Comparing the strategies and outputs of designers using Algorithm of Inventive Problem Solving, Axiomatic Design, or Environment-Based Design

Sébastien Dubois (1) , Derrick Tate (2) , Céline Conrardy (1) , Thanh an Nguyen (3) , Roland de Guio (1) , Aditya Gaik-Wad (2)

1 LGeco - Laboratoire de Génie de la Conception
2 Department of Mechanical Engineering
3 CIISE - Concordia Institute for Information Systems Engineering

This paper presents the results of a study designed to compare the processes followed by practitioners of three design methods: the algorithm of inventive problem solving, axiomatic design, and environment-based design. Prior literature has postulated the complementary nature of these design methods, and in some cases, has provided case studies of their mutual application on a design problem. However, prior studies have not focused on the de-tailed activities used in each method to examine the similarities and differences in the outputs of the activities. In this study, a series of three one-day and three three-day design exercises were conducted simultaneously by three international research groups, each focusing on one method. The objectives of this study were to examine the early stages of the design process that deal with macro activities: problem analysis, problem synthesis, and design evalua-tion and decision making. Several micro design activities were conducted within these, depending on the design method: clarification of requirements, gathering information on existing technologies, initial conceptualization of an assembly of technologies, the identification of system contradictions/coupling, and the solution of contradictions. The objectives of this comparative study were to establish, from observations of practitioners -- rather than from a theoretical point of view -- the differences and complementarities between the design methods. The problems pre-sented to designers covered a range of design tasks that spanned multiple disciplines, multiple levels of open-endedness/specificity of the task, and various levels of inventiveness required. The comparison showed the complementary nature of the design methods, highlighted their respective strengths, and suggested the outlines of an integrated method based on the main benefit of each.

Mots clés: Algorithm of Inventive Problem Solving (ARIZ); Theory of Inventive Problem Solving (TRIZ); Axiomatic Design (AD); Environment-Based Design (EBD)

Domaines: Génie mécanique [physics.class-ph]; Génie mécanique [physics.class-ph]

Sébastien Dubois, Derrick Tate, Céline Conrardy, Thanh an Nguyen, Roland de Guio, et al.. Comparing the strategies and outputs of designers using Algorithm of Inventive Problem Solving, Axiomatic Design, or Environment-Based Design. Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, 2012, 16 (3), pp.89-110. ⟨10.3233/jid-2012-0018⟩. ⟨hal-00794228⟩