Article Preview
Top1. Triz For Innovative Architecture
The TOP-FLOP analysis implemented by L. Frizziero, Conceptual design of an innovative electric transportation means with QFD, bench marking, top-flop analysis (Frizziero, 2018; Francia et al., 2017; Meuli & Raghunath, 1997; Ramalingam et al., 2018) allows the identification of sixteen main performance features of an innovative electric transportation (Bosso et al., 2018; Ranjan et al., 2016): the hoverboard. (read 4.1 Bench Marking Analysis: results).
Based on these features, an analysis will be conducted through a TRIZ methodology, that will lead to some innovative architecture of the system-hoverboard (see Figure 1).
Figure 1. From the QFD analysis to the TRIZ analysis for innovative solutions
Eight of these features have been preferred over the others because they have the ability to make the hoverboard more powerful (Caligiana et al., 2017; Frizziero et al., 2017). The eight features identified are the following:
Starting from the features that improve the performance of the hoverboard identified through the QFD analysis a TRIZ methodology will be applied to find some innovative solutions to improve the hoverboard overall performance (A. Freddi, 2005; Ishak et al., 2018).
Improving the eight identified features will lead to the improvement of the hoverboard performance. However, this could lead to a “technical contradiction”. A “technical contradiction” is defined as a situation in which the improvement of one feature brings on the deterioration of another feature within the same technical system.
Technical contradictions are a typical aspect of the evolution of a technical system.
“Contradiction” is also one of the main postulates of TRIZ theory. This theory implies that a contradiction is the most important obstacle that limits the evolution of a technical system. As a consequence, the evolution of technical systems is strongly influenced by the resolution of contradictions.