The concept of contradiction is key in TRIZ, and one major contribution of the method.
There are 3 different types of contradiction which always come in the following order : administrative contradiction, technical contradiction and physical contradiction.
Now let us imagine the following : it is wished to transform an undesired situation into a desired one. The gap existing between both situations is the problem to be solved. If it is not known how to solve it, one faces an inventive situation. Let us consider the problem of the red eyes when a photography is taken in the direction of the eyes with a flash. This problem is already (almost) solved in modern cameras, but let us use it for illustration.
Then one defines :
* Inventive situation : it is necessary to take a photograph with a flash & without red eyes
* Administrative contradiction : it is necessary to take a photograph with a flash & without red eyes, but how to make it is not known
* Technical contradiction (which has two opposite formulations TC1 and TC2)
* TC1 : if one does not use a flash, there is no red eyes' phenomenon, but the photograph is dark
* TC2 : if one uses a flash, the photograph is bright, but the red eyes' phenomenon appears
* Physical contradiction (PC) : one needs a flash to get a bright photograph, and one does not need a flash to avoid the red eyes' phenomenon
The former definition is here only to show you the structure of a PC, but the former PC is chosen badly. It will be shown in a next article how to chose a right physical contradiction, which is helpful for the solving of the problem.
Remarks :
* for a given problem, there may be different possible pairs of TC and different possible PC
* the pair of TC draws a compromise
* it is not always possible to define a pair of TC and an associated PC ; if it is possible, then the formerly defined pathway towards the PC can lead to a powerful solution, without compromise ; it will be explained in a future article how to solve a PC
There are 3 different types of contradiction which always come in the following order : administrative contradiction, technical contradiction and physical contradiction.
Now let us imagine the following : it is wished to transform an undesired situation into a desired one. The gap existing between both situations is the problem to be solved. If it is not known how to solve it, one faces an inventive situation. Let us consider the problem of the red eyes when a photography is taken in the direction of the eyes with a flash. This problem is already (almost) solved in modern cameras, but let us use it for illustration.
Then one defines :
* Inventive situation : it is necessary to take a photograph with a flash & without red eyes
* Administrative contradiction : it is necessary to take a photograph with a flash & without red eyes, but how to make it is not known
* Technical contradiction (which has two opposite formulations TC1 and TC2)
* TC1 : if one does not use a flash, there is no red eyes' phenomenon, but the photograph is dark
* TC2 : if one uses a flash, the photograph is bright, but the red eyes' phenomenon appears
* Physical contradiction (PC) : one needs a flash to get a bright photograph, and one does not need a flash to avoid the red eyes' phenomenon
The former definition is here only to show you the structure of a PC, but the former PC is chosen badly. It will be shown in a next article how to chose a right physical contradiction, which is helpful for the solving of the problem.
Remarks :
* for a given problem, there may be different possible pairs of TC and different possible PC
* the pair of TC draws a compromise
* it is not always possible to define a pair of TC and an associated PC ; if it is possible, then the formerly defined pathway towards the PC can lead to a powerful solution, without compromise ; it will be explained in a future article how to solve a PC
No comments:
Post a Comment