**2. Theory of Inventive Problem Solving (TRIZ)**

The Theory of Inventive Problem Solving, better known by its acronym TRIZ was developed by Genrich Altshuller, from 1946 [1]. TRIZ is a theory that can help any engineer invent.

The TRIZ methodology can be seen and used on several levels. The highest level, the TRIZ can be seen as a science, as a philosophy or a way to be in life (a creative mode and a permanent

search of continuous improvement). The more practical level, the TRIZ can be seen as a set of analytical tools that assist in the detection of contradictions on systems, in formulating and solving of design problems through the elimination or mitigation of contradictions [2].

A system conflict or contradiction occurs when the improvement of certain attributes results in the deterioration of others. The typical conflicts are: reliability/complexity; productivity/

lead to conflict with another part.

become more ideal.

technology with a new technology. About 4% of the total.

application of traditional engineering techniques does not produce notable results.

We can evaluate an inventive level of a technical system by its degree of Ideality.

typical conflicts are: reliability/complexity; productivity/precision; strength/ductility, etc.

77

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/55979

systematizes solutions that can be used for different technical fields and activities.

solved only by the development of a new system based on a different principle of operation.

most important and difficult tasks, with numerous impediments. The situation is often obscured.

There are several ways to increase an ideality of a technical system.

TRIZ: Design Problem Solving with Systematic Innovation

aims to remove contradictions and to remove compromises.

Level 4: solutions based on application of new scientific principles. It solves the problem by replacing the original

The TRIZ aims to assist the development of design tasks at levels 3 and 4 (about a quarter of the total), where the simple

The Law of Ideality states that any technical system tends to reduce costs, to reduce energy wastes, to reduce space and dimensional requirements, to become more effective, more reliable, and simpler. Any technical system, during its lifetime, tends to

The TRIZ axiom of evolution reveals that, during the evolution of a technical system, improvement of any part of that system can

A system conflict or contradiction occurs when the improvement of certain attributes results in the deterioration of others. The

Traditional engineering and design practices can become insufficient and inefficient for the implementation of new scientific principles or for radical improvements of existing systems. Traditional way of technical and design contradictions' solving is through search of possible compromise between contradicting factors, whereas the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving (TRIZ)

The inconsistencies are eliminated by modification of the entire system or by modification of one or more subsystems. TRIZ

In TRIZ, the problems are divided into local and global problems [1]. The problem is considered as local when it can be mitigated or eliminated by modifying of a subsystem, keeping the remaining unchanged. The problem is classified as global when it can be

Over the past decades, TRIZ has developed into a set of different practical tools that can be used together or apart for technical

Generally, the TRIZ's problem solving process is to define a specific problem, formalize it, identify the contradictions, find examples of how others have solved the contradiction or utilized the principles, and finally, apply those general solutions to the

It is important to identify and to understand the contradiction that is causing the problem as soon as possible. TRIZ can help to identify contradictions and to formalize problems to be solved. The identification and the formalizing of problems is one of the

The problem can be generalized by selecting one of the TRIZ problem solving tools. The generic solutions available within TRIZ

Level 5: innovative solutions based on scientific discoveries not previously explored. Less than 1% of the total.

Traditional engineering and design practices can become insufficient and inefficient for the implementation of new scientific principles or for radical improvements of existing systems. Traditional way of technical and design contradictions' solving is through search of possible compromise between contradicting factors, whereas the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving

The inconsistencies are eliminated by modification of the entire system or by modification of one or more subsystems. TRIZ systematizes solutions that can be used for different technical

In TRIZ, the problems are divided into local and global problems [1]. The problem is considered as local when it can be mitigated or eliminated by modifying of a subsystem, keeping the remaining unchanged. The problem is classified as global when it can be solved only by the

Over the past decades, TRIZ has developed into a set of different practical tools that can be

problem solving and design failure analysis.

Figure 1 shows the steps of the TRIZ's problem solving.

General Solution

Specific Solution

Figure 1. Steps of the TRIZ's algorithm for problem solving [4]

can be of great benefit at choosing of corrective actions.

Problem formulation system.

The integral development of TRIZ consists of a set of concepts [5]:

Generally, the TRIZ's problem solving process is to define a specific problem, formalize it, identify the contradictions, find examples of how others have solved the contradiction or utilized the principles, and finally, apply those general solutions to the particular problem.

It is important to identify and to understand the contradiction that is causing the problem as soon as possible. TRIZ can help to identify contradictions and to formalize problems to be solved. The identification and the formalizing of problems is one of the most important and

The problem can be generalized by selecting one of the TRIZ problem solving tools. The generic solutions available within TRIZ can be of great benefit at choosing of corrective actions.

(TRIZ) aims to remove contradictions and to remove compromises.

development of a new system based on a different principle of operation.

Figure 1 shows the steps of the TRIZ's problem solving.

**Figure 1.** Steps of the TRIZ's algorithm for problem solving [4]

General Problem

Specific Problem

difficult tasks, with numerous impediments. The situation is often obscured.

used together or apart for technical problem solving and design failure analysis.

particular problem.

precision; strength/ductility, etc.

fields and activities.

The TRIZ methodology is based on the following grounds:


Every system that performs a technical function is a technical system. Any technical system can contain one or more subsystems. The hierarchy of technical systems can be complex with many interactions. When a technical system produces harmful or inadequate effects, the system needs to be improved. Technical systems emerge; ripen to maturity, and die (they are replaced with new technical systems).

Altshuller's analysis of a large number of patents reveals that inventive value of different inventions is not equal. Altshuller systematized the solutions described in patent applications dividing them into five levels [3]:


The TRIZ aims to assist the development of design tasks at levels 3 and 4 (about a quarter of the total), where the simple application of traditional engineering techniques does not produce notable results.

The Law of Ideality states that any technical system tends to reduce costs, to reduce energy wastes, to reduce space and dimensional requirements, to become more effective, more reliable, and simpler. Any technical system, during its lifetime, tends to become more ideal.

We can evaluate an inventive level of a technical system by its degree of Ideality.

There are several ways to increase an ideality of a technical system.

The TRIZ axiom of evolution reveals that, during the evolution of a technical system, im‐ provement of any part of that system can lead to conflict with another part.

There are several ways to increase an ideality of a technical system.

application of traditional engineering techniques does not produce notable results.

We can evaluate an inventive level of a technical system by its degree of Ideality.

technology with a new technology. About 4% of the total.

Level 4: solutions based on application of new scientific principles. It solves the problem by replacing the original

The TRIZ aims to assist the development of design tasks at levels 3 and 4 (about a quarter of the total), where the simple

The Law of Ideality states that any technical system tends to reduce costs, to reduce energy wastes, to reduce space and dimensional requirements, to become more effective, more reliable, and simpler. Any technical system, during its lifetime, tends to

The TRIZ axiom of evolution reveals that, during the evolution of a technical system, improvement of any part of that system can

A system conflict or contradiction occurs when the improvement of certain attributes results in the deterioration of others. The

Traditional engineering and design practices can become insufficient and inefficient for the implementation of new scientific

The problem can be generalized by selecting one of the TRIZ problem solving tools. The generic solutions available within TRIZ

Level 5: innovative solutions based on scientific discoveries not previously explored. Less than 1% of the total.

A system conflict or contradiction occurs when the improvement of certain attributes results in the deterioration of others. The typical conflicts are: reliability/complexity; productivity/ precision; strength/ductility, etc. principles or for radical improvements of existing systems. Traditional way of technical and design contradictions' solving is through search of possible compromise between contradicting factors, whereas the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving (TRIZ)

lead to conflict with another part.

become more ideal.

Traditional engineering and design practices can become insufficient and inefficient for the implementation of new scientific principles or for radical improvements of existing systems. Traditional way of technical and design contradictions' solving is through search of possible compromise between contradicting factors, whereas the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving (TRIZ) aims to remove contradictions and to remove compromises. aims to remove contradictions and to remove compromises. The inconsistencies are eliminated by modification of the entire system or by modification of one or more subsystems. TRIZ systematizes solutions that can be used for different technical fields and activities.

The inconsistencies are eliminated by modification of the entire system or by modification of one or more subsystems. TRIZ systematizes solutions that can be used for different technical fields and activities. In TRIZ, the problems are divided into local and global problems [1]. The problem is considered as local when it can be mitigated or eliminated by modifying of a subsystem, keeping the remaining unchanged. The problem is classified as global when it can be

In TRIZ, the problems are divided into local and global problems [1]. The problem is considered as local when it can be mitigated or eliminated by modifying of a subsystem, keeping the remaining unchanged. The problem is classified as global when it can be solved only by the development of a new system based on a different principle of operation. solved only by the development of a new system based on a different principle of operation. Over the past decades, TRIZ has developed into a set of different practical tools that can be used together or apart for technical problem solving and design failure analysis.

Over the past decades, TRIZ has developed into a set of different practical tools that can be used together or apart for technical problem solving and design failure analysis. Generally, the TRIZ's problem solving process is to define a specific problem, formalize it, identify the contradictions, find

Generally, the TRIZ's problem solving process is to define a specific problem, formalize it, identify the contradictions, find examples of how others have solved the contradiction or utilized the principles, and finally, apply those general solutions to the particular problem. examples of how others have solved the contradiction or utilized the principles, and finally, apply those general solutions to the particular problem.

Figure 1 shows the steps of the TRIZ's problem solving. Figure 1 shows the steps of the TRIZ's problem solving.

search of continuous improvement). The more practical level, the TRIZ can be seen as a set of analytical tools that assist in the detection of contradictions on systems, in formulating and solving of design problems through the elimination or mitigation of contradictions [2].

Every system that performs a technical function is a technical system. Any technical system can contain one or more subsystems. The hierarchy of technical systems can be complex with many interactions. When a technical system produces harmful or inadequate effects, the system needs to be improved. Technical systems emerge; ripen to maturity, and die (they are

Altshuller's analysis of a large number of patents reveals that inventive value of different inventions is not equal. Altshuller systematized the solutions described in patent applications

**•** Level 1: routine solutions using methods well known in their area of specialty. The Level 1

**•** Level 2: small corrections in existing systems using methods known in the industry. About

**•** Level 3: major improvements that solve contradictions in typical systems of a particular branch of industry. About 20% of the total. This is where creative design solutions appear. **•** Level 4: solutions based on application of new scientific principles. It solves the problem by

**•** Level 5: innovative solutions based on scientific discoveries not previously explored. Less

The TRIZ aims to assist the development of design tasks at levels 3 and 4 (about a quarter of the total), where the simple application of traditional engineering techniques does not produce

The Law of Ideality states that any technical system tends to reduce costs, to reduce energy wastes, to reduce space and dimensional requirements, to become more effective, more reliable, and simpler. Any technical system, during its lifetime, tends to become more ideal.

The TRIZ axiom of evolution reveals that, during the evolution of a technical system, im‐

We can evaluate an inventive level of a technical system by its degree of Ideality.

provement of any part of that system can lead to conflict with another part.

There are several ways to increase an ideality of a technical system.

replacing the original technology with a new technology. About 4% of the total.

is not really innovative. This category is about 30% of the total.

The TRIZ methodology is based on the following grounds:

**•** Technical systems. **•** Levels of innovation.

76 Advances in Industrial Design Engineering

**•** Law of ideality. **•** Contradictions.

replaced with new technical systems).

dividing them into five levels [3]:

45% of the total.

than 1% of the total.

notable results.

Figure 1. Steps of the TRIZ's algorithm for problem solving [4] **Figure 1.** Steps of the TRIZ's algorithm for problem solving [4]

It is important to identify and to understand the contradiction that is causing the problem as soon as possible. TRIZ can help to identify contradictions and to formalize problems to be solved. The identification and the formalizing of problems is one of the It is important to identify and to understand the contradiction that is causing the problem as soon as possible. TRIZ can help to identify contradictions and to formalize problems to be solved. The identification and the formalizing of problems is one of the most important and difficult tasks, with numerous impediments. The situation is often obscured.

most important and difficult tasks, with numerous impediments. The situation is often obscured. The problem can be generalized by selecting one of the TRIZ problem solving tools. The generic solutions available within TRIZ can be of great benefit at choosing of corrective actions.

Problem formulation system.

can be of great benefit at choosing of corrective actions.

The integral development of TRIZ consists of a set of concepts [5]:

The integral development of TRIZ consists of a set of concepts [5]:


Altshuller found that, despite the great technological diversity, there is only 1250 typical system conflicts. He also identified 39 engineering parameters or product attributes that engineers usually try to improve.

1. Segmentation 2. Extraction 3. Local quality 4. Asymmetry 5. Combining 6. Universality 7. Nesting 8. Counterweight 9. Prior counter-action 10. Prior action 11. Cushion in advance 12. Equipotentiality 13. Inversion 14. Spheroidality 15. Dynamicity

21. Rushing through 22. Convert harm into benefit

27. Inexpensive, short-lived object for expensive,

TRIZ: Design Problem Solving with Systematic Innovation

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/55979

79

28. Replacement of a mechanical system 29. Pneumatic or hydraulic construction 30. Flexible membranes or thin film 31. Use of porous material 32. Changing the color 33. Homogeneity

34. Rejecting and regenerating parts

35. Transformation of the physical and chemical states

23. Feedback 24. Mediator 25. Self-service 26. Copying

durable one

of an object

However, most of the principles of invention of Table 2 have a specific technical meaning

**•** Transition from a homogeneous structure of an object or outside environment/action to a

**•** Physical Contradiction - occurs when two mutually incompatible requirements refer to the

**•** Technical Contradiction - occurs when the improvement of a particular attribute or char‐

The first step in the conflict solving process is drawing up a statement of the problem in order to reveal the contradictions contained in the system. Then, the parameters that affect and

**•** Place each part of the object under conditions most favourable for its operation.

introduced by Altshuller. For example, the principle of Local Quality [6]:

**•** Have different parts of the object carry out different functions.

Altshuller built a contradictions matrix, classifying them as follows [1]:

acteristic of the system causes the deterioration of another attribute.

36. Phase transformation 37. Thermal expansion 38. Use strong oxidizers 39. Inert environment 40.Composite materials

16. Partial or overdone action 17. Moving to a new dimension 18. Mechanical vibration 19. Periodic action

20. Continuity of a useful action

**Table 2.** Invention principles of TRIZ

heterogeneous structure.

same element of the system.

improve system performance are identified.

Table 1 presents the list of these parameters.


All of these 1250 conflicts can be solved through the application of only 40 principles of invention [3], often called Techniques for Overcoming System Conflicts, which represent the Table 2.


**Table 2.** Invention principles of TRIZ

The integral development of TRIZ consists of a set of concepts [5]:

Altshuller found that, despite the great technological diversity, there is only 1250 typical system conflicts. He also identified 39 engineering parameters or product attributes that

21. Power

27. Reliability

All of these 1250 conflicts can be solved through the application of only 40 principles of invention [3], often called Techniques for Overcoming System Conflicts, which represent the

28. Accuracy of measurement 29. Accuracy of manufacturing 30. Harmful factors acting on object

31. Harmful side effects 32. Manufacturability 33. Convenience of use 34. Repairability 35. Adaptability 36. Complexity of device 37. Complexity of control 38. Level of automation 39. Productivity

22. Waste of energy 23. Waste of substance 24. Loss of information 25. Waste of time 26. Amount of substance

**•** Problem formulation system.

78 Advances in Industrial Design Engineering

**•** Analysis "Substance-Field".

engineers usually try to improve.

1. Weight of moving object 2. Weight of nonmoving object 3. Length of moving object 4. Length of nonmoving object 5. Area of moving object 6. Area of nonmoving object 7. Volume of moving object 8. Volume of nonmoving object

9. Speed 10. Force

12. Shape

11. Tension, pressure

13. Stability of object 14. Strength

17. Temperature 18. Brightness

Table 2.

15. Durability of moving object 16. Durability of nonmoving object

19. Energy spent by moving object 20. Energy spent by nonmoving object

**Table 1.** Engineering parameters according to TRIZ [3]

Table 1 presents the list of these parameters.

**•** Physical and technical contradictions solving.

**•** Algorithm of Inventive Problem Solving (ARIZ).

**•** Concept of the ideal state of a design.

However, most of the principles of invention of Table 2 have a specific technical meaning introduced by Altshuller. For example, the principle of Local Quality [6]:


Altshuller built a contradictions matrix, classifying them as follows [1]:


The first step in the conflict solving process is drawing up a statement of the problem in order to reveal the contradictions contained in the system. Then, the parameters that affect and improve system performance are identified.

Result 1-13)

The rows of the table of contradictions are then populated with parameters whose adjustment improves the behavior of the system, and these intersect the columns with parameters whose adjustment produces unwanted results. At the intersection are the numbers of invention principles that are suggested as being capable of solving the contradiction (Table 3). numbers of invention principles that are suggested as being capable of solving the contradiction (Table 3). In the Table 3, the rows and columns refer to the Table 1. The numbers in cells refer to

In the Table 3, the rows and columns refer to the Table 1. The numbers in cells refer to the Table 2. the Table 2. Table 3-a: Altshuller's Table of Contradictions (Features to Improve 1-20 vs. Undesired

Table 3-b: Altshuller's Table of Contradictions (cont.) (Features to Improve 1-20 vs.


Characteristics Characteristic that is getting worse




8 Volume of a stationary object - - - 30, 6


19, 2

4 Length of a stationary object 3, 25 - 12, 8



7 Volume of a mobile object 35

6 Area of a stationary object 40 - -

5 Area of a mobile object 6, 3 19, 32

2 Weight of a stationary object -

3 Length of a mobile object 19






16 Time of action of a stationary object - - - - 16



35, 19

18 Brightness - 32 1, 6

**Table 3-b:** Altshuller's Table of Contradictions (cont.) (Features to Improve 1-20 vs. Undesired Result 14-26)

20 Energy spent by a stationary object 35 - -

19 Energy spent by a moving object -

17 Temperature

15 Time of action of a moving object

13 Stability of composition

11 Tension/Pressure

14 Strength

12 Shape

9 Speed

10 Force

Characteristic to be improved

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 28, 27 5, 34 6, 29 19, 1 35, 12 12, 36 6, 2 5, 35 10, 24 10, 35 3, 26 18, 40 31, 35 4, 38 32 34, 31 18, 31 34, 19 3, 31 35 20, 28 18, 31 28, 2 2, 27 28, 19 19, 32 18, 19 15, 19 18, 19 5, 8 10, 15 10, 20 19, 6 10, 27 19, 6 32, 22 35 28, 1 18, 22 28, 15 13, 30 35 35, 26 18, 26 8, 35 10, 15 8, 35 7, 2 4, 29 15, 2 29, 34 19 24 35, 39 23, 10 29 15, 14 1, 40 3, 35 10, 28 30, 29 28, 26 35 38, 18 24, 35 14 3, 15 2, 15 15, 32 19, 10 15, 17 10, 35 29, 30 40, 14 16 19, 13 32, 18 30, 26 2, 39 6, 13






32

2, 10 35, 39 17, 7 10, 14 10, 35 2, 18 19, 30 38 30 18, 39 4, 18 40, 4

6, 28

TRIZ: Design Problem Solving with Systematic Innovation


29, 35

81

1, 24

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/55979

24, 26

30, 26

26, 4


35, 27

30, 16

2, 22

13, 26







10



35, 3

36, 22

1, 19

19, 18 27, 16 28, 20 3, 35 36, 40 18, 38 10, 16 31

14

14, 15

35


19, 2 28, 27 3, 35 35, 32 18, 31 31



13, 1


10, 30 19, 13 19, 18 32, 30 19, 15 2, 14 21, 17 21, 36 35, 28 3, 17 22, 40 39 36, 40 21, 16 3, 17 17, 25 35, 38 29, 31 21, 18 30, 39 2, 19 32, 35 32, 1 32, 35 13, 16 19, 1 6 19 19 1, 15 1, 6 26, 17 5, 19 28, 35 19, 24 2, 15 6, 19 12, 22 35, 24 35, 38 34, 23 9, 35 6, 18 3, 14 19 37, 18 15, 24 18, 5 19, 18 16, 18


9, 14 6, 35 34, 39 2, 13 35, 6 7, 15 36, 39 2, 6 29, 30 15, 7 4 10, 18 10 13, 18 13, 16 34, 10 34, 10 7 9, 14 35, 34 35, 6 10, 39 35, 16 17, 15 38 4 35, 34 32, 18 8, 3 3, 19 28, 30 10, 13 8, 15 19, 35 14, 20 10, 13 10, 19 26, 14 35, 5 36, 2 19 35, 38 38, 2 19, 35 28, 38 29, 38 35, 10 35, 10 19, 17 1, 16 19, 35 8, 35 10, 37 14, 29 14, 27 21 10 36, 37 18, 37 40, 5 36 18, 36 9, 18 19, 3 35, 39 14, 24 10, 35 2, 36 10, 36 37, 36 10, 14 3, 40 27 19, 2 10, 37 14 25 3, 37 4 36 30, 14 14, 26 22, 14 13, 15 2, 6 4, 6 35, 29 14, 10 10, 40 9, 25 19, 32 32 34, 14 2 3, 5 34, 17 17, 9 13, 27 39, 3 35, 1 32, 3 27, 4 32, 35 14, 2 2, 14 15, 32 15 10, 35 35, 23 32 27, 15 29, 18 27, 31 39, 6 30, 40 35 27, 3 30, 10 19, 35 10, 26 35, 28 29, 3 29, 10 26 40 10 35, 28 31, 40 28, 10 27 27, 3 19, 35 2, 19 28, 6 19, 10 28, 27 20, 10 3, 35 10 39 4, 35 35, 18 35, 38 3, 18 28, 18 10, 40





35

13, 19

35, 19





Undesired Result 14-26)

1 Weight of a mobile object


**Table 3-a:** Altshuller's Table of Contradictions (Features to Improve 1-20 vs. Undesired Result 1-13)


Table 3-b: Altshuller's Table of Contradictions (cont.) (Features to Improve 1-20 vs.

Undesired Result 14-26)

The rows of the table of contradictions are then populated with parameters whose adjustment improves the behavior of the system, and these intersect the columns with parameters whose adjustment produces unwanted results. At the intersection are the numbers of invention

In the Table 3, the rows and columns refer to the Table 1. The numbers in cells refer to the

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13


8, 15 15, 17 7, 17 13, 4 17, 10 1, 8 1, 8 1, 8 29, 34 4 4, 35 8 4 35 10, 29 15, 34 35, 28 17, 7 35, 8 1, 14 13, 14 39, 37 40, 29 10, 40 2, 14 35 15, 7 35 2, 17 14, 15 7, 14 29, 30 19, 30 10, 15 5, 34 11, 2 29, 4 18, 4 17, 4 4, 34 35, 2 36, 28 29, 4 13, 39 30, 2 26, 7 1, 18 10, 15 14, 18 9, 39 35, 36 36, 37 2, 26 1, 7 1, 7 29, 4 15, 35 6, 35 1, 15 28, 10 29, 40 4, 35 4, 17 38, 34 36, 37 36, 37 29, 4 1, 39 35, 10 35, 8 2, 18 7, 2 34, 28 19, 14 2, 14 37 35 35, 40 2, 28 13, 14 29, 30 7, 29 13, 28 6, 18 35, 15 28, 33 13, 38 8 34 34 15, 19 38, 40 18, 34 1, 18 8, 1 18, 13 17, 19 19, 10 1, 18 15, 9 2, 36 13, 28 18, 21 10, 35 35, 10 37, 18 1, 28 9, 36 15 36, 37 12, 37 18, 37 15, 12 11 40, 34 21 10, 36 13, 29 35, 10 35, 1 10, 15 10, 15 6, 35 6, 35 36, 35 35, 4 35, 33 37, 40 10, 18 36 14, 16 36, 28 36, 37 10 36 21 15, 10 2, 40 8, 10 15, 10 29, 34 13, 14 5, 34 14, 4 7, 2 35, 15 35, 10 34, 15 33, 1 29, 40 26, 3 5, 4 10, 7 4, 10 15, 22 35 34, 18 37, 40 10, 14 18, 4 21, 35 26, 39 13, 15 2, 11 28, 10 34, 28 33, 15 10, 35 2, 35 22, 1 2, 39 1, 40 1, 28 13 19, 39 35, 40 28, 18 21, 16 40 18, 4 1, 8, 40 40, 26 1, 15 15, 14 3, 34 9, 40 10, 15 9, 14 8, 13 10, 18 10, 3 10, 30 13, 17 15 27, 1 8, 35 28, 26 40, 29 28 14, 7 17, 15 26, 14 3, 14 18, 40 35, 40 35 19, 5 2, 19 3, 17 10, 2 3, 35 19, 2 19, 3 14, 26 13, 3 34, 31 9 19 19, 30 5 16 27 28, 25 35 6, 27 1, 40 35, 34 39, 3 19, 16 35 38 35, 23 36, 22 22, 35 15, 19 15, 19 3, 35 34, 39 35, 6 2, 28 35, 10 35, 39 14, 22 1, 35 6, 38 32 9 9 39, 18 40, 18 4 36, 30 3, 21 19, 2 19, 32 32 19, 1 2, 35 19, 32 19, 32 2, 13 10, 13 26, 19 32, 3 32 32 16 26 10 19 6 27 12, 18 15, 19 35, 13 16, 26 23, 14 12, 2 19, 13 28, 31 25 18 21, 2 25 29 17, 24 19, 9 27, 4 6, 27 29, 18



15, 8 29, 17 29, 2 2, 8 8, 10 10, 36 10, 14 1, 35 29, 34 38, 34 40, 28 15, 38 18, 37 37, 40 35, 40 19, 39 10, 1 35, 30 5, 35 8, 10 13, 29 13, 10 26, 39 29, 35 13, 2 14, 2 19, 35 10, 18 29, 14 1, 40












8, 35



12, 28

**Table 3-a:** Altshuller's Table of Contradictions (Features to Improve 1-20 vs. Undesired Result 1-13)


20 Energy spent by a stationary object - -

19 Energy spent by a moving object - - -

18 Brightness - -

17 Temperature 35, 38

16 Time of action of a stationary object - - - -

12 Shape -

7 Volume of a mobile object - - -

4 Length of a stationary object - - -

5 Area of a mobile object -

2 Weight of a stationary object - - -

1 Weight of a mobile object - -

3 Length of a mobile object - - -

11 Tension/Pressure 35, 24

9 Speed - - - -

8 Volume of a stationary object - 19, 14 --- 24, 35

6 Area of a stationary object - - - - - 2, 38


13 Stability of composition 37 39

15 Time of action of a moving object - -

10 Force 28, 10







In the Table 3, the rows and columns refer to the Table 1. The numbers in cells refer to

Table 3-a: Altshuller's Table of Contradictions (Features to Improve 1-20 vs. Undesired

principles that are suggested as being capable of solving the contradiction (Table 3).

Characteristics Characteristic that is getting worse

numbers of invention principles that are suggested as being capable of solving the

Table 2.

Result 1-13)

14 Strength

Characteristic to be improved

the Table 2.

contradiction (Table 3).

80 Advances in Industrial Design Engineering

**Table 3-b:** Altshuller's Table of Contradictions (cont.) (Features to Improve 1-20 vs. Undesired Result 14-26)

Undesired Result 27-39)


Table 3-c: Altshuller's Table of Contradictions (cont.) (Features to Improve 1-20 vs.

Table 3-d: Altshuller's Table of Contradictions (cont.) (Features to Improve 21-39 vs.

Characteristics Characteristic that is getting worse

1, 18

10, 24 10, 35 35 5

21 Power - 19, 38

22 Waste of energy 7

36 Complexity of device 6, 36

39 Productivity -

38 Level of automation 23 - - 13, 35

**Table 3-d:** Altshuller's Table of Contradictions (cont.) (Features to Improve 21-39 vs. Undesired Result 1-13)

26

33 Convenience of use -

31 Harmful side effects -

26 Amount of substance -

24 Loss of information 1, 26

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 8, 36 19, 26 1, 10 17, 32 35, 6 30, 6 15, 35 26, 2 22, 10 29, 14 35, 32 38, 31 17, 27 35, 37 13, 38 38 25 2 36, 35 35 2, 40 15, 31 15, 6 19, 6 7, 2 6, 38 15, 26 17, 7 7, 18 16, 35 14, 2 19, 28 18, 9 6, 13 7 17, 30 30, 18 23 38 39, 6 35, 6 35, 6 14, 29 10, 28 35, 2 10, 18 1, 29 3, 39 10, 13 14, 15 3, 36 29, 35 2, 14 23, 40 22, 32 10, 39 24 10, 31 39, 31 30, 36 18, 31 28, 38 18, 40 37, 10 3, 5 30, 40

36, 38 -


32, 2

35, 12

26, 16



83


3, 35 30, 18

35, 1


10, 20 10, 20 15, 2 30, 24 26, 4 10, 35 2, 5 35, 16 10, 37 37, 36 4, 10 35, 3 37, 35 26, 5 29 14, 5 5, 16 17, 4 34, 10 32, 18 36, 5 4 34, 17 22, 5 35, 6 27, 26 29, 14 15, 14 2, 18 15, 20 35, 29 35, 14 10, 36 15, 2 18, 31 18, 35 35, 18 29 40, 4 29 34, 28 3 14, 3 17, 40 3, 8 3, 10 15, 9 15, 29 17, 10 32, 35 3, 10 2, 35 21, 35 8, 28 10, 24 35, 1 10, 40 8, 28 14, 4 28, 11 14, 16 40, 4 14, 24 24 11, 28 10, 3 35, 19 16, 11 32, 35 28, 35 28, 26 32, 28 26, 28 26, 28 32, 13 28, 13 6, 28 6, 28 32, 35 26, 28 25, 26 5, 16 3, 16 32, 3 32, 3 6 32, 24 32 32 13 28, 32 28, 35 10, 28 2, 32 28, 33 2, 29 32, 28 25, 10 10, 28 28, 19 32, 30 13, 18 27, 9 29, 37 10 29, 32 18, 36 2 35 32 34, 36 40 22, 21 2, 22 17, 1 22, 1 27, 2 22, 23 34, 39 21, 22 13, 35 22, 2 22, 1 35, 24 27, 39 13, 24 39, 4 33, 28 39, 35 37, 35 19, 27 35, 28 39, 18 37 3, 35 30, 18 19, 22 35, 22 17, 15 17, 2 22, 1 17, 2 30, 18 35, 28 35, 28 2, 33 35, 40 15, 39 1, 39 16, 22 18, 39 40 40 35, 4 3, 23 1, 40 27, 18 27, 39 28, 29 1, 27 1, 29 15, 17 13, 1 13, 29 35, 13 35, 19 1, 28 11, 13 15, 16 36, 13 13, 17 27 26, 12 1, 40 8, 1 1, 37 13, 27 1 25, 2 6, 13 1, 17 1, 17 18, 16 1, 16 4, 18 18, 13 28, 13 2, 32 15, 34 32, 35 13, 15 1, 25 13, 12 13, 16 15, 39 35, 15 39, 31 34 35 12 29, 28 30 2, 27 2, 27 1, 28 3, 18 15, 13 25, 2 1, 11 1, 13 35, 11 35, 11 10, 25 31 32 35, 11 10 2, 4 1, 6 19, 15 35, 1 1, 35 35, 30 15, 35 35, 10 15, 17 15, 37 35, 30 15, 8 29, 16 29, 2 16 29, 7 29 14 20 1, 8 14 26, 30 2, 26 1, 19 14, 1 34, 26 34, 10 19, 1 29, 13 2, 22 34, 36 35, 39 26, 24 13, 16 6 28 35 28, 15 17, 19 27, 26 6, 13 16, 17 2, 13 2, 39 29, 1 2, 18 3, 4 36, 28 35, 36 27, 13 11, 22 28, 13 28, 1 26, 24 18, 17 30, 16 4, 16 26, 31 16, 35 40, 19 37, 32 1, 39 39, 30 28, 26 28, 26 14, 13 17, 14 35, 13 15, 32 18, 35 35, 10 17, 28 13 16 11, 13 35, 26 28, 27 18, 4 30, 7 10, 26 10, 35 2, 6 35, 37 28, 15 10, 37 14, 10 35, 3 24, 37 15, 3 28, 38 14, 26 34, 31 17, 7 34, 10 10, 2 10, 36 14 34, 40 22, 39


35

1




TRIZ: Design Problem Solving with Systematic Innovation

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/55979

26 30, 26 30, 16

15, 16

26 1, 16

28, 10 2, 35

35, 16

34, 9 13 2, 35

18, 1

16, 25

16, 40

Undesired Result 1-13)

37 Complexity of control

34 Repairability

32 Manufacturability

30 Harmful factors acting on object

28 Accuracy of measurement

27 Reliability

Characteristic to be improved

25 Waste of time

23 Waste of substance

29 Accuracy of manufacturing

35 Adaptability

**Table 3-c:** Altshuller's Table of Contradictions (cont.) (Features to Improve 1-20 vs. Undesired Result 27-39)


Table 3-d: Altshuller's Table of Contradictions (cont.) (Features to Improve 21-39 vs.

Undesired Result 1-13)

Table 3-c: Altshuller's Table of Contradictions (cont.) (Features to Improve 1-20 vs.

1, 18

Characteristics Characteristic that is getting worse

7 Volume of a mobile object 15, 29 26, 1

26, 28

27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 3, 11 28, 27 28, 35 22, 21 22, 35 27, 28 35, 3 2, 27 29, 5 26, 30 28, 29 26, 35 35, 3 1, 27 35, 26 26, 18 18, 27 31, 39 1, 36 2, 24 28, 11 15, 8 36, 34 26, 32 18, 19 24, 37 10, 28 18, 26 10,1 2, 19 35, 22 28, 1 6, 13 2, 27 19, 15 1, 10 25, 28 2, 26 1, 28 8, 3 28 35, 17 22, 37 1, 39 9 1, 32 28, 11 29 26, 39 17, 15 35 15, 35 10, 14 28, 32 10, 28 1, 15 1, 29 15, 29 1, 28 14, 15 1, 19 35, 1 17, 24 14,4 29, 40 4 29, 37 17, 24 17 35, 4, 7 10 1, 16 26, 24 26, 24 26, 16 28, 29 15, 29 32, 28 2, 32 15, 17 30, 14 28 3 10 27 7, 26 26, 28 22, 33 17, 2 13, 1 15, 17 15, 13 14, 1 2, 36 14, 30 10, 26 32, 3 28, 1 18, 39 26, 24 13, 16 10, 1 13 26, 18 28, 23 34, 2 32, 35 26, 28 2, 29 27, 2 22, 1 1, 18 2, 35 10, 15 40, 4 32, 3 18, 36 39, 35 40 36 30, 18 17, 7 14, 1 25, 28 22, 21 17, 2 29, 1 15, 13 29, 26 35, 34 10, 6 40, 11 2, 16 27, 35 40, 1 40 30, 12 4 16, 24 2, 34 2, 35 35, 10 34, 39 30, 18 2, 17 35, 37 16 25 19, 27 35, 4 26 10, 2

11, 35 28, 32 10, 28 1, 28 2, 24 35, 13 32, 28 34, 2 15, 10 10, 28 3, 34 27, 28 1, 24 32, 35 35, 23 35, 21 8, 1 13, 12 28, 27 26 4, 34 27, 16

35, 1

10, 36 10, 2 19, 22 19, 35 23 22, 37 18 16, 25

26, 27

1, 4 - -

35, 10 1 1

20 Energy spent by a stationary object - - - -

15, 19

19 Energy spent by a moving object - 19, 35 35, 36

**Table 3-c:** Altshuller's Table of Contradictions (cont.) (Features to Improve 1-20 vs. Undesired Result 27-39)

24

3, 35 35, 10 28, 29 1, 35 13, 3 15, 37 1, 28 15, 1 15, 17 26, 35 36, 37 3, 28 13, 21 23, 24 37, 36 40, 18 36, 24 18, 1 3, 25 11 18, 20 10, 18 10, 19 35, 37 10, 13 6, 28 22, 2 2, 33 1, 35 19, 1 2, 36 10, 14 19, 35 25 37 27, 18 16 35 37 35, 37 10, 40 28, 32 32, 30 22, 1 1, 32 32, 15 2, 13 1, 15 16, 29 15, 13 15, 1 17, 26 16 1 40 2, 35 17, 28 26 1 29 1, 28 39 32 34, 10

16, 4 16

35, 24 35, 40 32, 35 2, 35 35, 30 2, 35 35, 22 1, 8 23, 35 30, 18 27, 39 30 10, 16 34, 2 22, 26 39, 23 35 40, 3

2

2

1

10

15, 30


35

3 1, 35 26

32, 15



1, 6

1, 26 -

1, 31 -

10, 18

2, 35

35, 24


15

6, 10

32, 2

15, 16 23

3, 27 18, 35 15, 35 11,3 32, 40 27, 11 15, 3 2, 13 27, 3 29, 35 16 37, 1 22, 2 10, 32 28, 2 3 32 25, 28 15, 40 10, 14 11, 2 3, 27 22, 15 21, 39 27, 1 29, 10 1, 35 10, 4 19, 29 35, 17 13 16, 40 33, 28 16, 22 4 27 13 29, 15 39, 35 14, 19 34, 27 10, 26 17, 1 25, 34 20, 10 6, 40 24 40, 33 6, 35 16, 38 19, 35 32, 19 22, 33 22, 35 4, 10 2, 18 2, 17 3, 27 26, 2 15, 28 3, 10 24 35, 2 2, 24 16 27 16 35, 31 19, 16 35 11, 15 35, 19 19, 35 28, 26 15, 17 15, 1 6, 32 2, 26 2, 25 32 32, 39 28, 26 19 13, 16 19 13 10 16 19, 21 3, 1 1, 35 2, 35 28, 26 1, 15 15, 17 2, 29 12, 28 11, 27 32 6, 27 6 30 17, 28 13, 16 27, 28 35

Undesired Result 27-39)

82 Advances in Industrial Design Engineering

1 Weight of a mobile object

2 Weight of a stationary object

5 Area of a mobile object 2, 32

14 Strength 11, 3 3, 27

18 Brightness - 3, 32

4 Length of a stationary object - 2, 25

6 Area of a stationary object 40, 16

29, 9

8 Volume of a stationary object - 35 -

11 Tension/Pressure 3, 35 11

17 Temperature 26, 27

15 Time of action of a moving object 3 12, 27

13 Stability of composition 35, 19


13 18

16 Time of action of a stationary object - 22

3 Length of a mobile object 17, 15

Characteristic to be improved

9 Speed

10 Force

12 Shape

**Table 3-d:** Altshuller's Table of Contradictions (cont.) (Features to Improve 21-39 vs. Undesired Result 1-13)

Undesired Result 14-26)


Table 3-e: Altshuller's Table of Contradictions (cont.) (Features to Improve 21-39 vs.

Table 3-f: Altshuller's Table of Contradictions (cont.) (Features to Improve 21-39 vs.

Characteristics Characteristic that is getting worse

24 Loss of information - - 32 27, 22 - - -

33, 30



Waste of energy 32 - -

21 Power 32, 2

32 Manufacturability - -

36 Complexity of device 19, 1

27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 19, 24 32, 15 19, 22 2, 35 26, 10 26, 35 35, 2 19, 17 20, 19 19, 35 28, 2 28, 35 26, 31 2 31, 2 18 34 10 10, 34 34 30, 34 16 17 34 11, 10 21, 22 21, 35 35, 32 35, 3 28, 10 35 35, 2 2, 22 1 15, 23 29, 35 10, 29 16, 34 35, 10 33, 22 10, 1 15, 34 32, 28 2, 35 15, 10 35, 10 35, 18 35, 10 28, 35 39, 35 31, 18 24, 31 30, 40 34, 29 33 2, 24 34, 27 2 28, 24 10, 13 18 10, 23 10, 28 22, 10 10, 21 13, 23 23 1 22 15 10, 30 24, 34 24, 26 35, 18 35, 22 35, 28 4, 28 32, 1 18, 28 24, 28 4 28, 32 28, 18 34 18, 39 34, 4 10, 34 10 32, 10 35, 30 18, 3 13, 2 35, 33 3, 35 29, 1 35, 29 2, 32 15, 3 3, 13 3, 27 13, 29 28, 40 28 29, 31 40, 39 35, 27 25, 10 10, 25 29 27, 10 29, 18 3, 27 32, 3 11, 32 27, 35 35, 2 27, 17 13, 35 13, 35 27, 40 11, 13 1, 35 11, 23 1 2, 40 40, 26 40 8, 24 1 28 27 29, 38 5, 11 28, 24 3, 33 6, 35 1, 13 1, 32 13, 35 27, 35 26, 24 28, 2 10, 34 1, 23 22, 26 39, 10 25, 18 17, 34 13, 11 2 10, 34 32, 28 10, 34 28, 32 11, 32 26, 28 4, 17 1, 32 26, 2 26, 28 10, 18 1 10, 36 34, 26 35, 23 18 18, 23 32, 39 27, 24 28, 33 26, 28 24, 35 2, 25 35, 10 35, 11 22, 19 22, 19 33, 3 22, 35 2, 40 23, 26 10, 18 2 28, 39 2 22, 31 29, 40 29, 40 34 13, 24 24, 2 3, 33 4, 17 19, 1 2, 21 22, 35 40, 39 26 34, 26 31 27, 1 18, 39 1, 35 2, 5 35, 1, 25 2, 13 27, 26 6, 28 8, 28 35, 1 12, 18 13, 16 11, 9 15 1 11, 1 1 10, 28 17, 27 25, 13 1, 32 2, 25 2, 5 12, 26 15, 34 32, 26 1, 34 15, 1 8, 40 2, 34 35, 23 28, 39 12 1, 32 1, 16 12, 17 12, 3 28 11, 10 10, 2 35, 10 1, 35 1, 12 7, 1 35, 1, 25 34, 35 1, 32 1, 16 13 2, 16 11, 10 26, 15 4, 16 13, 11 7, 13 10 35, 13 35, 5 35, 11 1, 13 15, 34 1, 16 15, 29 27, 34 35, 28 8, 24 1, 10 32, 31 31 1, 16, 7 7, 4 37, 28 35 6, 37 13, 35 2, 26 26, 24 22, 19 27, 26 27, 9 29, 15 15, 10 15, 1 12, 17 1 10, 34 32 29, 40 1, 13 26, 24 28, 37 37, 28 24 28



1, 11


2, 19 -

TRIZ: Design Problem Solving with Systematic Innovation

35, 28 6, 29

35, 33


2, 5 12, 26 1, 15 34, 21 35, 18

35

8, 35


7, 33 2

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/55979

85

Substance-Field Analysis is one of TRIZ analytical tools. It can be used in the solution of

2, 33

2


31 Harmful side effects 2

24, 2 -






35 Adaptability - 1

34 Repairability 25, 10 -

27, 40 26, 24 22, 19 5, 28 15, 10 28, 8 32, 28 29, 28 11, 29 37, 28


11, 27 28, 26 28, 26 1, 26 1, 12 1, 35 27, 4 15, 24 34, 27 5, 12 32 10, 34 18, 23 13 34, 3 13 1, 35 10 25 35, 26 1, 35 1, 10 18, 10 22, 35 35, 22 35, 28 1, 28 1, 32 1, 35 12, 17 35, 18 5, 12 10, 38 34, 28 32, 1 13, 24 18, 39 2, 24 7, 19 10, 25 28, 37 28, 24 27, 2 35, 26

1, 13

Substance-Field Analysis is a useful tool for identifying problems in a technical system and finding innovative solutions to these identified problems. Recognized as one of the most valuable contributions of TRIZ, Substance-Field Analysis is able to model a system in a simple graphical approach, to identify problems and also to offer standard solutions for

Substance-Field Analysis is one of TRIZ analytical tools. It can be used in the solution of problems related to technical or design activities through functional models building [1].

problems related to technical or design activities through functional models building [1].

**Table 3-f:** Altshuller's Table of Contradictions (cont.) (Features to Improve 21-39 vs. Undesired Result 27-39)

The process of functional models construction comprehends the following stages [8]:

Undesired Result 27-39)

23 Waste of substance

26 Amount of substance

28 Accuracy of measurement

27 Reliability

25 Waste of time

29 Accuracy of manufacturing

33 Convenience of use

37 Complexity of control

38 Level of automation

30 Harmful factors acting on object

22

Characteristic to be improved

system improvement [7].

39 Productivity

1. Survey of available information.

2. Construction of Substance-Field diagram. 3. Identification of problematic situation.

**Table 3-e:** Altshuller's Table of Contradictions (cont.) (Features to Improve 21-39 vs. Undesired Result 14-26)


Table 3-f: Altshuller's Table of Contradictions (cont.) (Features to Improve 21-39 vs.

Table 3-e: Altshuller's Table of Contradictions (cont.) (Features to Improve 21-39 vs.

16

Characteristics Characteristic that is getting worse

26 - -

22 Waste of energy 3, 38


24 Loss of information 10 - 19

Amount of substance 35

3, 27 - 19, 26

28 Accuracy of measurement - -

11, 28

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 26, 10 19, 35 2, 14 16, 6 16, 6 10, 35 28, 27 35, 20 4, 34 28 10, 38 17, 25 19 19, 37 38 18, 38 10, 6 19

35, 28 28, 27 27, 16 21, 36 1, 6 35, 18 28, 27 28, 27 35, 27 15, 18 6, 3 31, 40 3, 18 18, 38 39, 31 13 24, 5 12, 31 18, 38 2, 31 35, 10 10, 24


29, 3 20, 10 28, 20 35, 29 1, 19 35, 38 35, 20 10, 5 35, 18 24, 26 35, 38 28, 18 28, 18 10, 16 21, 18 26, 17 19, 18 10, 6 18, 32 10, 39 28, 32 18, 16 14, 35 3, 35 3, 35 3, 17 34, 29 3, 35 7, 18 6, 3 24, 28 35, 38 34, 10 10, 40 31 39 16, 18 31 25 10, 24 35 18, 16

1

36, 23

2, 35 34, 27 3, 35 11, 32 21, 11 21, 11 10, 11 10, 35 10, 30 21, 28 3, 25 6, 40 10 13 27, 19 26, 31 35 29, 39 4 40, 3 28, 6 28, 6 10, 26 6, 19 6, 1 3, 6 3, 6 26, 32 10, 16 24, 34 2, 6 32 32 24 28, 24 32 32 32 27 31, 28 28, 32 32 3, 27 13, 32 35, 31 32, 26 40 2 10, 24 28, 18 18, 35 22, 15 17, 1 22, 33 1, 19 1, 24 10, 2 19, 22 21, 22 33, 22 22, 10 35, 18 35, 33 37, 1 33, 28 40, 33 35, 2 32, 13 6, 27 22, 37 31, 2 35, 2 19, 40 2 34 29, 31 15, 35 15, 22 21, 39 22, 35 19, 24 2, 35 19, 22 2, 35 21, 35 10, 1 10, 21 3, 24 22, 2 33, 31 16, 22 2, 24 39, 32 6 18 18 2, 22 34 29 39, 1 1, 3 27, 1 27, 26 28, 24 28, 26 27, 1 15, 34 32, 24 35, 28 35, 23 10, 32 4 18 27, 1 27, 1 12, 24 33 18, 16 34, 4 1, 24 32, 40 29, 3 1, 16 26, 27 13, 17 1, 13 35, 34 2, 19 28, 32 4, 10 4, 28 3, 28 8, 25 25 13 1, 24 24 2, 10 13 2, 24 27, 22 10, 34 11, 1 11, 29 15, 1 15, 1 15, 10 15, 1 2, 35 32, 1 2, 28 2, 9 28, 27 13 28, 16 32, 2 32, 19 34, 27 10, 25 10, 25 35, 3 13, 1 27, 2 6, 22 19, 35 19, 1 18, 15 15, 10 3, 35 32, 6 35 3, 35 26, 1 29, 13 29 1 2, 13 15 2, 13 10, 4 2, 17 24, 17 27, 2 20, 19 10, 35 35, 10 13, 3 28 28, 15 13 13 29, 28 30, 34 13, 2 28, 29 27, 10 27, 3 19, 29 25, 34 3, 27 2, 24 19, 35 19, 1 35, 3 1, 18 35, 33 18, 28 3, 27 15, 28 39, 25 6, 35 35, 16 26 16 16, 10 15, 19 10, 24 27, 22 32, 9 29, 18

> 26, 2 8, 32 2, 32 28, 2 35, 10 24, 28 19 19 13 27 18, 5 35, 30

1, 4 19, 35



25, 13 6, 9 - 23, 28 35, 33 35, 13


3, 32 32, 2 32, 2 -


1

29, 28 35, 10 20, 10 35, 21 26, 17 35, 10 35, 20 28, 10 28, 10 13, 15 10, 18 2, 18 16, 38 28, 10 19, 1 38, 19 10 29, 35 35, 23 23

35, 38

4, 10 -

35, 16

1

2, 16


**Table 3-e:** Altshuller's Table of Contradictions (cont.) (Features to Improve 21-39 vs. Undesired Result 14-26)


29 Accuracy of manufacturing - 32, 30

19, 38 1, 13 35, 27 10, 18 7, 18 7 32, 15 2, 37 32, 7 25




24, 26 24, 28 28, 32 35


10, 28

12, 35

35, 28

1, 22



6, 29


Undesired Result 14-26)

84 Advances in Industrial Design Engineering

21 Power

27 Reliability

26

25 Waste of time

23 Waste of substance

39 Productivity

35 Adaptability

34 Repairability

32

Characteristic to be improved

37 Complexity of control

36 Complexity of device

33 Convenience of use

Manufacturability

31 Harmful side effects

30 Harmful factors acting on object

38 Level of automation

Substance-Field Analysis is one of TRIZ analytical tools. It can be used in the solution of problems related to technical or design activities through functional models building [1]. **Table 3-f:** Altshuller's Table of Contradictions (cont.) (Features to Improve 21-39 vs. Undesired Result 27-39)

The process of functional models construction comprehends the following stages [8]:

system improvement [7].

1. Survey of available information.

2. Construction of Substance-Field diagram. 3. Identification of problematic situation.

Substance-Field Analysis is a useful tool for identifying problems in a technical system and finding innovative solutions to these identified problems. Recognized as one of the most valuable contributions of TRIZ, Substance-Field Analysis is able to model a system in a simple graphical approach, to identify problems and also to offer standard solutions for Substance-Field Analysis is one of TRIZ analytical tools. It can be used in the solution of problems related to technical or design activities through functional models building [1].

Substance-Field Analysis is a useful tool for identifying problems in a technical system and finding innovative solutions to these identified problems. Recognized as one of the most valuable contributions of TRIZ, Substance-Field Analysis is able to model a system in a simple graphical approach, to identify problems and also to offer standard solutions for system improvement [7].

Figure 3 shows the solution.

of the workpiece.

to General Solution 2.

Figure 5 shows the general solution.

General Solution 2.

permanent.

in the modification.

Figure 6 shows the general solution.

**Figure 5.** General Solution 2 for Problematic Situation 2

Figure 5 shows the general solution.

Substances).

**Figure 3.** General Solution 1 for Problematic Situation 1

S1 S2 S2 S1

The possible specific solution is to inspect pieces before the operation, putting aside faulty

A machine-tool fixture used for certain fabrication operation is damaging the lateral surfaces

Figure 4 shows the problem (Problematic Situation 2 - Harmful Interactions between the

Figure 4: Problematic Situation 2 - harmful interactions between the substances The Substance-Field Model is complete however the interaction between the substances is harmful. The problem corresponds to Problematic Situation 2 and can be solved resorting

The Substance-Field Model is complete however the interaction between the substances is harmful. The problem corresponds to Problematic Situation 2 and can be solved resorting to

S2 S1

F

Figure 5: General Solution 2 for Problematic Situation 2 The possible specific solution is to use another machine-tool fixture system or to modify the actual fixture in order to eliminate or reduce damages at the lateral surfaces of the

General Solution 3 is similar to General Solution 2, but instead of substance S2 modification, the substance S1 is modified. The characteristics (physical, chemical and/or other) of substance S1 are changed in order to become it less sensitive or insensitive to a harmful impact. The changes can be internal and/or external, can be temporary or

The physical and/or chemical characteristics of substance S1 may be altered internally or externally, so that it becomes less sensitive or insensitive to a harmful impact, as seen in Figure 4. The modification may be either temporary or permanent. Additives may be needed

Figure 6: General Solution 3 for Problematic Situation 2

S2 S'1

F

S´2 S1

F

S´2 S1

F

General Solution 3: Modify S1 to be Insensitive or Less Sensitive to Harmful Impact

workpiece. Then the harmful interaction is reduced or eliminated.

S2 S1

F

F

**Figure 4.** Problematic Situation 2 - harmful interactions between the substances

The problematic situation is the same (see Figure 4).

S2 S1

S2 S1

F

components from acceptable ones. Then the model becomes complete.

F

TRIZ: Design Problem Solving with Systematic Innovation

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/55979

87

The process of functional models construction comprehends the following stages [8]:


There are mainly five types of relationships among the substances: useful impact, harmful impact, excessive impact, insufficient impact and transformation [8].

Substance-Field Analysis has 76 standard solutions categorized into five classes [9]:


These 76 solutions can be condensed and generalized into seven standard solutions.
