Re: A Comparison: Triads & TRIZ: Three Objects Comprise a Phenomenon

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post a followup ] [ Systematic Creativity ] [ FAQ ]

Submitted by Julie Pace at Augusti 05, 19100 klockan 04:03:36:

Reply to: Re: A Comparison: Triads & TRIZ: Three Objects Comprise a Phenomenon submitted by James F. Kowalick at Maj 11, 1998 klockan 09:41:08:

: I agree with you, Gregory, and I also disagree with what was said. Let me attempt to explain below, with only a few paragraphs (entire chapters in books have been written on the subject of triads, so an understandable response cannot easily be written in just a few paragraphs - it took several decades of effort for me to get to my current level of understanding of triads).

: S-Fields have proven to be quite useful in their present form. For example, the entire "Standard Solution" approach is based upon them, and this approach has been very useful for solving problems. Nevertheless, for several reasons, calling an "S-Field" a "minimal system" is troublesome, and is less than satisfactory for reasons discussed below.

: First, I would like to address some problems that, at least partly, may have arisen due to the poor translations of TRIZ concepts from the Russian to the English language. One such problem is the misuse of the word "system" for the word "function." Let’s consider two objects. When these two objects interact, for example, in a desired way, a function emerges, and this is what, in TRIZ, is called an S-Field: a toothbrush interacts in a certain way with teeth, such that the function "toothbrush cleans teeth" emerges. The S-Field is created when, according to one account from a TRIZnik, a "Field" provides the energy to bring the two objects (toothbrush and teeth) together to create the function of "cleaning". The field in this case could be called "Mechanical."

: Now TRIZ also refers to this function as a "system." In fact, however, the function is a capability of the system - the function is not equal to the system. To describe a "system" is to describe its essential parts - those parts that are absolutely necessary to carry out the system’s essential function(s). If one of these parts is missing, the essential function cannot be carried out. What are these parts for the example under discussion? There are three of them: The teeth represents one "part" - the part to be modified, worked on, changed, etc. (the part to be "cleaned"). This part is a "passive" part. The toothbrush is another "part" - representing the "tool" or "instrument" that can perform the "cleaning" of the teeth. This part is an "active" part. But these two parts alone are an incomplete system. Another "part" is required before we have a system that accomplishes cleaning. This third "part" is the "enabling" part - the part that brings the active and passive parts together in a way that is desired. In this instance, the enabling part is a human being - without which, the "cleaning" function cannot occur. Together, these three parts provide the required "cleaning" function. The essential system is made up of teeth, a toothbrush, and a human being.

: Please note that several essential interactions between these three objects are required for "cleaning" to be effectively accomplished. One involves the interaction(s) between the toothbrush and the teeth. This is primarily a mechanical interaction - but it cannot occur without the presence of the third object - the human being. The second involves the interaction(s) between the toothbrush and the human being. This is primarily a mechanical interaction, but with an intelligent control of the motion, the direction of motion, and the degree of force exerted by the toothbrush relative to the teeth. The third involves the interaction(s) between the human being and the teeth, through the human’s sensory system (acting as feedback). The human senses by "touch" or "feel," and possibly by visual means (e.g., using a mirror), the position of the brush, the degree of force exerted by the brush, and motion of the brush, relative to the teeth.

: So there are three interactions, or "S-Fields" involved to effectively create the overall "cleaning" function. If one of them is missing, effective cleaning will not occur. One could say that "cleaning" has been decomposed into three interactions, one involving mechanical work, another involving a certain control, and the other involving sensing/feedback. The "cleaning" system consists of three parts: teeth, toothbrush and person - all three parts are necessary for cleaning to occur. Each successful interaction between any two parts represents an S-Field (as an S-Field is defined by TRIZ).

: If the object is to "improve" such a "cleaning" system, one of the first tasks would be to define the system, by defining its essential parts. Another task would be to define the essential interactions between these essential parts. Yet another task would be to identify which one or more interactions should be the subject for imrpovement. If the object is to create an alternative system, the designer may want to replace one of the "essential" parts with some other part. One way of doing this is to "trim" one part, and have another part take over its function. In reality, however, we still have a triad.

: TRIZ correctly states that all systems contain four parts: an engine, a transmission, a limbs (or working part), and controls. Because TRIZniks have "grown up" with this knowledge, naturally when they hear about something like Triads, they will try to "fit" it (or any other different approach) into the structure that they already "know." But somethimes it is better to not do that; sometimes it is better to consider looking at the different approach as a separate entity. This is how new understanding comes about in science.

: The value of a creative approach, in part, lies in its usefulness and in its "truth" - not in whether or not it is related to another approach, or whether or not it can be "placed" within another approach. The triads approach was recognized by the Russian, Peter Ouspensky around 1913 (in the time period of the Bolshevik Revolution), so it existed long before TRIZ did. It was primarily used for psychological functions, but it was recognized by Ouspensky as applying to all functions, including technical functions. He said that a requirement for anything to happen is the presence of three "elements" or "forces," or "objects," and he gave several good examples in his writings - but alas: most of his examples are psychological, and many scientists and engineers lack subject matter expertise in psychology, so they may be unable to use the principle of analogy to apply triads to engineering systems.

: Ouspensky wrote several books, including "A New Model of the Universe;" "Tertium Organum:" "Fragments of an Unknown Teaching (in French);" and "The Fourth Way;" These books deal with two main subject areas: physics and psychology. They are considered to be classics. A "classic" work is one that a reader can read through the first time, and then read it again, perhaps five or ten years later, and obtain far more from it than from the first reading; the same is true for a third time, etc. Shakespeare’s Sonnets is another example of a classic work of literature/poetry. One of the necessary capabilities of a good problem-solver is the ability to think abstractly (or, metaphorically). This type of thinking is often evident in fairy tales - but also in the works of both Ouspensky and Shakespeare. Altshuller clearly appeared to have this brilliant ability. So do Zlotin and Litvin.

Followup:

Post a followup

Name:

E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:
: : I agree with you, Gregory, and I also disagree with what was said. Let me attempt to explain below, with only a few paragraphs (entire chapters in books have been written on the subject of triads, so an understandable response cannot easily be written in just a few paragraphs - it took several decades of effort for me to get to my current level of understanding of triads). : : S-Fields have proven to be quite useful in their present form. For example, the entire "Standard Solution" approach is based upon them, and this approach has been very useful for solving problems. Nevertheless, for several reasons, calling an "S-Field" a "minimal system" is troublesome, and is less than satisfactory for reasons discussed below. : : First, I would like to address some problems that, at least partly, may have arisen due to the poor translations of TRIZ concepts from the Russian to the English language. One such problem is the misuse of the word "system" for the word "function." Let’s consider two objects. When these two objects interact, for example, in a desired way, a function emerges, and this is what, in TRIZ, is called an S-Field: a toothbrush interacts in a certain way with teeth, such that the function "toothbrush cleans teeth" emerges. The S-Field is created when, according to one account from a TRIZnik, a "Field" provides the energy to bring the two objects (toothbrush and teeth) together to create the function of "cleaning". The field in this case could be called "Mechanical." : : Now TRIZ also refers to this function as a "system." In fact, however, the function is a capability of the system - the function is not equal to the system. To describe a "system" is to describe its essential parts - those parts that are absolutely necessary to carry out the system’s essential function(s). If one of these parts is missing, the essential function cannot be carried out. What are these parts for the example under discussion? There are three of them: The teeth represents one "part" - the part to be modified, worked on, changed, etc. (the part to be "cleaned"). This part is a "passive" part. The toothbrush is another "part" - representing the "tool" or "instrument" that can perform the "cleaning" of the teeth. This part is an "active" part. But these two parts alone are an incomplete system. Another "part" is required before we have a system that accomplishes cleaning. This third "part" is the "enabling" part - the part that brings the active and passive parts together in a way that is desired. In this instance, the enabling part is a human being - without which, the "cleaning" function cannot occur. Together, these three parts provide the required "cleaning" function. The essential system is made up of teeth, a toothbrush, and a human being. : : Please note that several essential interactions between these three objects are required for "cleaning" to be effectively accomplished. One involves the interaction(s) between the toothbrush and the teeth. This is primarily a mechanical interaction - but it cannot occur without the presence of the third object - the human being. The second involves the interaction(s) between the toothbrush and the human being. This is primarily a mechanical interaction, but with an intelligent control of the motion, the direction of motion, and the degree of force exerted by the toothbrush relative to the teeth. The third involves the interaction(s) between the human being and the teeth, through the human’s sensory system (acting as feedback). The human senses by "touch" or "feel," and possibly by visual means (e.g., using a mirror), the position of the brush, the degree of force exerted by the brush, and motion of the brush, relative to the teeth. : : So there are three interactions, or "S-Fields" involved to effectively create the overall "cleaning" function. If one of them is missing, effective cleaning will not occur. One could say that "cleaning" has been decomposed into three interactions, one involving mechanical work, another involving a certain control, and the other involving sensing/feedback. The "cleaning" system consists of three parts: teeth, toothbrush and person - all three parts are necessary for cleaning to occur. Each successful interaction between any two parts represents an S-Field (as an S-Field is defined by TRIZ). : : If the object is to "improve" such a "cleaning" system, one of the first tasks would be to define the system, by defining its essential parts. Another task would be to define the essential interactions between these essential parts. Yet another task would be to identify which one or more interactions should be the subject for imrpovement. If the object is to create an alternative system, the designer may want to replace one of the "essential" parts with some other part. One way of doing this is to "trim" one part, and have another part take over its function. In reality, however, we still have a triad. : : TRIZ correctly states that all systems contain four parts: an engine, a transmission, a limbs (or working part), and controls. Because TRIZniks have "grown up" with this knowledge, naturally when they hear about something like Triads, they will try to "fit" it (or any other different approach) into the structure that they already "know." But somethimes it is better to not do that; sometimes it is better to consider looking at the different approach as a separate entity. This is how new understanding comes about in science. : : The value of a creative approach, in part, lies in its usefulness and in its "truth" - not in whether or not it is related to another approach, or whether or not it can be "placed" within another approach. The triads approach was recognized by the Russian, Peter Ouspensky around 1913 (in the time period of the Bolshevik Revolution), so it existed long before TRIZ did. It was primarily used for psychological functions, but it was recognized by Ouspensky as applying to all functions, including technical functions. He said that a requirement for anything to happen is the presence of three "elements" or "forces," or "objects," and he gave several good examples in his writings - but alas: most of his examples are psychological, and many scientists and engineers lack subject matter expertise in psychology, so they may be unable to use the principle of analogy to apply triads to engineering systems. : : Ouspensky wrote several books, including "A New Model of the Universe;" "Tertium Organum:" "Fragments of an Unknown Teaching (in French);" and "The Fourth Way;" These books deal with two main subject areas: physics and psychology. They are considered to be classics. A "classic" work is one that a reader can read through the first time, and then read it again, perhaps five or ten years later, and obtain far more from it than from the first reading; the same is true for a third time, etc. Shakespeare’s Sonnets is another example of a classic work of literature/poetry. One of the necessary capabilities of a good problem-solver is the ability to think abstractly (or, metaphorically). This type of thinking is often evident in fairy tales - but also in the works of both Ouspensky and Shakespeare. Altshuller clearly appeared to have this brilliant ability. So do Zlotin and Litvin.

Optional link URL:

Link title:

Optional picture URL:

[ Followup ] [ Post a followup ] [ Systematic Creativity ] [ FAQ ]

TIPS Innovation ¤ Erik Dahlbergsgatan 21 ¤ 115 32 Stockholm Phone +46 8 666 04 19 Fax +46 8 600 19 70 E-mail TIPS Innovation