Design Transformation Principles

Paper:
Innovations in Design Through Transformation: A Fundamental Study of Transformation Principles
Vikramjit Singh, Stewart M. Skiles, Jarden E. Krager, Kristin L. Wood, Dan Jensen, and Robert Sierakowski, J. Mech. Des. 131, 081010 (2009), DOI:10.1115/1.3125205

Abstract:
The act of creating a new product, system, or process is an innovation; the result of excogitation, study and experimentation. It is an inductive and/or deductive process. The inductive process involves studying systems that exist, for example, in nature, patents and products, and inducing from the behavior of these systems elemental features for innovating novel products. The deductive process involves deducing such aspects from hypothetical concepts and situations where systems or products could exist. By the application of a combined inductive and deductive approach, this paper reports on a methodology for the creation of innovative products with a broader functional repertoire than traditional designs. This breed of innovative products is coined as transformers, transforming into different configurations or according to different states. Current design theory lacks a systematic methodology for the creation of products that have the ability to transform. This paper identifies analogies in nature, patents, and products along withhypothesizing the existence of such products in different environments andsituations. Transformation design principles are extracted by studying key design features and functional elements that make up a transforming product. These principles are defined and categorized according to their roles in general transformations. The principles and categorizations are then validated and applied to conceptualize transforming products as part of aninnovative design process.

Notes:

1. The authors explain (graphically) their research methods by introducing two complementary processes, which they call inductive and deductive. One of the questions I have relates to the deductive process, which is only briefly explained at the end of Section 2 and could be interpreted as an abductive process according to Charles Peirce. 

2. Another interesting discussion relates to the potential advantages and detriments of transformers (or reconfigurable products). I think that both of these need to be expanded and studied in much more detail.

3. In the future, it may also be very relevant to transcend the limitation of studying only mechanical transformations, since energy and information are also fundamental elements and very necessary for the construction of a thorough set of design principles.

4. The paper states repeatedly the need for a "foundational theory of transformational design", I couldn't agree more but this paper reminds us the need to further discuss what type of design theory or theories are required. References to relevant work would be welcome.

5. Design principles are defined here at least in four somewhat different ways: as causal principles (3.1), as generalized directive and as guidelines (4.1) and as representations of the transformation potential (4.3). The categorization process described in section 3.3 mentions that the grouping and coding of "facilitators" obtained from the inductive and deductive search is further organised into "super groups" from which "higher level facilitators" are extracted. From these, three general categories are then presented: expand/collapse, expose/cover and fuse/divide. This taxonomy is, arguably, the main contribution of this paper.

6. As the design principles are explained in 4.3, one mention is made to "primary functions". I think this leads to a very promising and interesting question: In transformation design, what defines a primary/secondary function?

7. Principles 1 and 2 could require a clearer distinction, for example the example in Fig 16b shows a water lilly as an example of expose/cover, yet it may seem to fit the expand/collapse definition: "change dimensions to bring about an increase/decrease along an axis, plane or volume.

8. Would an umbrella or a balloon be considered a transformer? Both seem to embody principle 1.

9. Personally, I consider section 4.4 to be the clearest and most substantial contribution of this paper: the description and illustration of all 20 transformation facilitators. Such taxonomy is highly valuable and is the type of analytic and systematic work that our field needs.

10. Reference to follow up:

1. Siddiqi and Weck 2008 "Modeling methods and conceptual design principles for reconfigurable systems", ASME J Mech Des 130(10), 101102.
2. Skiles, S. M., Singh, V., Krager, J. E., Seepersad, C. C., Wood, K. L., and Jensen, D., 2006, “Adapted Concept Generation and Computational Techniques for the Application of A Transformer Design Theory,” Proceedings of the ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences, Philadelphia, PA.