A COMPARISON OF TRIZ AND AXIOMATIC DESIGN PDF

To browse Academia. Skip to main content. By using our site, you agree to our collection of information through the use of cookies. To learn more, view our Privacy Policy. Log In Sign Up.

Author:Sakora Zunos
Country:Madagascar
Language:English (Spanish)
Genre:Travel
Published (Last):7 January 2010
Pages:72
PDF File Size:15.1 Mb
ePub File Size:17.94 Mb
ISBN:880-1-39124-828-4
Downloads:20068
Price:Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader:Mezisar



Descubra todo lo que Scribd tiene para ofrecer, incluyendo libros y audiolibros de importantes editoriales. Kyang mie. A case study is given. The remaining body of paper is divided into 4 parts. Section 4 provides a case study and section 5 is the conclusions of this paper. It is self-evident that decisions made during design stage of product and process development will profoundly affect the product quality and productivity. Traditionally, product and process have been designed based on know-how and trial-anderror; however the empiricism of a designer is limited and can lead to costly mistakes.

Axiomatic Design and the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving have been developed to aid design decision making and related problem solving. Axiomatic design is a general methodology that helps designers structure and understand design problems, thereby facilitating the synthesis and analysis of suitable design requirements, solutions, and processes.

This approach also provides a consistent framework from which the metrics of design alternatives can be quantified. Axiomatic Design theory has been developed to aid above decision making process.

It is based on the following important concepts [1] [8]:. TRIZ offers a wide-ranging series of tools to help designers and inventors avoid trial-and-error in design process and solve problem in a creative fashion.

The most part of TRIZ tools were created by means of careful research of the world patent database mainly in Russian , so they have been evolved independently and separately from many of the design strategies developed outside Russia. This paper compares and contrasts TRIZ and Axiomatic Design problem solving methods, analyzes their compatibility and discusses the possibility of integration of them.

The longterm goal of this work is to develop a generic framework and tools to help designers understand and make correct design decisions. The design process usually consists of several steps as follows. Establish design objectives to satisfy a given set of customer attributes Generate ideas to create plausible solutions Analyze the solution alternatives and select the best one Implement the selected design.

The mapping between the customer and functional domains is defined as concept design; the mapping between functional and physical domains is product design; the mapping between physical and process domains corresponds to process design. Hierarchical decomposition in one domain cannot be performed independently of the other domains, i. The two axioms can be stated as follows: Axiom 1 independence axiom : maintain the independence of the FRs. Axiom 2 information axiom : minimize the information content of the design.

The first axiom is the independent axiom, and it focus on the nature of the mapping between what is required FRs and how to achieve it DPs. It states that a good design maintains the independence of the functional requirements.

The second axiom is the information axiom and it establishes information content as a relative measure for evaluating alternative solutions that satisfy the independence axiom. Many corollaries and theorems are derived from these two fundamental axioms.

Studies of patent collections by Altshuller, the founder of TRIZ, indicated that only one per cent of solutions were truly pioneering inventions, the rest represented the use of previously known ideas and concepts but in a novel way [2]. Thus, the conclusion was that an idea of a design solution to a new problem might be already known. However, where this idea could be found? TRIZ, based on the systematic view of technological world, provides techniques and tools to help designers create a new design idea and avoid numerous trials and errors during a problem solving process.

Any problem solving process involves two components: the problem itself and the system in which the problem exists. Successful innovative experience shows that both problem analysis and system transformations are equally important to problem solving. Accordingly, TRIZ methodology includes the analytical tools for problem analysis and the knowledge base tools for system changing. The theoretical foundations of these tools are the patterns of evolution of technological systems.

Figure 1 illustrates the basic structure of TRIZ. These patterns indicate that there exist basic laws for engineering system development, and understanding them enhances ones ability to the design problem solving. There are eight patterns and each pattern consists of several sub-patterns or lines [9].

Based on them, the further configurations of a system can be reliably calculated or forecasted if the current system configuration is given [5]. These analytical tools do not use every piece of information about the product where the problem resides. The way they generalize a specific situation is to represent a problem as either a contradiction, or a substance-field model, or just as a required function realization.

ARIZ is such a sophisticated analytical tool that it integrates above three tools and other techniques. Substance field analysis is a TRIZ analytical tool for building functional model for problems related to existing or new technological systems.

Each system is created to perform a certain function. Typically, a function represents some action toward a certain object, and this action is performed by another object. This situation can be modeled by a triangle whose corners represent objects and an action or interaction called a field. A substance may be an article or tool and the field may be some form of energy. In general, any properly functioning system can be modeled with a complete triangle as shown in figure2.

Any deviation from the complete Su-field triangle, for example missing elements or occurring inefficient and undesired functions, reflects the existence of a problem [2] [8] [9].

Contradiction Analysis is a powerful tool of looking problem with the new perspective. In TRIZ standpoint, a challenging problem can be expressed as either a technical contradiction or. A technical contradiction might be solve using contradiction table that identifies 39 characteristics most frequently involved in design process. A physical contradiction might be solved by separation principles.

A technical contradiction may be transformed to a physical contradiction in some circumstances. Contradiction analysis is the fundamental step to apply 40 inventive principles, one of the knowledge base tools [2] [5] [7] [10].

Required function analysis refers to select the objective of the system and match it with the function list in the TRIZ Effect Knowledge Base. Required function analysis is the first step to use this knowledge base to search for the recommendations for accomplishing the objective [10].

ARIZ refers to Algorithm for Inventive Problem Solving, a set of successive logical procedures directed at reinterpretation of a given problem. In TRIZ standpoint, a technical problem becomes an invention one when a contradiction is overcome. However, real world problems do not always appear as contradictions. Furthermore, Su-field analysis and required function analysis may not be applied directly in some situations. Thus, it is not obvious how to apply TRIZ knowledge base tools to aid the problem solving.

ARIZ is a step-by-step method, whereby, given an unclear technical problem, the inherent contradictions are revealed, formulated and resolved [5]. These tools are developed based on the accumulated human innovation experience and the vast patent collection. The knowledge base tools are different from analytical tools in that they suggest ways for transforming the system, while analytical tools help changing the problem statement in favor of problem solving [7]. Forty Inventive Principles are used to guide the TRIZ practitioner in developing useful concepts of solution for inventive situations.

Each of solutions is a recommendation to make a specific change to a system for eliminating technical contradictions. Contradiction table recommends which. Seventy-six Standard Solutions were developed for solving standard problems based on the Patterns of Evolution of Technological Systems.

These Standard Solutions are grouped into five classes according to their objectives; the order of solutions within the classes reflects certain directions in the evolution of technological systems. To use these tools, one identifies based on the model obtained in Su-field analysis the class of a particular problem and then chooses a set of Standard Solutions accordingly.

The standard solution is a recommendation as to what kind of system transformation should be made to eliminate the problem. Very early in his research, Altshuller recognized that given a difficult problem, the ideality and ease of implementation of a particular solution could be substantially increased by utilizing various physical, chemical and geometric effects. Up to now, a large database has been developed. In applying Effects of Knowledge Base tool, one.

First International Conference on Axiomatic Design Cambridge, MA June , has to select an appropriate function the system performs based on the required function analysis , then the knowledge base provides many alternatives for delivering the function. Seven corollaries, which serve as the design rules, are derived from two axioms directly, so comparing these lower level design rules with TRIZ tools is useful to understand these two methodologies. Corollary 1 Decoupling of Coupled Design Decouple or separate parts or aspects of a solution if FRs are coupled or become interdependent in the proposed design.

This corollary states that functional independence must be ensured by decoupling if a proposed design couples the functional requirements. Functional decoupling may be achieved without physical separation.

However, in many cases, such physical decomposition may be the best way of solving the coupling problem [1] [3]. There are two types of contradictions: technological contradiction and physical contradiction.

A technological contradiction is derived from a physical contradiction. So, certain changes of the physical structure of a technological system guided by Contradiction Table and 40 Inventive Principles or Separation Principles are often required to remove contradiction.

Corollary 2 Minimization of FRs Minimize the number of functional requirements and constraints. Corollary 2 states that as the number of functional requirements and constraints increases, the system become more complex and thus the information content is increased. This corollary recommends the designer strive for maximum simplicity in overall design or the utmost simplicity in physical and functional characteristics.

IFR states that a system is a fee for realization of the required function and IFR will be realized if the system does not exist, but the required function is performed. IFR helps an engineer to focus on concepts that minimize requirements in substance, energy and complexity of engineering product and process. Corollary 3 states that the number of physical components should be reduced through integration of parts without coupling functional requirements.

However, mere physical integration is not desirable if it results in an increase of information content or in a coupling of functional requirements. Corollary 4 Use of Standardization Use standardization or interchangeable parts if the use of these parts is consistent with FRs and constraints.

Evolution Pattern 5, Increased Complexity followed by Simplification. This pattern states that technological systems tend to develop first toward increased complexity i. Line Mo-Bi-Poly reflects that Mono-function products evolve into bi-function or poly-function products through integration of physical embodiments.

No patterns, principles or tools correspond to this corollary. TRIZ focus its studies on inventive problem solving, so it pays less attention to the standardization and interchangeability of physical components. The corollary states a well-known design rule: use standard parts, methods, operations and routine, manufacture, and assembly. Special parts should be minimized to decrease cost. Interchangeable parts allow for the reduction of inventory, as well as the simplification of manufacturing and service operations, i.

JOHNNY THE HOMICIDAL MANIAC COMICS PDF

A COMPARISON OF TRIZ AND AXIOMATIC DESIGN

Editor On 19, Aug This is part 1 of a 2-part article. Part 2 appeared in September, Kai Yang and Hongwei Zhang kyang mie.

AL WASEET NEWSPAPER UAE PDF

.

Related Articles