|
Containment
Ring Problem (NOTE: The IWB portion of this case study can be found at www.ideationtriz.com/paper_IWB_comparative_case_study.htm.) Boris Zlotin, Alla Zusman, and Len Kaplan Ideation International Inc. Edited by Victoria Roza Introduction Introduction The variety of TRIZ tools available provides considerable flexibility in learning and utilizing TRIZ, but also creates confusion in the minds of new and potential TRIZ users. What are the differences between the various tools? Which tool (or tools) should be learned first? To which type of problem should each tool be applied? Indeed, each tool has its own advantages and limitations, and in an effort to provide clear and credible answers to these questions, the study described herein was undertaken.[2] As we have mentioned in previous publications,[3] TRIZ tools can be divided into two groups: Analytical tools that help to define, formulate and model a problem, and include:
Knowledge-base tools, derived from the accumulated knowledge of the human innovative experience, and organized and structured to provide users with the highest degree of problem-solving value. These include:
An armor-steel containment ring is designed to contain the fragments from an impeller burst of a maximum speed fan. The system consists of the fan, a fan shroud (which controls the direction of the air stream), and the containment ring (see Figure 1). The problem is this: the containment ring is too heavy, and must be reduced in weight by 50%.
The "map" shown below was used to select the appropriate tools, depending on the type of problem statement (in terms of parameter, functions, contradictions, etc.).
As the problem is stated in terms of a particular parameter (weight reduction) and contains a hidden technical contradiction[7], the following tools were selected:
The following tools were excluded from consideration: As mentioned earlier, the System of Operators is a complex, net-like tool containing numerous internal links – thus, it can be fully utilized only in a software environment. We selected the following Ideation software tools, both of which incorporate the System of Operators: The Improver[11] contains an abbreviated version of the System of Operators. The Improver is designed to be used to improve typical technical parameters of a product/process. Weight is one such parameter, making the Improver a suitable tool for the containment ring problem. The Innovation WorkBench[12] is a professional problem-solving software product that incorporates a comprehensive set of tools, including:
Main principle underlying the development of a TRIZ case study It is widely known among TRIZ professionals that success in problem solving is dependent on the following components:
The above components can be combined into the following equation: S = PC x PKN x (1+M) x (1+T) Where "S" is Success. In our experience teaching TRIZ, we have witnessed various combinations of the above components – where, for example, natural creativity or persistence can compensate for the lack of TRIZ knowledge, or vice versa. This fact has been demonstrated by a phenomenon well-known in the TRIZ community, where an experienced TRIZ professional finds a solution to a problem within the first steps of ARIZ, while students or less experienced professionals must complete nearly all of the steps before arriving at a solution. Obviously, in a teaching environment – as well as for the purposes of this comparison – we want to exclude the influence of PC and PKN and focus instead on the methodology. For this reason we have established and complied with the following main principle in the development of educational case studies and in teaching TRIZ students: Direct and minimal result: The result of each step offered by the methodology and its tools should be directly and clearly derived from the step recommendation or other TRIZ statement/information. In other words, an idea should be obviously prompted by a formulated problem statement, an Operator, Guide recommendation, or Illustration – and not the result of a remote association or from the engineering elaboration of an experienced TRIZ professional. Excluding the influence of PC and PKN is no easy task, nonetheless, we have tried to do just that in the containment ring case study. Working with the Contradiction Table and 40 Innovation Principles Selected feature to improve: Weight of moving object Degraded attribute: Strength The following Innovation Principles are recommended for trying to eliminate the above Technical Contradiction. 28. Replacement of a mechanical system 27. Inexpensive, short-lived object for expensive, durable one 18. Mechanical vibration 40. Composite materials In addition, the following pairs of parameters can be considered: Selected feature to improve: Weight of moving object Degraded attribute: Reliability Principles recommended: 3. Local conditions 11. Cushion in advance 1. Segmentation 27. Inexpensive, short-lived object for expensive, durable one Selected feature to improve: Weight of moving object Degraded attribute: Harmful factors acting on object Principles recommended: 22. Convert harm into benefit 21. Rushing through 18. Mechanical vibration 27. Disposable object (substitute an inexpensive, short-lived object for an expensive, durable one) Altogether we have obtained nine principles. Each has been considered in turn, yielding the following results: 28. Replacement of a mechanical system a. Replace a mechanical system by an optical, acoustical or olfactory (odor) system b. Use an electrical, magnetic or electromagnetic field for interaction with the object c. Replace fields, for instance: 1. Stationary fields with moving fields 2. Fixed fields with those which change in time 3. Random fields with structured fields d. Use a field in conjunction with ferromagnetic particles IDEA #1: Apply a magnetic field to contain the fragments. 27. Substitute an inexpensive, short-lived object for an expensive, durable one (Disposable object) Replace an expensive object by a collection of inexpensive ones, forgoing certain properties (e.g., longevity). IDEA #2: Use a disposable ring that will be destroyed while absorbing the energy of the fragments. 18. Mechanical vibration a. Set an object into oscillation b. If oscillation exists, increase its frequency, even to ultrasonic c. Use the resonant frequency d. Instead of mechanical vibration, use piezo-vibrators e. Use ultrasonic vibration in conjunction with an electromagnetic field No ideas. 40. Composite materials Replace a homogeneous material with a composite one Example: Military aircraft wings are made of composites of plastics and carbon fibers for high strength and low weight. IDEA #3: Make the ring from a composite material. 3. Local conditions a. Transition from a homogeneous structure of an object or outside environment/action to a heterogeneous structure b. Have different parts of the object carry out different functions c. Place each part of the object under conditions most favorable for its operation Example: To combat dust in coal mines, a fine, cone-shaped mist of water is applied to the working parts of the drilling and loading machinery. The smaller the droplets, the greater the effect in combating dust – the fine mist hinders the work, however. The solution is to develop a layer of coarse mist around the cone of fine mist. IDEA #4: Use a ring that has a heterogeneous structure. 11. Cushion in advance Compensate for the relatively low reliability of an object by countermeasures taken in advance. Example: Merchandise is magnetized to deter shoplifting. IDEA #5: Consider using additional protection from flying fragments should the reliability of the ring be insufficient. 1. Segmentation a. Divide an object into independent parts b. Make an object sectional c. Increase the degree of an object’s segmentation Example: Sectional furniture, modular computer components, folding wooden ruler IDEA #6: Use a multi-layer ring containing additional strengthening rings of different hardness and elasticity. 22. Convert harm into benefit a. Utilize harmful factors or environmental effects to obtain a positive effect b. Remove a harmful factor by combining it with another harmful factor c. Increase the amount of harmful action until it ceases to be harmful Example: When using high-frequency current to heat metal, it was found that only the outer layer became hot. This negative effect was later used for surface heat-treating. No ideas. 21. Rushing through Perform harmful or hazardous operations at very high speed. Example: A cutter for thin-walled plastic tubes prevents tube deformation during cutting by running at a very high speed (i.e., the cut is made before the tube has a chance to deform). No ideas. The following ideas (shown in order of feasibility) resulted from considering the above Principles:
It is important to mention that most of these ideas are general in nature and require further specification. Working with the Improver software The following menus were offered by the software:
We selected Improve a product:
Our main problem is Reduce weight. The following Operators are recommended:
Additional typical problems and recommended Operators appear in the table below:
Upon considering the recommended Operators (and their associated Illustrations) the following results were obtained: OPERATOR: Abandon symmetry
IDEA #1: Vary the thickness of the ring tube, reducing the thickness where permissible. OPERATOR: Reduce the weight of individual parts
IDEA #2: Reduce the energy of the fragments by reducing their weight (i.e., "help" the impeller break into smaller pieces). The ring is therefore not required to be as strong, and can be made lighter as a result. In the interest of brevity, we will provide text extracted from the software rather than screen shots.
IDEA #3: Use a multi-layer ring: additional strengthening rings, rings having different hardness and elasticity, rings which have a gap in between them where the gap is filled with an energy-absorbing material.
IDEA #4: Replace the ring with an airbag inflated by the impeller burst.
IDEA #5: Make a thin ring that has reinforcing ribs. If the ribs are placed on the internal surface of the ring, flying fragments will lose a large amount of their energy smashing into the ribs.
IDEA #6: Determine the places where the ring is most likely to break, and reinforce these places.
IDEA #7: Introduce preliminary stress – for example, use additional rings which have been pressure-fitted to create a force directed toward the inside the ring.
IDEA #8: Use thermal treatment to harden the ring material.
IDEA #9: Make the ring out of separate layers so that cracks that develop on the inside will not "spread."
IDEA #10: Use special threads, such as are found in bullet protection vests. IDEA #11: Use Ferro-concrete or some other composite material.
See IDEA #3 (multi-layer ring).
IDEA #12: Create inner stresses inside the ring. This can be done, for example, using wiring, banding, a double-ring structure, etc.
(Same as IDEA #3.)
IDEA #13: Use a disposable ring – i.e., a ring that will be destroyed while absorbing the energy of the fragments.
Consideration 1: The ring performs an auxiliary (i.e., corrective) function.
Consideration 1 (continued): The inherent shortcoming that the containment ring is designed to correct is an impeller burst. We should therefore consider a new problem: improving the mechanical strength of the fan to prevent it from bursting, and thus eliminating the need for a containment ring.
Consideration 2: We should also consider how other system elements might be used to perform the ring’s function.
IDEA #14: Use a magnetic field to contain the fragments.
Consideration 3: The fan should protect itself. We should consider the new problem formulated in Consideration 1. The Evaluating results section of the Improver software offers the following options:
Working with the typical problems presented by the Improver yielded 13 ideas. These ideas were evaluated and prioritized, taking in consideration the following criteria:
The results are as follows: Ideas #1 and 6: Vary the thickness of the ring, reducing the thickness where permissible. Determine the places where the ring is most likely to break, and reinforce these places. Idea #2: Reduce the energy of the fragments by reducing their weight (i.e., "help" the impeller break into smaller pieces). The ring is therefore not required to be as strong, and can be made lighter as a result. Ideas #3 and 9: Use a multi-layer ring: additional strengthening rings, rings having different hardness and elasticity, rings which have a gap in between them where the gap is filled with an energy-absorbing material. Make the ring out of separate layers so that cracks that develop on the inside will not "spread." Idea #5: Make a thin ring that has reinforcing ribs. If the ribs are placed on the internal surface of the ring, flying fragments will lose a large amount of their energy smashing into the ribs. Ideas #7 and 12: Introduce preliminary stress – for example, use additional rings which have been pressure-fitted to create a force directed toward the inside the ring. Create inner stresses inside the ring. This can be done, for example, using wiring, banding, a double-ring structure, etc. Idea #8: Use thermal treatment to harden the ring material. Ideas #10 and 11: Use special threads, such as are found in bullet protection vests. Use Ferro-concrete or some other composite material. Idea #4: Replace the ring with an airbag inflated by the impeller burst. Idea #13: Use a disposable ring – i.e., a ring that will be destroyed while absorbing the energy of the fragments. Idea #14 (which proposed the use of a magnetic field to contain the fragments) was excluded from the list due to the inability of a magnetic field to absorb the amount of energy we are dealing with in this system. Besides, fan can be made from a non-magnetic material. We selected an idea that was considered highly feasible (Idea #2) for enhancement. The options for enhancement are as follows:
After selecting Enhance product function efficiency, the following recommendations were provided by the software:
IDEA #15: If the impeller breaks, a direct explosion should take place at the exact moment of the break. This would serve two purposes:
The options for solving secondary problems are as follows:
We select Resolve a contradiction.
Idea #8 has a substantial drawback: hardening the ring can make it more brittle. By using the Resolve a contradiction template, we obtain the following contradiction: The idea [harden the ring] is acceptable because it provides [higher strength], and is unacceptable because it does not avoid [making the ring more brittle]. The following Separation Principles are considered:
IDEA #16: Introduce hardened segments uniformly distributed along the internal side of the ring made from a steel with higher plastic properties (see the Illustration entitled "Containers for jettisoning loads" earlier in this case study). This idea is compatible with Ideas #3 and 9 (multi-layer ring design). Reformulating the initial problem and obtaining new ideas
The purpose of improving the containment ring (reducing weight, increasing mechanical strength) is to enhance its corrective (i.e., protective) function of preventing fragments from flying away and causing severe damage. Thus, our new problem is: "Flying fragments." We return to the Develop Concepts menu:
We select from a new group of Operators for the typical problem Eliminate a drawback:
The cause of flying fragments is the impeller burst. The effect produced by flying fragments is the damage to the system. The problem of preventing the impeller burst is already on our list of considerations. We can add to the list the problem: Reduce the damage caused by flying fragments. Since for the purposes of this case study we are not targeting an exhaustive set of possible solutions, we will limit the analysis to eliminating the drawback itself – that is, to stop the fragments from flying. By selecting the item Eliminate the drawback, we obtain the following list of Operators:
IDEA #17: Use foam or foam-like material to absorb energy. For this purpose we would need a special type of foam such as metal foam. We can also consider using other fillings that absorb energy.
IDEA #18: Consider the possibility of "firing back," that is, explode the ring at the same instant the impeller bursts, so that the explosion shock wave counteracts the flying fragments. This idea is similar to Ideas #13 and 14.
IDEA #19: Determine which directions are the least dangerous and try to redirect the flying fragments in one of these directions. Final list of concepts (listed in order of feasibility):
The advantages of utilizing the Improver software versus the Contradiction Table are as follows:
1. The portion of the case study conducted using the Innovation WorkBench (IWB) System can be found at www.ideationtriz.com/paper_IWB_comparative_case_study.htm. 2. Also see also "Comparative Analysis of Selected TRIZ Tools," TRIZ in Progress (Ideation International, 1999). 3. "Tools Overview and Structure," Ideation/TRIZ Methodology course material (Ideation International, 1995). 4. The ISQ and Problem Formulator are recently-developed Ideation TRIZ analytical tools. 5. A recent Ideation TRIZ tool that incorporates the 40 Innovation Principles, Separation Principles, 76 Standard Solutions, selected Patterns/Lines of Technological Evolution, and more into an integrated, netlike structure. See details in Boris Zlotin and Alla Zusman, "An Integrated Operational Knowledge Base," from TRIZ in Progress (Ideation International, 1999). 6. The relatively high number of solutions was the result of limited initial information about the problem and system, especially with regard to constraints on system changes. We therefore aimed at an exhaustive set of potential ideas, which could later be screened. 7. Obviously, the "conventional" method of reducing the weight of the ring by reducing the amount of material used would sacrifice the ring's mechanical strength. 8. This tool (as well as the 76 Standard Solutions) is suitable for problems stated in terms of functions - e.g., a system contains a harmful function, an insufficient useful function, or a useful function is absent. The presented problem, however, does not include a functional description of the situation. 9. The application of ARIZ to this problem will be considered in a separate paper. 10. There is no apparent Physical Contradiction in the problem statement. © 2001 Ideation International Inc |