Can Someone Explain
Editor | On 01, Jan 2010Message: 1220
Posted by: Elliott Duvall
Posted on: Monday, 11th February 2008
what is the difference b/w ariz and triz? are they different? is one part of the other/vice versa? i can't find anything that addresses this–simply.
Posted by: Ellen Domb
Posted on: Tuesday, 12th February 2008
ARIZ is the Algorithm for Inventive Problem Solving. The version that has been in the discussion groups recently is ARIZ 85, which is the latest version that G. Altshuller was involved with (as far as I know.) It has approximately 95 steps, and one of the initial instructions is “don't skip any steps.”
TRIZ is the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving, and it usually refers to the tools, methods, and techniques as well as the theory.
Chemistry is a science which includes theories, methods, techniques, etc., so it is analogous to TRIZ. A procedure for carrying out the analysis of an unknown substance is an algorithm, analogous to ARIZ.
The confusion is partly because there is a vocal group of TRIZ practioners who say that the ONLY way to use TRIZ is by following all the steps of ARIZ, and there's a somewhat quieter but larger group that says they get lots of benefit from using a subset of the tools and steps, and they don't follow the order of the ARIZ steps.
Hope this helps.
Posted by: Valeri Souchkov
Posted on: Thursday, 14th February 2008
As Ellen Domb already commented, ARIZ is a part of TRIZ. But ARIZ can't replace TRIZ since ARIZ only targets a specific category of tasks which could be performed with TRIZ.
By the mid-1980s, there were three generally accepted distinct directions in TRIZ: a) techniques to solve “standard” inventive problems, such Altshuller Matrix and 40 Inventive Principles (although abandoned by Altshuller but still widely used), 76 Inventive Standards, Catalogues of physical effects, b) ARIZ, and c) Theory of Technical Systems Evolution. While the first two focused on solving narrow specific problems (e.g. process instability, machine failure), Theory of Technical Systems Evolution focused on studying roots, driving forces and patterns of evolution to create a framework for forecasting future products and technologies. There was connection between all three directions: for instance, according to the TRIZ philosophy, any invention which solves a problem by eliminating a contradiction brings a technical system to the next step of evolution.
Why ARIZ? As claimed by Altshuller, such techniques as Inventive Principles and Inventive Standards could only directly solve 75-80% of inventive problems which formulations corresponded patterns presented in these techniques. Such inventive problems were called “standard problems” (Inventive Standards got their name from the idea that “standard” problems have “standard” solutions. The remaining problems were considered as “non-standard”, and required more sophisticated analysis. A goal of ARIZ thus is to convert a “non-standard” problem to a “standard” one through its stepwise reformulation. ARIZ does it by localizing a conflict causing a problem and removing psychological inertia which prevents us from either seeing a core of a problem or generating most ideal out-of-the box solution ideas. In fact, ARIZ is a tool designed more for problem formulation rather than for problem solving. To solve problems, ARIZ-85 integrates 76 Inventive Standards, Principles for Physical Contradictions Elimination, and Method of Little Men.
ARIZ-85C consists of 9 parts, but only first 4 parts are really esential for problem reformulation and solving (remaining parts at the time of finishing ARIZ-85C still remained experimental). ARIZ is neither difficult nor complex, but its use requires good prior understanding of basic TRIZ concepts: contradiction, resources, ideality, psychological inertia. Some additional problems with learning ARIZ in non-Russian environments arise due to lack of experienced teaching resources and poor English translations of ARIZ.
In addition, modern TRIZ tools for initial problem analysis can be used to provide input for ARIZ: Function Analysis, Problem Formulator, Root Conflict Analysis.
Posted by: Pentti Soderlin
Posted on: Wednesday, 20th February 2008
Sorry to be a little bit late, but to me ARIZ is just a Job Plan for TRIZ. See my article in Triz-Journal Archive, April 2003.
Posted by: John Cooke
Posted on: Monday, 14th July 2008
As an advocate of Victor Fey's ARIZ approach, I've found that ARIZ also forces you into the physics of the problem in a way that the contradiction matrix really doesn't. Often, getting clear on the physics of the problem situation, makes it much easier to identify strong and robust solutions.
Posted by: innov8
Posted on: Monday, 25th August 2008
What is meant by “the physics ” of the problem, please?
Posted by: Jack Hipple
Posted on: Sunday, 31st August 2008
As usual in cases like this, there is a middle ground. The complete ARIZ algorithm is very powerful and useful when the problem is of sufficient complexity. But, as Ellen Domb indicated, there are a large number of us who have seen problems solved with just thnking about the IFR, resouces more completely, or just the TRIZ separation principles. It is important for a TRIZ professional to understand when, where, and under what circumstances different approaches and which tools are appropriate. Sometimes, despite our wishes, time constraints are present and prioritization is necessary. I can vouch for all these different approaches. The use of ARIZ-85 with all of its steps is simply overkill and not necessary for an optimum solution to many problems. And there are many cases where just pulling out the contradiction table is short-circuiting a proper problem definition.
No more zealots, please!
Posted by: John Cooke
Posted on: Tuesday, 2nd September 2008
What I mean by “the physics of the problem” is the physical interaction which occurs between each component of the system. For example, in the milk foaming problem, I wanted to understand how the foam is formed both from the point of view of how the air got to be inside milk bubbles and how the bubbles formed and stabilized. To do this I needed to be able to map out the physical actions between system componments at each stage of the process of foaming the milk. Without this clear understanding of the system physics, it is hard to be sure that any new solution identified will deliver the necessary physical solution
Posted by: Nikolai Khomenko
Posted on: Wednesday, 5th November 2008
TRIZ is abn applied scientific theory on how to create instruments for dealing with non typical, so called, creative problems. I mean Classical TRIZ. However modern TRIZ appear as some sets of tools and nothing more. That is why this question appear, I believe.
ARIZ is one of the most important instruments of Classical TRIZ. Understanding how Classical ARIZ work could help you to develop new instruments for solving non typical problems whenever you faced them. Altshuller consider ARIZ’s main function Ã instruments for solving non typical problems that could not be re-framed in order to apply one of tools for typical TRIZ typical problem solving like Matrix, System of Standards, Pointers of Effects and others…
However Altshuller consider Main Production process for ARIZ Ã developing specific way of thinking.
For those who are not familiar with ARIZ.
Main Production Process (MPP) is a main function of super system that is located at least 3-4 levels up in System Operator than system that we would like to improve by using ARIZ. Therefore we should not mix Main Function of the system to be improved by ARIZ and Main Production Process that this system is involved in. ARIZ is involved into the process of developing specific way of thinking that could be helpful to develop appropriate instruments for solving problems in case known instruments could not help us. This way of thinking is based on Classical TRIZ, not on modern TRIZ.
Classical TRIZ created Fundamentals for developing appropriate instruments for solving non typical problems.
ARIZ is one of the instruments, basedon the Fundamentals.