MaDLab, Department of Mechanical Engineering The University of Texas at Austin NSF Innovation and Discovery Workshop, 2006 Empirical Studies of Collaborative and Analogical Product Design: Implications on Innovation and Discovery Kristin L. Wood Cullen Trust Endowed Professor in Engineering & University Distinguished Teaching Professor Department of Mechanical Engineering The University of Texas
NSF Innovation and Discovery Workshop, 2006. Empirical Studies of Collaborative and Analogical Product Design: Implications on Innovation and Discovery. Kristin L. Wood Cullen Trust Endowed Professor in Engineering & University Distinguished Teaching Professor - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
MaDLab, Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of Texas at Austin
NSF Innovation and Discovery Workshop, 2006
Empirical Studies of Collaborative and Analogical Product Design: Implications on
Innovation and Discovery
Empirical Studies of Collaborative and Analogical Product Design: Implications on
Innovation and Discovery
Kristin L. WoodCullen Trust Endowed Professor in Engineering &
University Distinguished Teaching Professor
Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of Texas
MaDLab, Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of Texas at Austin
Presentation Roadmap• Prelude/Overture
– MaDLab and LFF Innovations– MaDLab Design Methods– Parallel Research Objectives
• Tenor– Collaborative Design Study– Problem Representation in
Design by Analogy• Analogical Applications
– Abstractions to Design Principles
• Finale– Implications, Questions,
Golden Nuggets, and Potential Pitfalls
• Acknowledgements:– NSF Grant: DMI-00631350– “Fundamental Studies of
Generating Concepts Through Design-by-Analogy”
– Co-PI: Professor Art Markman
– GRA’s: Julie Linsey and Jeremy Murphy
MaDLab, Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of Texas at Austin
MaDLab and LFF Innovations
• >15 Patents:
• >200 Products with >60 Companies:
• Fifteen International Design Competition Awards
laser beam
Sintered prototype
Loose Powder
CAD-designed prototype geometry
ComputerControl
Powder Supply
Current cross-section of prototype scanned by laser beam
Roller mechanism
laser beam
Sintered prototype
Loose Powder
CAD-designed prototype geometry
ComputerControl
Powder Supply
Current cross-section of prototype scanned by laser beam
Roller mechanism
MaDLab, Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of Texas at Austin
Army ants join their bodies to form a bridge for the rest of
the colony
US 4,856,775
The base of the exercise machine in this patent divides into two supporting
structures for a different exercise arrangement
MaDLab, Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of Texas at Austin
MaDLab Design Methods
Store / FlyExpand/ Collapse
Fusion/Division
Wrap/Fold
Segment
Nest
Roll wing around
fuselage
Roll up wing
Disassemble
Fold/ Stack
Telescoping
Wing inside other
Wings inside
fuselage
Inflate
Skeleton
Flexible
Material
Crumple
InterchangeWings
Disassemble plane
Slap bracelet
“Bird wing”
Whole plane in
container
Wings in fuselage 1 wing
inside another
Wings in container
Wing/ fuselage compose other
devices
Wing or body
compose other part
MAV in 2 halves
Body Armor
Plane = Tools
Fuselage = container
Shape Memory
Alloy
Cover/Expose
UAV “Compact Storage” Mind Map:
MaDLab, Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of Texas at Austin
MaDLab Design Methods
MaDLab, Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of Texas at Austin
Research Objectives• To understand how key parameters of
Idea Generation Techniques affect design outcomes…
• To explore the effects of representation on analogy use for real-world engineering design and product development problems…
MaDLab, Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of Texas at Austin
Idea Generation Techniques• Over one hundred formal idea generation
techniques
• Well-known Brainstorming – Osborn
• Engineering specific method: Theory of Inventive Problem Solving (TRIZ)
Adams, J. L., 1986, Conceptual Blockbusting, Perseus Books, Cambridge, ME. VanGundy, A. B., 1988, Techniques of Structured Problem Solving, 2nd edition, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York, NY Higgins, J. M., 1994, 101 Creative Problem Solving Techniques, The New Management Publishing Company, Winter Park, FL. Osborn, A., 1957, Applied Imagination. Scribner, New York, NY.Altshuller, G. S., 1984, Creativity as an Exact Science, Gordon and Breach Publishers, Luxembourg.
MaDLab, Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of Texas at Austin
Techniques Empirically Tested with Design Problems
• Brainstorming (Lewis, Sadosky, and Connolly, 1975)
• Brainwriting, Brainstorming, and others (Gryskiewicz, 1988)
• 6-3-5, C-Sketch, Gallery Method (Shah et al., 1998-2001)
• Brainsketching, Brainstorming (Van der Lugt, 2002)
• Variants of Brainstorming that included sketching, and physical models (Vidal, Mulet, and Gómez-Senent, 2004)
MaDLab, Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of Texas at Austin
Idea Generation TechniquesFormal
TechniqueForms of
CommunicationHow ideas are
displayed
Osborn’s Brainstorming
Spoken Word
6-3-5 Written Word Rotational Viewing
C-Sketch Sketches Only Rotational Viewing
Gallery Sketches & Written Word followed by
Spoken Word
All are viewed at the same time
Brainsketching Sketches & Written Word
Rotational Viewing
MaDLab, Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of Texas at Austin
Experiment: 2 X 3 Factorial• Factor 1: How ideas are exchanged and
displayed– Rotational Viewing– All view simultaneous via gallery style
• Factor 2: Forms of Communication– Written words only– Sketches only– A combination of words and sketches
MaDLab, Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of Texas at Austin
Experimental Conditions and Similar Formal Idea Generation
Technique
Factor 1: Display
Factor 2: RepresentationWords Only
Sketches Only
Words & Sketches
View AllCondition
1Condition 3
Condition 5Gallery
Rotational Viewing
Condition 2
6-3-5
Condition 4C-Sketch
Condition 6Brainsketchin
g
MaDLab, Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of Texas at Austin
Experimental Set-Up• Teams of 5 senior ME students
– A total of 12 teams
• Prescribed form of communication and how ideas are displayed
Factor 2: Words OnlyFactor 2: Sketches OnlySketches OnlyWords
Only
Interaction
Word & Sketches
Gallery Rotational Viewing
MaDLab, Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of Texas at Austin
Results: Quantitative 2 X 2 ANOVA
Main Effects Plot-- words and words & sketches conditions only
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
To
tal
Qu
an
tity
of
No
n-R
ed
un
da
nt
Ide
as
Condition 1
Condition 2
Condition 5
Condition 6
Mean
View All- Similar to Gallery and
Brainsketching
Rotational Viewing- Similar to
6-3-5/C-Sketch
Factor 1 Factor 2
Words Only Words & Sketches
Main Effects
Gallery Rotational Viewing
Words Only
Words & Sketches
MaDLab, Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of Texas at Austin
Results: Building from Others’ Ideas
Ideas per Time Period for Experiment 6: Rotational Viewing with Words and Sketches
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1 2 3 4 5
Time Period
To
tal Q
uan
tity
of
No
n-
Red
un
dan
t Id
eas
add
ed
each
Per
iod
Results from One Experiment (View All, Words & Sketches)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Inviduals: Time Period 1 Total Building from Others' Ideas:Time Periods 2-5 Total
Qu
anti
ty o
f N
on
-Red
un
dan
t Id
eas
Building from Others
Individual
MaDLab, Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of Texas at Austin
Survey
Select Likert Scale Survey Results from All Conditions Combined
Question Strongly Disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
I enjoy generating ideas. 1.5% 1.5% 12.3% 60.0% 24.6%
I helped contribute to the solution of this problem.
0.0% 0.0% 24.6% 60.0% 15.4%
I liked using the multiple colors. 1.5% 3.1% 18.5% 47.7% 29.2%
The extra colors did not enhance the idea generation process.
24.6% 41.5% 12.3% 20.0% 1.5%
• A strong dislike of being restricted to either words or sketches only
MaDLab, Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of Texas at Austin
Analogical Research Questions• What forms of analogical representation are most useful for
innovative design?
• What are the fundamental and underlying principles that make analogies useful to a designer?
• What benefits are there to physical models in design-by-analogy? What types of problems do they highlight? What limitations do they add?
• What are the effects of different manipulative media in the idea generation process? Which ones lead to design fixation, and which ones are most beneficial for concept development?
MaDLab, Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of Texas at Austin
Examples of Analogy
Device that allows repeatable printing
Problem Description
Analogy Concept
Wine Press Gutenberg Printing Press
MaDLab, Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of Texas at Austin
Examples of Analogy
Telegraph capable of sending and receiving multiple messages simultaneously
Problem Description
Analogy Concept
Water Distribution System
Quadreplex Telegraph
MaDLab, Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of Texas at Austin
Examples of Analogy
Device that provides pseudorandom frequency changes for transmission encryption
Problem Description
Analogy Concept
Player Piano Frequency-hopping Radio Transmission
MaDLab, Department of Mechanical EngineeringThe University of Texas at Austin
Examples of Analogy
Compound lens optical system capable of capturing 360° of vision