0
Research Papers: Design Education

Creative Contributions of the Methods of Inventive Principles of TRIZ and BioTRIZ to Problem Solving

[+] Author and Article Information
Lucas N. Abdala

Program of Post Graduation in Mechanical
Engineering—POSMEC,
Federal University of Santa Catarina,
Florianópolis, SC 88040-900, Brazil
e-mail: lucasemc@gmail.com

Rodrigo B. Fernandes

Program of Post Graduation in Mechanical
Engineering—POSMEC,
Federal University of Santa Catarina,
Florianópolis, SC 88040-900, Brazil
e-mail: fernandes.rbf@gmail.com

André Ogliari

Department of Mechanical Engineering—EMC,
Federal University of Santa Catarina,
Florianópolis, SC 88040-900, Brazil
e-mail: andre.ogliari@ufsc.br

Manuel Löwer

Chair and Institute for Engineering Design—IKT,
RWTH Aachen University,
Aachen D-52074, Germany
e-mail: loewer@ikt.rwth-aachen.de

Jörg Feldhusen

Chair and Institute for Engineering Design—IKT,
RWTH Aachen University,
Aachen D-52074, Germany
e-mail: feldhusen@ikt.rwth-aachen.de

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Design Education Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL DESIGN. Manuscript received April 4, 2016; final manuscript received March 28, 2017; published online May 23, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Gul E. Okudan Kremer.

J. Mech. Des 139(8), 082001 (May 23, 2017) (9 pages) Paper No: MD-16-1268; doi: 10.1115/1.4036566 History: Received April 04, 2016; Revised March 28, 2017

This study compares the potential of the methods of inventive principles (IPR) of TRIZ (MIPT) and BioTRIZ (MIPB) in relation to stimulating creativity in problem solving. The two methods were applied to different issues by groups of undergraduate students. The solutions were evaluated in terms of creativity, which was defined by the criteria of originality and utility. Quantitative analysis provided evidence that the two methods are equal in terms of creative contributions. However, further analyses indicate that the IPs derived from biological systems tend to provide a greater creative contribution compared to those based on technical systems. In addition, it was found that repeated inventive principles (IPR), that is, those indicated more than once by the applied methods, tend to introduce a greater potential for stimulating creativity compared to inventive principles (IPs) indicated only once.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Steps to problem solving using TRIZ (adapted from Ref.[6])

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Partial view of a contradiction matrix used in MIPT

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Form used in the experiment and the corresponding example of its application

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Examples of ideas generated: (a) for the transmission line (problem 1) and (b) for the breaking system (problem 2)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Creative contribution IPRs to a given problem (number of total and creative solutions)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Ascending creative contributions of the IPs (considering only the number of creative solutions)

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In