Advertisement

Fusion of TRIZ and Axiomatic Design Principles: An Investigation in Scalability of System Design Processes to Contemporary Design Frameworks

  • Himanshu PandayEmail author
  • Bishakh Bhattacharya
Conference paper
Part of the Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies book series (SIST, volume 135)

Abstract

The research paper reflects on advancements in the amalgamation of established methods of TRIZ and axiomatic design techniques in the context of system design. The fusion of problem rendering capabilities of axioms and innovation potential of TRIZ matrix is explored and examined by multiple theoretical standpoints. An analytical conclusion is derived through comparative analysis of contemporary developments in the mixed method technique. Methodological voids in the advancements are also constituted by analogical comparisons in the design cycle. A reference to the human-centered design process is established as a demonstration of scalability of TRIZ–Axiom framework to contemporary multi-dimensional design practices.

Keywords

System design Axiomatic design TRIZ Design innovation 

References

  1. 1.
    Jugulum, R., Sefik, M.: Building a robust manufacturing strategy. Comput. Ind. Eng. 35, 225–228 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pallas, F., Groening, C., Mittal, V.: Allocation of resources to customer satisfaction and delight based on utilitarian and hedonic benefits. J. Res. Market. 2, 106–112 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wang, C.: Incorporating customer satisfaction into the decision-making process of product configuration: a fuzzy Kano perspective. Int. J. Prod. Res. 51, 6651–6662 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tomiyama, T., Gu, P., Jin, Y., Lutters, D., Kind, C., Kimura, F.: Design methodologies: industrial and educational applications. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 58, 543–565 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Panday, H., Bhattacharya, B.: Comparative Definitions of Design Theories and Methodologies. Process Interventions for Radical Design Innovations (2017)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Panday, H., Bhattacharya, B.: Mixed Method Endeavours with TRIZ and Axiomatic Design. Process Interventions for Radical Design Innovations (2017)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Altshuller, G.S., Shulyak, L., Rodman, S.: 40 Principles: TRIZ Keys to Technical Innovation (1997)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Al’tshuller, G.S.: Creativity as an Exact Science: The Theory of the Solution of Inventive Problems. Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, New York  (1984)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhang, J., Tan, K., Chai, K.: Systematic innovation in service design through TRIZ. In: Proceedings of the EurOMA-POMS 2003 Annual Conference, vol. 1, pp. 1013–1022 (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kang, Y.J., Skuratovich, A., Chung, P.K.: TRIZ applied to axiomatic design and case study: improving tensile strength of polymer insulator. In: TRIZ Future Conference (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yang, K., Zhang, H.: A comparison of TRIZ and axiomatic design. In: First International Conference on Axiomatic Design, pp. 235–243 (2000)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kim, Y.S., Cochran, D.S.: Reviewing TRIZ from the perspective of axiomatic design. J. Eng. Des. 11, 79–94 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mann, D.: Axiomatic design and TRIZ: compatibilities and contradictions. In: Proceedings of ICAD2002 Second International Conference on Axiomatic Design, pp. 1–7. Cambridge, MA (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ruihong, Z., Runhua, T., Guozhong, C.: Case study in AD and TRIZ: a paper machine. TRIZ J. (2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shin, G.S., Park, G.J.: Conceptual design of a beam splitter for the laser marker using axiomatic design and TRIZ. J. Korean Soc. Precis Eng 21 (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kankey, A., Ogot, M.: Improving the acoustics in a historic building using axiomatic design and TRIZ. TRIZ J. 1–7 (2005)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ogot, M.: Conceptual design using axiomatic design in a TRIZ framework. In: TRIZ Future Conference, pp. 736–744. Elsevier B.V. (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Park, G.: Decoupling process of a coupled design using the TRIZ module, pp. 1–9 (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shirwaiker, R., Okudan, G.: TRIZ and axiomatic design: a review of manufacturing case-studies & their compatibility. In: 2006 Technology Management for the Global Future—PICMET 2006 Conference (2006)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zhang, R., Cha, J., Lu, Y.: A conceptual design model using axiomatic design, functional basis and TRIZ. In: 2007 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, pp. 1807–1810 (2007)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Shirwaiker, R.A., Okudan, G.E.: Triz and axiomatic design: a review of case-studies and a proposed synergistic use. J. Intell. Manuf. 19, 33–47 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hu, M., Kai, Y., Shin, T.: Enhancing robust design with the aid of TRIZ and axiomatic design (part II) Matthew Hu Ford Motor Company. Design 1–18 (2008)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Uang, S., Liu, C., Chang, M.: A Product Design Approach by Integrating Axiomatic Design and TRIZ. Design, User Experience, and Usability. …, pp. 225–233 (2011)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Duflou, J.R., Dewulf, W.: On the complementarity of TRIZ and axiomatic design: From decoupling objective to contradiction identification. Proc. Eng. 9, 633–639 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Shirwaiker, R.A., Okudan, G.E.: Contributions of TRIZ and axiomatic design to leanness in design: An investigation. Proc. Eng. 9, 730–735 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kremer, G.O., Chiu, M.C., Lin, C.Y., Gupta, S., Claudio, D., Thevenot, H.: Application of axiomatic design, TRIZ, and mixed integer programming to develop innovative designs: a locomotive ballast arrangement case study. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 61, 827–842 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Borgianni, Y., Matt, D.: Axiomatic design and TRIZ: deficiencies of their integrated use and future opportunities (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Borgianni, Y., Matt, D.T.: Applications of TRIZ and axiomatic design: a comparison to deduce best practices in industry. Proc. CIRP 39, 91–96 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Suh, N.P.: Designing-in of quality through axiomatic design. IEEE Trans. Reliab. 44, 256–264 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Suh, N.P., Do, S.-H.: Axiomatic design of software systems. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 49, 95–100 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lee, K.D., Suh, N.P., Oh, J.-H.: Axiomatic design of machine control system. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 50, 109–114 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Suh, N.P., Cochran, D.S., Lima, P.C.: Manufacturing system design. CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 47, 627–639 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Suh, N.P.: The Principles of Design (1990)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kurr, T.T.: Synthesis of the principle-based and other product development approaches with emphasis on concept generation and evaluation (1998)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Panday, H., Bhattachrya, B.: Exploring need in narratives: human computer interaction in the design of a home automation system for the elderly people (2016)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Articles, R.: Su-Field Analysis, pp. 1–9 (2015)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ideo: An Introduction to human-centered design. In: HCD Workshop, pp. 1–19 (2013)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Nayan Jyoti, B., Panday, H., Verma, V., Bhattachrya, B.: Design of passive pipe health monitoring systems. In: 8th International Collaboration Symposium on Information, Production and Systems (ISIPS 2014) (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Indian Institute of Technology KanpurKanpurIndia

Personalised recommendations