gh-lyndonkl-claude/skills/morphological-analysis-triz/resources/methodology.md

Morphological Analysis & TRIZ Methodology

Table of Contents

1. Trends of Technical Evolution
2. Substance-Field Analysis
3. ARIZ Algorithm
4. Combining Morphological Analysis + TRIZ
5. Multi-Contradiction Problems
6. TRIZ for Software & Services

---

1. Trends of Technical Evolution

Concept

Technical systems evolve along predictable patterns. Understanding these trends helps predict future states and design next-generation solutions.

8 Key Trends

Trend 1: Mono-Bi-Poly (Increasing Complexity Then Simplification)

• Mono: Single system
• Bi: System + counteracting system
• Poly: Multiple interacting systems
• Then: Integration/simplification

Example:

• Mono: Manual transmission (single system)
• Bi: Manual + automatic (two options)
• Poly: CVT, dual-clutch, automated manual (many variants)
• Integration: Seamless hybrid transmission

Application: If stuck at Bi-Poly stage, look for integration opportunities

Trend 2: Transition to Micro-Level

• Macro → Meso → Micro → Nano
• System operates at smaller scales over time

Example:

• Macro: Room air conditioner
• Meso: Window unit
• Micro: Personal cooling device
• Nano: Fabric with cooling nanoparticles

Application: Can your solution work at smaller scale?

Trend 3: Increasing Dynamism & Controllability

• Fixed → Adjustable → Adaptive → Self-regulating

Example:

• Fixed: Solid chair
• Adjustable: Height-adjustable chair
• Adaptive: Chair that conforms to posture
• Self-regulating: Chair that actively prevents back pain

Application: Add adjustability, then feedback control, then autonomous adaptation

Trend 4: Increasing Ideality (IFR - Ideal Final Result)

• System delivers more benefits with fewer costs and harms
• Ultimate: All benefits, no cost/harm (ideal is unattainable but directional)

Formula: Ideality = Σ(Benefits) / [Σ(Costs) + Σ(Harms)]

Application: Systematically increase numerator (add benefits) and decrease denominator (remove costs/harms)

Trend 5: Non-Uniform Development

• Different parts evolve at different rates → contradictions emerge
• Advanced subsystem bottlenecked by primitive subsystem

Example: High-performance engine limited by weak transmission

Application: Identify lagging subsystems and bring them to parity

Trend 6: Transition to Super-System

• Individual system → System + complementary systems → Integrated super-system

Example:

• Computer alone
• Computer + printer + scanner (separate)
• All-in-one device (integrated super-system)

Application: What complementary systems can be integrated?

Trend 7: Matching/Mismatching

• Matching: All parts work in coordination (efficiency)
• Mismatching: Deliberate asymmetry for specific function

Example: Matched: All wheels same size (car). Mismatched: Different front/rear tires (drag racer)

Application: Sometimes deliberate mismatch creates new capabilities

Trend 8: Increasing Use of Fields

• Mechanical → Thermal → Chemical → Electric → Magnetic → Electromagnetic

Example:

• Mechanical: Manual saw
• Thermal: Hot wire cutter
• Electric: Powered saw
• Magnetic: Magnetic coupling
• Electromagnetic: Laser cutter

Application: Can you replace mechanical action with a "higher" field?

How to Apply Trends

Step 1: Identify where current system is on each trend Step 2: Predict next stage in evolution Step 3: Design solution that leapfrogs to next stage Step 4: Look for contradictions that arise and resolve with TRIZ principles

---

2. Substance-Field Analysis

Concept

Model systems as interactions between substances (S1, S2) and fields (F) to identify incomplete or harmful models and transform them.

Basic Model: S1 - F - S2

• S1: Object being acted upon (workpiece, patient, user)
• F: Field providing energy (mechanical, thermal, chemical, electrical, magnetic)
• S2: Tool/agent acting on S1 (cutter, heater, medicine, interface)

Complete vs Incomplete Models

Incomplete (Doesn't work well):

S1 ---- S2   (No field, or field too weak)

Solution: Add or strengthen field

Complete (Works):

S1 <-F-> S2   (Field connects substances effectively)

76 Standard Solutions

TRIZ catalogs 76 standard substance-field transformations. Key examples:

Problem: Incomplete model (S1 and S2 not interacting)

• Solution 1: Add field F between them
• Solution 2: Replace S2 with more reactive substance S3
• Solution 3: Add substance S3 as intermediary

Problem: Harmful action (field F causes unwanted effect)

• Solution 1: Insert substance S3 to block harmful field
• Solution 2: Add field F2 to counteract F1
• Solution 3: Remove or modify S2 to eliminate harmful field

Problem: Need to detect or measure S1 (invisible, inaccessible)

• Solution 1: Add marker substance S3 that reveals S1
• Solution 2: Use external field F2 to probe S1
• Solution 3: Transform S1 into S1' that's easier to detect

Application Example

Problem: Need to inspect internal pipe for cracks (S1 = pipe, can't see inside)

Substance-field analysis:

Current: S1 (pipe) - no effective field - S2 (inspector)
Incomplete model

Solutions via standard models:

1. Add ferromagnetic particles + magnetic field (field F reveals cracks)
2. Add ultrasonic field (detect reflection changes at cracks)
3. Add pressurized dye penetrant (substance S3 reveals cracks)

Selected: Magnetic particle inspection (proven technique)

---

3. ARIZ Algorithm

Concept

ARIZ (Algorithm of Inventive Problem Solving) is systematic step-by-step process for complex problems where contradiction isn't obvious.

ARIZ Steps (Simplified)

Step 1: Problem Formulation

• State problem as given
• Identify ultimate goal
• List available resources (time, space, substances, fields, information)

Step 2: Mini-Problem

• Define "ideal final result" (IFR): system achieves goal with minimal change
• Formulate mini-problem: "Element X, using available resources, must provide [desired effect] without [harmful effect]"

Step 3: Physical Contradiction

• Identify conflicting requirements on single element
• Example: "Element must be hard (for strength) AND soft (for flexibility)"

Step 4: Separate Contradictions Four separation principles:

• In space: Hard in one location, soft in another
• In time: Hard during use, soft during installation
• Upon condition: Hard under load, soft when relaxed
• Between system levels: Hard at macro level, soft at micro level

Step 5: Application of Resources

• What substances are available? (in system, nearby, environment, products/derivatives)
• What fields are available? (waste heat, vibration, gravity, pressure)
• How can cheap/free resources substitute for expensive ones?

Step 6: Apply Substance-Field Model

• Model current state
• Identify incomplete or harmful models
• Apply standard solutions

Step 7: Apply TRIZ Principles

• If not solved yet, use contradiction matrix
• Try 2-3 most relevant principles

Step 8: Analyze Solution

• Does it achieve IFR?
• What new problems arise?
• Can solution be generalized to other domains?

ARIZ Example (Abbreviated)

Problem: Bike lock must be strong (resist cutting) but lightweight (portable)

Step 1: Goal = secure bike, Resources = lock material, bike frame, environment

Step 2: IFR = Lock secures bike without added weight. Mini-problem: Lock, using available resources, must resist cutting without being heavy.

Step 3: Physical contradiction - Lock material must be thick/strong (resist cutting) AND thin/light (reduce weight)

Step 4: Separation - In space (strong in critical area only), Upon condition (hard when attacked, normal otherwise)

Step 5: Resources - Can we use bike frame itself? Environment (anchor to heavy object)?

Step 6: Substance-field - Add alarm field (makes cutting detectable even if lock is light)

Step 7: TRIZ - Principle #40 (composite materials): Use hardened steel inserts in lightweight frame. Principle #2 (taking out): Secure bike to immovable object, lock just prevents separation.

Step 8: Solution - Lightweight cable with selective hardening + alarm. Achieves security without excessive weight.

---

4. Combining Morphological Analysis + TRIZ

When to Combine

Use case: Complex system with multiple parameters (morphological) AND contradictions within configurations (TRIZ)

Process

Step 1: Build morphological box for overall system architecture

Step 2: Identify promising parameter combinations (3-5 configurations)

Step 3: For each configuration, identify embedded contradictions

• Does this configuration create any trade-offs?
• Which parameters conflict within this configuration?

Step 4: Apply TRIZ to resolve contradictions within each configuration

• Use TRIZ principles to eliminate trade-offs
• Improve configurations to be non-compromise solutions

Step 5: Re-evaluate configurations now that contradictions are resolved

• Configurations that were inferior due to contradictions may now be viable

Example: Designing Portable Speaker

Morphological Parameters:

• Power: Battery | Solar | Wall plug | Hybrid
• Size: Pocket | Handheld | Tabletop | Floor
• Audio tech: Mono | Stereo | Surround | Spatial
• Material: Plastic | Metal | Wood | Fabric
• Price tier: Budget | Mid | Premium | Luxury

Configuration 1: Pocket + Battery + Stereo + Plastic + Mid

• Contradiction: Pocket size (small) vs Stereo (needs speaker separation for stereo imaging)
• TRIZ Solution: Principle #17 (another dimension) - Use beamforming or psychoacoustic processing to create virtual stereo from single driver

Configuration 2: Tabletop + Solar + Surround + Wood + Premium

• Contradiction: Solar (needs light, outdoor) vs Wood (damages in weather)
• TRIZ Solution: Principle #30 (flexible shell) - Protective cover deploys when outdoors, retracts indoors

Outcome: Both configurations now viable without compromises

---

5. Multi-Contradiction Problems

Challenge

Real systems often have multiple contradictions that interact.

Approach

Step 1: Map all contradictions

Contradiction 1: Improve A → worsens B
Contradiction 2: Improve C → worsens D
Contradiction 3: Improve A → worsens D
...

Step 2: Identify primary contradiction

• Which contradiction, if resolved, eliminates or eases others?
• Which contradiction is most critical to success?

Step 3: Resolve primary contradiction first

• Apply TRIZ principles
• Generate solution concepts

Step 4: Check if resolving primary affects secondary contradictions

• Did solution eliminate secondary contradictions?
• Did solution worsen secondary contradictions?

Step 5: Resolve remaining contradictions

• Apply TRIZ to each remaining contradiction
• Check for conflicts between solutions

Step 6: Integrate solutions

• Can multiple TRIZ principles be combined?
• Are there synergies between solutions?

Example: Electric Vehicle Design

Contradictions:

1. Improve range → worsens cost (large battery expensive)
2. Improve acceleration → worsens range (high power drains battery)
3. Improve safety → worsens weight (reinforcement adds mass)
4. Reduce weight → worsens safety (less structure)

Primary: Range vs Cost (most critical for market adoption)

TRIZ Solutions:

• Principle #6 (universality): Battery also serves as structural element (improves range without added weight/cost)
• Principle #35 (parameter change): Use different battery chemistry (higher energy density)

Secondary contradictions affected:

• Weight reduced (battery is structure) → helps safety-weight contradiction
• Can now afford stronger materials with weight/cost savings

Integrated solution: Structural battery pack with high energy density cells

---

6. TRIZ for Software & Services

Adapting TRIZ to Non-Physical Domains

Key insight: TRIZ principles are metaphorical. Translate physical concepts to digital/service equivalents.

Software-Specific Mappings

Physical	Software/Digital
Weight	Code size, memory, latency
Strength	Robustness, security, reliability
Speed	Response time, throughput
Temperature	CPU load, resource utilization
Pressure	User load, traffic
Shape	Architecture, data structure
Material	Technology stack, framework
Segmentation	Modularization, microservices
Merging	Integration, consolidation

TRIZ Principles for Software (Examples)

#1 Segmentation:

• Monolith → Microservices
• Single database → Sharded databases
• Batch processing → Stream processing

#2 Taking Out:

• Extract auth into separate service
• Externalize config from code
• Offload computation to client (edge computing)

#10 Preliminary Action:

• Caching, pre-computation
• Ahead-of-time compilation
• Pre-fetch data

#15 Dynamics:

• Adaptive algorithms (change based on load)
• Auto-scaling infrastructure
• Dynamic pricing

#19 Periodic Action:

• Polling → Webhooks (event-driven)
• Batch jobs on schedule
• Garbage collection intervals

#23 Feedback:

• Monitoring and alerting
• A/B testing with metrics
• Auto-tuning parameters

#28 Mechanics Substitution:

• Physical token → Digital certificate
• Manual process → Automated workflow
• Paper forms → Digital forms

Service Design with TRIZ (Examples)

#1 Segmentation:

• Self-service tier + premium support tier
• Modular service packages (pick what you need)

#5 Merging:

• One-stop shop (multiple services in one visit)
• Bundled offerings

#6 Universality:

• Staff cross-trained for multiple roles
• Multi-purpose facilities

#10 Preliminary Action:

• Pre-registration, pre-authorization
• Prepare materials before appointment
• Send info in advance (reduce appointment time)

#24 Intermediary:

• Concierge service
• Service coordinator between specialists
• Customer success manager

#25 Self-Service:

• Online booking, FAQ, chatbots
• Self-checkout, automated kiosks

---

Quick Decision Trees

"Should I use morphological analysis or TRIZ?"

Do I have clearly defined parameters with discrete options?
├─ YES → Is there a performance trade-off/contradiction?
│   ├─ YES → Use both (MA to explore, TRIZ to resolve contradictions)
│   └─ NO → Use morphological analysis only
└─ NO → Do I have "improve A worsens B" situation?
    ├─ YES → Use TRIZ only
    └─ NO → Neither applies; use other innovation methods

"Which TRIZ technique should I use?"

Is problem well-defined with clear contradiction?
├─ YES → Use contradiction matrix + principles (template.md)
└─ NO → Is problem complex/ambiguous?
    ├─ YES → Use ARIZ algorithm (Section 3)
    └─ NO → Model as substance-field (Section 2)

"How many TRIZ principles should I try?"

Did first principle fully solve contradiction?
├─ YES → Done, move to evaluation
└─ NO → Try 2-3 principles recommended by matrix
    Partial solution?
    ├─ YES → Combine principles (Section 5)
    └─ NO → Re-examine contradiction (may be mis-stated)

---

Summary: When to Use What

Situation	Method	Section
Explore design space systematically	Morphological Analysis	template.md
Clear "improve A worsens B" contradiction	TRIZ Contradiction Matrix	template.md
Complex problem, unclear contradiction	ARIZ Algorithm	Section 3
Modeling interactions, detecting issues	Substance-Field Analysis	Section 2
Predict future product evolution	Trends of Evolution	Section 1
Multiple related contradictions	Multi-Contradiction Process	Section 5
Software/service innovation	Adapted TRIZ Principles	Section 6
Complex system with trade-offs	MA + TRIZ Combined	Section 4