google Trend
search on TRIZ, which shows a severe decline (allowing for countries where
Google lacks coverage.) He compared the
TRIZ trend to the Kodak history and the Crocs shoes history, and finally a
search for innovation and problem solving.
Six Sigma is declining, Lean is noisy and rising. Crowdsourcing is on a steeper rise than
open innovation, which is also rising.
Network analysis of the genes and memes
was used to look at the survivability of TRIZ (which is a meme-plex.) Adding complexity makes the system more stable
and thus more survivable but also makes it more complex and intimidating to
BUT because TRIZ is small
it can still grow! TRIZ should be
simplified, use open TRIZ innovation, make it cheap and easy to get started,
ride the wave of crowdsourcing.
Finally, Lapidot proposes that we do new TRIZ research, using modern
search tools, to create solutions databases for software, for biotech, for
Minkyoung (Linda) Kwon from POSCO continued the theme
of the keynote yesterday by developing the 36 strategies of Sun-tzu, and
creating a strategy matrix similar to
the contradiction matrix. They
demonstrated the use of the strategies for the sales of slag powder—this is a
very realistic case for a steel company!
Midmapping was a useful technique for showing how all the parts of
the problem analysis and problem
solving/strategy development system interact (this means “go read the
proceedings to see details.”) The
military analogies were not fully portable (first kill the leader of the
competitor “army” was reinterpreted as bribing the leader of the other company)
to modern business situations, but the analogies were definitely challenging to
“Application of Substance-Field Analysis for Failure
Analysis” was presented by Ann Belski.
Briefly, an auxiliary field FA is introduced in each of the
relationships in the Su-Field model, and is hypothesized to cause failure in
the system. Then a real scenario is
developed that would create the failure situation. Finally, another Su-Field analysis is done to
find a way to overcome the failure mode.
Case study examples made the model very appealing—Ms. Belski showed a
complex Su-field model for a ship sinking in the ocean and a wiper blade switch
failure in an automotive application.
In the latter case, the engineers went from 4 possible failures to more
than 30, greatly increasing their opportunity of finding the actual cause. The Singapore/Dutch challenge to world-wide
students for minimizing turbidity created during backhoe dredging. Her Su-field model showed deep technical
knowledge of the dredging process, and the auxiliary fields gave a strong set
of solutions (not implemented because of cost, but showing promise for the
Minsoo Kim from Samsung Display addressed “Group
Creativity plus TRIZ.” He modeled TRIZ
classically as 1) analysis to develop the problem understanding and 2)problem
solving to develop solution ideas. He
reviewed the TRIZ training system, and highlighted the need for group
processes, as well as TRIZ knowledge, for people to solve complex problems. He used the model from “The Medici Effect” to
suggest that multiple experts, each expert in his/her own field, will stimulate
creativity for each other and the
group. A long-life, big, bright, low-weight display
was a good example of group creativity, calling on multiple experts, using the
intersection method—improving the intersection between the subsystems to give
direction to the full project.
Ivan Masin from the Technical University of Liberec in the Czech
Republic concluded the session with “Inventive principles application in the
nano-structures field.” The first project used the “nanospider”—a roller electro-spinning
technology that produces non-woven nanofiber material. They used the 40 principles as a checklist,
looking to see if each could be used on the technology for producing the
structures OR on the structures themselves.
He showed us a great variety of examples—segmented roller, curved
fibers, self-regulating fibers, etc.
All 40 principles were relevant in the production methods, some were not
found in the fiber structure area. The
second step was to look at potential improvements in the roller technology—the
project was successful and patents are being pursued right now, so details were
not presented. A third project was to
eliminate the time for exchange of rollers in the machine—again very successful.
Gala dinner in Paris! The group enjoyed a boat tour of the Seine
River, starting from the base of the Eiffel tower, and cruising past many historic and artistic
monuments. Great food, great wine,
great company, great talk! (And why the
day 2 blog is being posted on day 3)
We had a short walk to the Paris City Hall for a beautiful lunch -- 3 courses with 2 wines! The afternoon speakers will have a challenge rousing the audience. Good news, there was lots of afternoon excitement.
Val Souchkov was the chairman of the afternoon session on
TRIZ with other tools. First speaker
was Ms. Yui Kato with Manabu Sawaguchi, “Design Process Management based on
Redesigned Contradiction Matrix in Aesthetic field.” She gave a detailed explanation of the issues
of design workflow and individual designers’ differences that contribute to the
need for improvement in design work.
This study is limited to the product design work phase of product
development (excluding market research and product planning that come before,
and production and distribution that come after.) They have hybridized the stages of design
based on AHP (especially weighting and evaluation) and the stages based on TRIZ
(design and problem solving). Improvements
to designs that have a good sales history are different in some details from
new products. A typical esthetic
conflict was improving Impact vs. declining
Color Harmony; a sample of 11 elements of an aesthetic issues matrix was
shown, with a 48-element version
described that included some of the classical Altshuller matrix elements. Future work will include extension of the
examples of application of the principles to the design problems.
“Lean-TRIZ instead of TRIZ Lean” was introduced by Prof.
Christian Thurnes (the lean guy) and Dr. Frank Zeihsel (the TRIZ guy.) They start with the assertion that lean methods have had a lot of money and
management attention over the last 30 years, whereas TRIZ has been an expert
method with very little management
attention. They have enriched TRIZ tools with lean elements, and then used them
to work on lean problems. For example,
they have made specific separation principles that include separation of
non-value added work, separate set-up tasks from operating tasks, etc. Likewise, ideality was easily combined with
lean—what is the ideal production rate, what is the ideal transportation unit,
…what are the ideal functions of the product, ….Then they reversed the process
and found areas of weakness in Lean that can be improved with TRIZ, such as
treating “necessary waste” as a physical contradiction, then applying the usual
separation principles to resolving the contradiction. They
conclude that these practices have a high potential for spread in the lean
world, with case studies and stories needed to support the dissipation of the
I presented the paper written with Tim Brewer, Joe Miller,
and Darrell Mann on the crowdsourcing and crowdfunding business models, and how
the TRIZ model of the complete system helps to understand these emerging
models. I’ll post the full paper on
this site when I get back from the meetings.
Prof. Paul Filmore presented the work done with Mir
Abubakr Shahdad on the application of
TRIZ to graphic design, using genetic algorithms. They developed software, now in its 7th
generation to create a computer-aided innovation tool. Genetic algorithms are used because of their
ability to deal with extremely large search space. Font design was the specific graphic design
task that was chosen. The designer
selects “chromosomes” and the system generates the next generation; the designer selects the “parents” of the next generation, and the
system does the iterations. A similar
process is applied to logos. Feedback
from the designers is that they find it very fast, works well for initial
concept creation, and enables them to benefit from TRIZ without studying
it. New studies will include examining
the difference between the use by graphic designers and engineers, and
inclusion of additional TRIZ principles.
“A novel hybridized TRIZ-based Design Approach for Concept Generation”
was presented by Aiman Ziout and Ahmed Azab from the University of Windsor,
Canada. They demonstrated the method
with the design problem of an active joint, one that can be disassembled by some
external trigger. Active joints are
important at the end of product life, for disassembly, as an element of
sustainable design. Function analysis
and patterns of evolution were combined with Cladistics (a biological method of
classifying solutions) to create lines of ideas.
Valeri Souchkov presented “Trend of Functionality Evolution” which is
based on some of Altshuller’s work, expanded by his personal experience with
over 100 products and projects. During
his work, Val realized that something was missing in TRIZ, and he used
TRIZ-based function analysis and value analysis to complete the missing
element, the evolution of the functionalities.
He saw 18 steps of evolution, 11 of expansion and 7 of convolution. He called on his experience in the The
Netherlands to use the evolution of the bicycle to illustrate the 18
steps. Business-targeted products (B2B)
have a somewhat different emphasis from B2C products, and the order of the
patterns is not always the same. Val’s
challenge to the audience is to use these trends of functionality evolution to
support innovation road mapping and risk management.
Eric Prevost’s presentation “TRIZ for Business” emphasized the need for different vocabulary
and different psychology than those used for engineering/technical TRIZ.
His first approach is to create fear—show the statistics on the vanishing
of companies (87% of the Fortune 500 changed in 20 years…) and to show new paradigms
in technology and manufacturing, as well
as new paradigms of selling and other elements of business – sensors in tires
and engines and many products make it possible to sell based on performance and
lifetime rather than price. Innovation
models are changing—particularly integration of service into products
accelerates innovation, but requires new business models with new
partners. As an example, he showed a
conventional business process used at CapGemini, then inserted TRIZ into the
process, and did 3 one day workshops (sales, talent management, and project
funding.) Result: lots of ideas, reusable content, and great
Val Souchkov presented Vladimir
Petrov’s paper “On Su-Field Analysis for Information Processing
System” which was originally presented at
the TRIZ Developers Summit. Petrov
replaces the Substance-Field interaction
with DFK (Data coming into the system,
Function that changes the data, and
Knowledge that is the aggregation of information about the incoming data
and the function, and can be used to adjust the system. ) There are 3 laws:
processing: 4 trends within this trend
progress from simple to simple multistage, to coordinated multistage (knowledge
about stages interacts, improving system function) to common multistage which can have shared structure with shared
Multiple sources of processing: Independent processing of multiple kinds of
data progress to coherent multiple source processing, (video conference example, which video and
audio data are processed separately, but knowledge about positions of people is
used to modify the process and the data collection.)
And information system tends to accommodate past data to improve its
performance. The progress is from
static, to learning, to evolving DFK systems.
The function stays the same but the knowledge is used differently at
Complex systems can be generating by combining systems from each of
The meeting adjourned for the day, and we found congenial small
restaurants for continuing the discussions.
The European TRIZ Association meeting, TRIZ FUTURES
CONFERENCE 2013, started Oct 28 with 2 tutorial sessions. As usual, this is a personal report, so
you’ll only read about sessions I was actually in—for the rest, see the
proceedings. http://www.etria.net I
missed the tutorials because of flight arrangements, but got to Paris in time
for the opening reception. It was great
to see old friends and meet new people.
The TRIZ community is expanding! Many photos will be posted on the conference site and the Facebook page, so I'll concentrate on the discussions and presentations.
The morning of Oct. 29 we were welcomed to the conference,
to university, and to Paris. Paris Tech – Arts et Metiers is over 200 years
old, and combines the historical view of engineering as art and engineering as
“genius” in their approach to education.
ETRIA President Joost
Dufluor welcomed all participants, with
particular note of the delegations from
Japan and Korea, and other
distant visitors, and he extended thanks to all the organizers and their
employers for all the time and energy of
organizing and managing TFC 2013.
The local committee from TRIZ France announced new
relationships including Switzerland and other French speaking countries and a
new relationship between TRIZ France and KATA (Korea).
Denis Cavallucci and Marc Trela (the chairs of the
committees) reviewed the preparations—119 abstracts eventually resulted in a
70% acceptance rate, and the schedule has expanded to accommodate all the
papers, in “professional” and “scientific” sessions.
The opening keynote speaker is Se-Hyun Kim - President of the Korea Academic
TRIZ Association and Senior VP of POSCO (and veteran of 24 years at
Samsung.) He started with a brief intro
to POSCO, 5th largest steel company in the world, but “most
competitive” and “most admired” in recent surveys by metal industries
organizations. POSCO’s concept of “smart
innovation” includes Toyota’s biomimetics approach, Steve Jobs’s creativity
based on convergence of art and technology.
POSCO challenges the blue ocean and nurtures creativity by using
TRIZ. “Creativity comes from
insight. Insight comes from
observation” is the motto on the Poreka
(Posco +eureka) room. Korean folk
stories are full of stories of innovation based on observation and insight,
charmingly explained by Mr. Kim.
gave us impressive statistics about the TRIZ efforts, including increasing
numbers of patents, projects, and development of the internal databases that
help subsequent projects. TRIZ is
being hybridized with Six Sigma and FMEA, and with the 36 principles of the Art
of War strategy. PTA is the POSCO TRIZ
Association which involves 10 companies from the POSCO family, and sponsors
workshops and mutual growth. POSCO is
also promoting TRIZ to SME’s and educational institutions (TRIZ summer camp
sounds great!) They have an internal
conference annually as well as participating in MATRIZ, KATA, and ETRIA and
reviewed the history of TRIZ in Korea, starting with Samsung’s work with
Russian experts starting in 2001, expanding through education and software
(I-SPARK in 2006) and propagation through projects and involvement of their
supplier community. The future is the
expansion of TRIZ to all activities, and specific challenges to application of
TRIZ in Software development.
universities, Postech, Hanyang, Korea Polytechnic, and KIT, have TRIZ classes
and outreach to local companies and programs for professors. KATA sponsors industry-academic knowledge sharing with 30 companies and 29
academic members, and is the host of the Global TRIZCON every summer and the
Korea TRIZ Festival each winter. Their
new activities this year focus on social applications of TRIZ (combating violence, increasing creativity.)
rest of the day I was back and forth between the 2 sessions. Alexis Bultey
presented “ A proposal of a systematic
and consistent Substance-Field Analysis” with the goal of resolving conflicts between
different methods of use of the 76
standard solutions and different Su-Field terminology, which result in limited
use of TRIZ in industry. The development team started with a TRIZ expert
team and TRIZ historical references both by Altshuller and from TRIZ Journal
articles, then developed the modeling method using knowledge management
methodologies to remove conflicts in definitions and logic, resulting in a
“formal ontology” which was then processed to create and “operational ontology”
which became the basis for a computer-based system. Both measurement and product-type Su-field
models were included. Eight sets of rules
were developed, which were familiar as groups of the 76 standards, but were
described with a standard vocabulary.
Hentschel used Horst Nadler as a simulated elderly person to demonstrate the
need to understand the interactions between the user and the system as part of
“Design thinking as a door-opener for TRIZ – paving the way for systematic
innovation.” She then had the audience
make paper models of their solutions and the customer reply with “I like” and
“I wish” about the candidate solutions.
This was a demonstration of the Self-Immersion method of design
thinking. Dr. Hentshcel proposed that
the usability issues and visionary
issues of the design can create TRIZ
challenges when merged with the technological challenges. This approach has created new appeal for
TRIZ in business and academic communities that had originally rejected TRIZ as
too complex, too hard to learn, etc.
Q&A featured the interaction of TRIZ with design, especially with
design going beyond ideality while TRIZ returns the designer to practical
ideality that can be implemented.
Busov presented the case study “TRIZ used for improvement of active hinge of
the car bonnet.” The project was developed to meet the requirements for
pedestrian survival resulting from recent auto industry requirement
development. The active hinge must lift
up to prevent the head of the pedestrian from hitting the rigid parts of the
engine. Current solutions are both
complex and expensive. Initial analysis
produced a list of principles to apply, but the limitation of people’s design
experience and abstract thinking capability suggested that they should
re-evaluate the problem from the point of view of the physical contradiction,
between the simple, passive hinge and the complex, active hinge. The solution was found in the “scientific
effects” index – redesigning the dynamic element as part of the short arm of
the hinge, using a much simpler actuator.
This explanation relies on pictures of the old and new hinges—I
encourage readers to see the full case study to appreciate the multiple levels
of TRIZ that were used to create this
new and much more elegant solution to saving pedestrian lives. The audience was very interested and the
speaker noted that his English would improve after one or two beers…
Monnier introduced R2B (Research to
business) as one phase of B2C (business to customer) . He proposes that open innovation is the
solution to increasing complexity in a world of decreasing financial support
for development of new systems.
Complementary functions have been provided by suppliers, mixing external
R&D with corporate systems for much of the recent past, but the corporate
partners have frequently benefited more than the SME contributors. A “creativity space” between research and
development makes it possible for the benefits to be equalized and the process
accelerated since both partners benefit from better management of the
I ran back
to the other room for Pascal Sire’s “How to leverage the knowledge spiral and
creative meta-rules to train on TRIZ thinking while rescuing the sinking
Titanic?” A wide variety of games and simulations were developed for students
and teachers with a great variety of backgrounds. One challenge is to create a method of
measuring the effectiveness of these game-type training methods, and he
recognized the difficulty of developing
the method while using it. A short-term
measure is that the students and teachers are both embracing the system.
To be continued after lunch...