Designing and Prototyping

Updated 11/18/2019

Acknowledgements

This book is the work of a collaborative group.

Contributors
Larry Ball (Primary Author)
David Troness
Kartik Ariyur
Jason Huang
Steve Hickman
Petr Krupansky
Larry Miller
Krishnamurthy Vaidyanathan

Editors
Erika Ball
David Troness
Paul Dwyer
Robert Lang

Illustrators
Larry Ball
David Troness

Other Authors, Theoreticians, Practitioners Whose Writings or Teachings have Impacted This Work
Genrich Altshuller
Ellen Domb
Roni Horowitz
John Terninko
Alla Zusman
Boris Zlotin
Lev Shulyak
Yuri Salamatov
Victor Fey
Eugene Rivin
Darrell Mann
Sergei Ikovenko
Simon Litvin
Peter Ulan
Lane Desborough
Clayton Christensen
Renee Mauborgne
Kim Chan

Where the Material Comes From

This book draws heavily from the ideas of the thought leaders mentioned. Initially, the goal was to gather their insights, but this process also integrated other experimental approaches. By recognizing common patterns among various tools, we were able to categorize them along with key decisions. Decisions generate information that informs subsequent choices. Through this process, we identified patterns and gaps, which allowed us to introduce experimental methods when necessary. The success of these methods depends on whether they help readers uncover features that will appeal to the market.

Introduction to Designing And Prototyping

Prerequisite Knowledge:
In this book, we will use the terms “Function” and “Job.” It’s important to understand the meanings of these terms as defined here. If you haven’t read TRIZ Power Tools – Working with Functions, please do so before proceeding.

Each book in the TRIZ Power Tools series serves as a step-by-step guide.

The Output of this Book is Prototypes and Manufacturing Knowledge
This book will assist you in creating prototypes to present to customers, along with the necessary protections. Once the prototypes are prepared, we can refer to Creating Offerings and utilize feedback from market representatives to enhance the features.

It is crucial to emphasize that understanding the market and the desired features is a learning process, not merely execution. We may not grasp customer needs on our first attempt. Consumers can sense when a concept feels right, but it is our responsibility to present various ideas to help them clarify their needs.

This challenge also extends to the business side. It is essential to comprehend the business’s needs and their role in the market so that limitations do not prevent them from delivering the product or service as the target market desires. Thus, we also need to consider production methods during the prototyping process. When we present prototypes to business managers, they will want to know about manufacturing costs, both recurring and non-recurring. Will they need to acquire new equipment or modify existing ones?

(Preparing to Prototype)

Method

Step 1: Begin with the tools you already possess.

Step 2: Acquire additional tools as you can.

Step 3: Learn to use these tools effectively

Step 4: After mastering hand tools, you can purchase essential tools such as grinders, welders, power saws, and power screwdrivers at an affordable price

Step 5: Add more advanced tools such as lathes, mills, and 3D printers.

Step 6: Set up storage bins for materials. Choose various sizes to hold different components.

Step 7: Regularly disassemble products and keep the individual parts.

–This will help you understand how products are constructed.

–You can find useful components like switches, motors, and fans.

Step 8: Organize these parts for easier access.

Step 9: Use the parts frequently. You’ll become familiar with their locations and how to utilize them effectively.

Step 10: Look for local stores that supply raw materials for prototyping.

Step 11: Buy, store, and learn how to use these materials

–Parts from other products

–Fiberglass resin and Bondo™ (Available at auto parts stores)

–Plywood and scrap wood

–Aluminum sheet metal

–Lexan™ plastic (now available at hardware stores)

–Plastic and metal tubing

–Aluminum blocks, rods, and sheets (Aluminum is easy to work with using hand tools)

Step 12: Local hardware stores have many items for making prototypes, so you don’t need to stock every possible material.

Explanation

If you haven’t started yet, now is the time to gather your prototyping tools and materials. You don’t need to have everything at once; just organize as you go. Being organized will save you time in the long run.

Tools
Many people think you need expensive equipment. A typical garage with hand tools is usually sufficient. Prototyping often utilizes existing subsystems that just need some adjustments. You don’t need all the tools immediately. Basic hand tools are often enough to start since many raw materials come from parts that only require slight modifications. Over time, you may want better tools for improved components and to explore Aesthetic Prototypes if necessary.

Materials
Today, there are many easy-to-use raw materials for rapid prototyping. New product developers should learn about these materials. Make it a habit to explore new materials whenever you visit hardware or specialty shops. Discuss with others their experiences and tips on using different materials.

Building prototypes can be either frustrating or enjoyable, depending on the resources available. Having raw materials like rods, tubes, and blocks is advantageous, but many pre-owned items can also be adapted for prototypes. Good access to these materials can enhance your experience.

Raw materials can come from both new and used products intended for different purposes. For instance, gardening in the Arizona desert requires creativity, as the materials are not ideal. Many gardening tools suitable elsewhere may not work in Arizona. Often, parts require significant modifications, such as sprinkler components. When searching for these parts, one might find items in the plumbing aisle or as chair leg protectors in a hardware store. One of the best places to look is at second-hand stores. With practice, you will recognize potential in others’ discarded items.

A useful tip is to create a collection of parts that can be easily modified for prototypes. Store bins of small, medium, and large plastic, metal, and wood parts. These bins shouldn’t clutter your workshop, and you can populate them by disassembling unused or broken items from home or thrift stores.

Before starting this step, it’s beneficial to have various objects to experiment with different physical concepts. Regularly gather items associated with unusual physical phenomena. Make it a habit to take apart second-hand goods to salvage useful components. This practice will teach you about various manufacturing methods and help you collect inexpensive materials.

Recall the Offering Requirements

Method

Recall the offering requirements that will meet the needs of the target market and the business. This is the primary outcome from Creating Offerings.

Explanation

At this stage, we should already have a clear understanding of the market segment we are targeting. A market segment consists of a job, the individual performing that job, and the challenges they encounter. If you are uncertain, revisit this step.

You should also be mindful of the specific requirements for the offering. These requirements are not definitive yet because the innovation process is iterative and involves learning. We may still be in the early stages and lack clarity on the features essential to eliminate market and business challenges. We are still investigating where to address these challenges, whether it be in the product, service, manufacturing process, business model, or any part of the value chain. Additionally, we are still identifying the features of the product or service that can help simplify the task for our target market.

Example—Drying Shoes

There is a constant need to wash and dry athletic shoes, yet it remains a challenging task. Many people try to dry their shoes by placing them in a clothes dryer.

The shoes may not dry completely in a regular dryer. They can create a lot of noise while tumbling and may damage the dryer drum, other clothing, or the shoes themselves. We shouldn’t have to rely on a clothes dryer, but we need an effective method to dry shoes. We aim to provide a great solution for those seeking to dry their shoes. Additionally, we hope to attract potential licensees.

Keep in mind the requirements for an offering that satisfies the needs of the target market and the business. This is the primary outcome from Creating Offerings.

The offering should feature the ability to dry shoes evenly in 20 minutes without damaging the shoes or the dryer. It should be priced at no more than $5 and be easy to purchase, set up, and maintain.

Patent Search

Patent and Literature Search

Method

Step 0: Before beginning, familiarize yourself with existing alternative products and services. If you haven’t explored these options yet, please refer to the book Creating Offerings and conduct a search. Just because you don’t see any similar products doesn’t mean you shouldn’t check for patents.

Step 1: Research patents and literature to understand the evolution of the functions related to the task at hand. What functions have developed over time? Which key parameters have improved?

Step 2: Analyze patents and literature to trace the development of the technologies (physical phenomena) that provide these functions. How have these technologies progressed? What physical phenomena have been utilized?

Step 3: Summarize your findings.

Explanation

Hopefully, you have reviewed competing systems in the book Creating Offerings. If not, consider going back to do so.

This is an excellent time to conduct a patent search. Why do we do this? It’s essential to understand how others have managed the functions your system aims to provide. Don’t be discouraged if your idea is similar to an existing patent. There are often alternative approaches to patents, and many patents can be enhanced. Additionally, finding inventions that enable efficient manufacturing is crucial. If your product doesn’t exist in the market yet, there may be significant flaws that need addressing. Lastly, avoid creating a product that closely resembles a patented one unless it is no longer enforced.

Understanding the history [9] of a system sheds light on key evolutionary patterns. Each system follows a primary evolutionary path, and the likelihood of stagnation largely depends on technical issues that conflict with this progression. Since you’ve already researched patents in your field, you possess a wealth of historical information. This process may require time, but it is invaluable for your subsequent steps. You’ll become a knowledgeable expert in your area.

Example—Measurement of Corrosion

Step 1: Analyze patents and literature to explore the technologies (physical phenomena) used for detection. How have these technologies transformed? What phenomena have enabled these functions?

From http://www.corrosion-club.com/historyelectrochem.htm Electrochemical Corrosion Monitoring – Highlights: 1942 Hickling – Introduced the term “potentiostat,” a significant electronic model still referenced today. Potentiostats became popular in the 1960s for laboratory corrosion measurements. Source: H.S. Isaacs: “Aspects of Corrosion” in Journal of the Electrochemical Society, Vol. 149, No.12, pp.S85-S87, 2002. 1957 M. Stern and A.L. Geary: Developed a method to measure general corrosion rates using polarization resistance. 1960s Epelboin: Advanced electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) for a.c. corrosion measurement. 1968: Warren P. Iverson—Published a key article on measuring voltage transients in corroding metals.
1956—US2947679—Developed a method for measuring corrosion rate based on corrosion current and potential changes. This method provides a quicker way to assess corrosion. 1956—US2856495—Measured the resistance of a wire within a pipe to determine corrosion without disassembly. This approach could be useful if capsules were adjusted to function similarly to long, thin wires.
1959—US3069332—Introduced direct measurements of corrosion current. This method aligns with US2947679 and offers a faster approach to capture corrosion current voltage.
1964—US3337440—Similar to US2947679 but focuses on measuring corrosion current in specific environments like jet fuel.
1965—US3684679—Refines the US2947679 approach, addressing challenging conditions where corrosion occurs in contact with water.
1966—US3449232—Measures current under unique corrosion conditions. 1966—US3539808—Uses beta radiation to analyze corrosion by measuring backscatter. 1970—US3609549—Indirectly measures corrosion through resistance changes.
1971—US3748247—Builds on the 1956 patent US2947679 with an easier probe design.
1972—US3821641—Introduces oscillating current probes to stabilize current levels for corrosion measurement.
1974—US3947329—Enhances the US2947679 method for rapidly corroding environments through electrical adjustments.
1977—US4130464—Introduces a new technique focused on measuring electric double-layer potential decay. 1979—US4238298—Measures corrosion rates through alternating current impedance between test plates.
1983—US575678—Assesses corrosion rates by analyzing low-frequency noise voltage between electrodes in corrosive settings.
1987—US4800165—Applies earlier methods to large structures under corrosion.
1987—US4758312—Analyzes corroded materials after exposure to a corrosive environment.
1990—US4006786—Impedance measurement correlated with corrosion rates.
1993—US5519330—Introduces pulsing measurements for corrosion rate analysis.
1998—US6132594—Focuses on localized corrosion by measuring multiple areas.
1999—US6275050—Detects corrosion through signal injection analysis.
1999—US5905376—Applies MRI technology for corrosion detection.
2000—US5320395—Similar to the US4238298 approach.
2000—US6556001—Implements a noisy signal to analyze corrosion over time.
2002—USH2127—Detects corrosion through phase response after pulse heating the surface.
2003—US7057177—Introduces a method using infrared reflections to gauge corrosion amounts.
2003—US20030146749A1—Utilizes a magnetometer for measuring magnetic corrosion.
2005—US20050274628A1—Reiterates the US6132594 approach.
2005—US20050213430A1—Develops a method to scan surfaces pre-and post-corrosion for evaluating differences.
2006—US7388386—Utilizes small plates that break electrical paths when corroded.
2010—US20110067497A1—Uses ultrasound to measure corrosion thickness.

Step 3: Summarize your findings.

Note that not every case requires a patent search. In this instance, we are interested in innovative corrosion measurement techniques. Here’s a summary of discoveries:

Pre 1956: Weight loss coupons—An early method where samples are weighed, corroded, and re-weighed to measure corrosion rates, used in the acid container example.
1956: Electrical resistance—Some early patents involved measuring wire resistance over time in corrosive environments.
1956: Linear polarization—This method reverses galvanic voltage to measure resulting currents, developed alongside resistance measurements.
1959: Galvanic current—Measuring actual currents involved in corrosion, developed around the same time as resistance methods.
1966: Beta radiation exposure followed by backscatter measurement for corrosion thickness.
1977: Decay of electric double layer potential measured to assess corrosion rate.
1979: Alternating currents between test plates yield corrosion rates from impedance measurements.
1983: Low-frequency noise voltage measures corrosion rates via averaged voltage readings.
1999: MRI technology detects corrosion.
2003: Infrared reflections determine corrosion amounts.
2003: Magnetometer measures magnetic fields around corroded materials.
2005: Surface scans before and after corrosion allow for difference measuring.
2006: Small plates utilized to measure corrosion through broken electrical paths.
2010: Ultrasound measures sample thickness for corrosion assessment.

These methods improved in accuracy and versatility, as evidenced by patent developments. Many can provide an instantaneous corrosion rate, although some may require further calculations to derive that rate.

Create and Iterate on the Functional Prototype

Explanation of Create and iterate on the Functional Prototype

Creating and Iteratively Improving the Product or Service
Building a product or service from the ground up involves adding smaller components step by step until everything is ready. This approach is crucial because conceptualizing large systems can be challenging. While humans are capable, we aren’t infallible! Most large systems consist of smaller components created by teams. These components are further divided into elements that require time to design, test, and resolve issues. Many may be surprised to learn that this is how extensive and intricate systems are developed. Even simpler systems are often constructed this way.

(If Possible, Consider a Set-Based Approach)

Method

Step 1: Identify several solution ideas that meet the super-system goals and requirements.

Step 2: Gradually develop each system to align with the goals and requirements. Share the capabilities with the super-system designers to reduce risks while maintaining a wide range of potential solutions.

Explanation

Set-Based System Creation
If your project is substantial enough to explore different solution concepts, consider multiple system options simultaneously. This approach, known as set-based system development, begins with several candidate systems that closely align with the original goals and requirements. Their capabilities are communicated to the super-system designers, who modify the goals and acceptable ranges over time as they learn about the various sub-systems. Meanwhile, the candidate systems improve towards the defined targets. Eventually, the acceptable ranges are narrowed down to final values that the system will meet. This process is similar to what Toyota follows when developing its cars, allowing a flow of requirements and capabilities between teams.

This approach enables prototype development on a larger scale, which may not be feasible for smaller organizations or individuals.

It’s also important to recognize that the design and prototyping process is iterative, shaped by insights gained during system development. The goal is to lower each system’s risk while keeping as many possible solutions open for as long as feasible.

In a set-based approach, each solution develops independently. Some may introduce groundbreaking concepts, while others will evolve existing ones to meet the defined goals. Small teams or individuals might not always be able to manage multiple solutions.

While narrowing down the options, be cautious of certain types of solutions. For instance, ideas that the target market cannot distinguish are unlikely to be successful.

Be careful not to pursue solutions leading to major disruptions unless you’re ready for an internal struggle. This perspective may seem limiting, but experience indicates that most innovators find it challenging to tackle both product and cultural conflicts simultaneously.

When selecting a final system, aim for the simplest solution with the fewest components.

Identify The Most Ideal System Elements and Perform Simple Experiments

Method

Step 1: Procure a hardbound journal and a ballpoint pen. Number the pages. Begin each entry on a new date with the date at the top. Be very careful not to go back to previous days to add annotations. Always write in ink.

Step 2: Starting with the primary useful system product, begin adding functions and supporting functions using Idealizing Useful Functions for useful functions and Idealizing Informing Functions for measurement functions.

Step 3: For each function you are adding, first identify the most ideal physical phenomenon to deliver the function.

Step 4: Perform the simplest experiments possible to determine whether the physical phenomenon will work.

Step 5: When challenges arise, utilize TRIZ Power Tools—Resolving Problems to confront these issues.

Step 6: Search online, check YouTube, look at patents, and visit stores for existing solutions that fulfill your needs. Find options that fit your budget.

Step 7: After each iteration, evaluate if simplification is necessary. If so, refer to TRIZ Power Tools—Reducing Offering Burdens.

Explanation

Where to Start: The Main Useful Function
This process begins with the main useful function, which operates on the main system product. This product is essential in the system. Everything that interacts with this product serves a higher purpose. Items that do not contribute to this product are known as auxiliary functions and serve lesser purposes. As we incorporate each subsystem, we add supporting elements that are less critical to the system product. Be cautious when adding these elements, as they are less vital and can increase the cost and complexity of the final offering.

In summary, creating a product or service from scratch involves adding functional subsystems step by step, beginning with the main useful function and assessing its effectiveness.

Defining the Ideal Sub-system Elements
A careful approach to adding subsystems involves idealizing each one before including it. We must thoughtfully choose the element’s purpose, the physical phenomenon delivering the function, and the functional objects used. These choices are crucial and affect future decisions. Thus, we should aim to add these elements as ideally as possible. Detailed steps can help ensure proper evaluation.

As we incorporate each subsystem, we must be mindful of the supporting elements. These choices become increasingly difficult to alter over time. It’s important to add these elements as ideally as we can. The TRIZ Power Tools—Idealizing Useful Functions and Idealizing Informing Functions provide algorithms for adding functions more ideally.

To make necessary design choices, we must critically evaluate the primary function. We should ask ourselves if there’s a more optimal option. Is this the product we truly wish to modify? Is this the change we genuinely want to make?

Idealizing Each Additional Useful Function
The first step in idealizing a useful function is identifying and defining the ideal change to the product in functional terms. We start with useful functions because informing functions are specific useful functions, and an effective strategy for idealizing harmful functions is converting them into useful functions. Once transformed, they can be idealized using the steps from this chapter.

As we add each subsystem, we face decisions that impact the downstream supporting elements. These choices become harder to reverse over time. Each new function must be evaluated as we do for the primary useful function. Given its significance, let’s explore how this process unfolds for the primary useful function.

The first choice is whether to support the current system product or seek a better alternative. What improvements can be made? For example, can we address multiple elements simultaneously? If minor adjustments will suffice, it may not be necessary to change it at all. If the product is wasteful, implementing a function to minimize that waste might be a better choice.

After identifying the product we wish to support, we reconsider whether the initial change aligns with our goals. Could a reverse change be more beneficial, or might there be a more optimal phrasing or sequence that requires less energy?

Once we determine the product and change, we identify potential physical phenomena to achieve the function. Typically, we have several options available.

Before finalizing our choice of physical phenomena to implement the change, we evaluate our resources. What systems do we already possess? What have we utilized in the past? What system elements are at our disposal? What affordable materials are readily available? With this information, we can pinpoint various physical phenomena to deliver the function, as they often overlap.

Next, we assess which objects can be used to implement the selected physical phenomena. Choosing which physical phenomena to employ largely relies on the resources we have, as we prefer to avoid introducing new physical objects if possible.

After selecting the objects to deliver the physical phenomena, we determine the system’s design by identifying the attributes of the objects affecting function performance and defining the required levels for these attributes. These attributes dictate the system’s design. Depending on the system’s complexity, various tools may assist us in setting suitable attribute levels. Sometimes, we can utilize models if the physics are well understood, or we might need to create simple prototypes for testing.

Whether to use an existing system depends on our objectives and willingness to adapt current systems or seek something fundamentally better. We may just want to demonstrate part of a system, and utilizing low-cost existing elements may suffice. If we aim for ideal systems, the next section will guide that exploration. However, preliminary searches won’t hurt, even if seeking the most ideal system.

If you’re struggling to implement these functions and haven’t yet conducted a patent search, this is the perfect time to consider doing so.

Simplifying the System
The system simplification step is reserved for the final stage, as it is a general simplification aimed at reducing the number of elements.

Example: Drying Shoes

Method

Step 1: Get a hardbound journal and a ballpoint pen. Number the pages. Start each entry with the date, ensuring not to return and annotate previous entries. Always write using ink.

In the first iteration, we begin by focusing on the primary useful function associated with drying shoes. To illustrate this step, let’s consider the drying of fabric shoes that become wet during washing or accidentally, provided the water is sufficiently clean. The target market, therefore, consists of individuals seeking to dry their shoes quickly after washing or in the event of an accident.

The main focus is the water, and we simply want to relocate it. The shoes are not our concern, as we don’t intend to change them at all. The moisture may have affected the shoes more than we prefer, but that’s a separate issue. Our goal is to transfer the moisture from inside the shoes to another location.

Step 3: For each function you are adding, first identify the most ideal physical phenomenon to deliver the function.

Physical Phenomena used to move water are

—Evaporation

—Centrifugal force

—Gravity movement

—Gas movement

—Vacuum

—Surface tension

Step 4: Perform the simplest experiments possible to determine whether the physical phenomenon will work.

Below are possible methods to demonstrate these physical phenomena:

—Evaporation: Utilize sunlight; however, this method may not be reliable in all locations.

—Evaporation: Place shoes in a warm room. This process can be rather slow and may require assistance for faster drying.

—Evaporation: Use a clothes dryer. Shoes can be noisy and may damage the dryer or other garments.

—Evaporation: Use a food oven, though cultural practices may need adjustments.

—Evaporation: Utilize a microwave oven, keeping in mind concerns regarding the effects of various shoe materials.

—Centrifugal Force: The washer’s spin cycle generates strong centrifugal force, but shoes are often not positioned correctly to take advantage of it.

—Gravity movement: Gravity can help move liquid water through fabric to some extent, but it is not sufficient to guarantee drying.

—Gas movement: A dryer circulates air; however, the airflow speed is typically low.

—Vacuum: A vacuum cleaner can create airflow through fabric, which is significant since dryers are not very efficient at pulling air through materials.

—Surface tension: The surface tension of the fabric in shoes draws water from wet areas to drier ones. Dry materials like old towels can absorb moisture, but they are not very effective.

—Drying out: Water must evaporate from the shoes before reaching the desiccant, which primarily serves as storage.

In conclusion, the preferred method is the clothes dryer, as it naturally aids the process of drying clothes, with the washer likely used beforehand.

Step 5: When challenges arise, utilize TRIZ Power Tools—Resolving Problems to confront these issues.

Simply placing the shoes in the dryer is problematic. They bounce around, creating a lot of noise and potentially damaging the dryer or any clothes inside. From TRIZ Power Tools—Resolving Problems, we can create a function diagram of the issue.

Everything in our system is red. The green and yellow represent super-system elements, while the yellow indicates the product that our system modifies.

Next, we will analyze the problem to identify the cause. To keep it simple, we will focus on the harmful functions as the main issue. We observe that there are two problems with the shoes: they damage the drum and the clothing.

Next, we explore ways to improve harmful functions using TRIZ Power Tools—Idealizing Harmful Functions. Ideally, the shoe would not exist. But since it must, we can address the issue by separating its functions. Shoes should be placed where they won’t damage the clothes and drum, and not found elsewhere. They should remain stable while allowing good airflow. There are two possible spots: one for air to enter the drum through small openings, and another for air to exit. The incoming air is drier than the outgoing air, but it might be easier to direct air to the shoes at the exit. The harmful functions illustrated in the diagram are now eliminated.

Step 6: Search online, check YouTube, look at patents, and visit stores for existing solutions that fulfill your needs. Find options that fit your budget.

Online searches for drying shoes reveal various methods to dry them.

1—Hang the shoes in the dryer by their laces, using techniques such as closing the laces in the dryer door or using special attachments inside the dryer.

2—Place the shoes on a dryer rack designed for use in the dryer. (This option can be expensive if the dryer does not come with a drying rack).

3—Put the shoes in a pillowcase along with other cloth items.

4—Use a hairdryer.

5—Hang them on a clothesline (this takes longer).

6—Stuff a towel into the shoes.

7—Fill the shoes with newspaper (this takes longer).

Step 8: In each round, check if simplification is necessary. If so, refer to TRIZ Power Tools—Reducing Offering Burdens.

No simplification is required in this round.

Draw and Re-draw the Potential Architecture Multiple Times

Method

Step 1: In your journal, draw and redraw an architectural design in your invention journal several times. Be as detailed as possible. (The system may already exist but could be improved.) If you’re not changing the system, then use the current system as your baseline.

Step 2: Consider having the drawings reviewed.

Step 3: As challenges arise, use the TRIZ Power Tools—Resolving Problems to tackle these issues.

Explanation

Creating the Architecture (Schematics, etc.)
Once we identify the key components of the sub-system, we can begin to create diagrams that illustrate how these components fit together. These drawings don’t need to be perfect or to scale; they just need to show how everything connects. Initial sketches can be made on any medium, like napkins or in your invention journal. The goal is to capture the features of the sub-system elements that affect their performance and how they relate spatially to one another.

As you start sketching the system, you will notice various issues that need attention. It’s important to begin addressing these problems at this stage. The book TRIZ Power Tools—Resolving Problems discusses this topic.

This drawing process is typically iterative. The objective is still to design the sub-system as ideally as possible using available materials. One approach is to redraw the sub-system multiple times, making small improvements with each iteration. Repeatedly sketching the sub-system can help simplify the number of components and their connections. For final drawings, some individuals prefer to add rich details (like shading) to make the concept more tangible.

Challenges will quickly arise and need to be solved, and the book TRIZ Power Tools—Resolving Problems can assist in tackling these challenges.

Example—Drying Shoes

In the first iteration, the drawings are basic but should be documented in the invention journal. This captures the idea and the date it was created. In this example, the drawings are reviewed because the idea may be significant.

Step 2: Consider observing the drawings.

No need in this case.

Step 3: As problems arise, utilize the methods of TRIZ Power Tools—Resolving Problems to tackle these issues.

At this point, we can anticipate challenges, but it is better to prototype and verify whether these problems actually exist.

Identify the Biggest Risks and Problems with the New Architecture

Method

Step 1: Create a list of design risks.

Step 2: Identify the most significant risk.

Step 3: Determine the simplest prototype or experiment we can create to verify if there is a problem.

Step 4: Conduct the experiments.

Explanation

Learning Versus Doing
No matter how much we believe we know, nature often reveals that we still have much to learn. Over time, you’ll discover where the most significant risks lie. Focus on those areas first.

Address Problems with Physics Based Models

Method

Whenever possible, model the risky subsystem. Use this model to set parameter values. Consider utilizing TRIZ Power Tools—Mobilizing Function Resources to discover innovative ways to use these resources.

Explanation

Modeling the Subsystem
With our initial design in mind, we can begin modeling the system. Modeling helps accurately capture the physics from the outset. Often, the scale of effects and component sizes will guide the next drawing or layout. The results of the modeling may also alter our initial schematic if the sizes of the elements differ significantly from our expectations.

Models are usually based on a functional drawing, such as a timing diagram or a free-body diagram. Initial models should be as simple as possible to provide a rough estimate of sizing. More detail will be necessary in future iterations of the prototype.

It is recognized that many individuals may lack the skills to model physics. In such cases, this step can be skipped in favor of jumping directly to prototyping, but this increases the risk of wasting time on prototyping. A notable example is Thomas Edison, who often avoided modeling. Nikola Tesla, who worked with Edison, believed that Edison’s work would improve significantly with some knowledge of physics. Tesla was a renowned physicist, while Edison was famous for his large-scale invention studio where many worked using trial-and-error methods.

Why Model?
The need for modeling arises from the desire to get the physics as accurate as possible right from the start. The size of effects and component sizing often dictate the next drawing or layout steps. The results of modeling might also influence our basic schematic if the sizes of the elements differ from initial assumptions.

How are Models Created?
Models are generally based on functional drawings like timing diagrams or free-body diagrams. Initial models should be simple to provide a rough estimate of sizing. More detail will be required in subsequent prototype iterations.

What If I Don’t Have the Background to Model?
Many individuals might not possess the background necessary to model physics. In this case, this step can be skipped for prototyping, but this can significantly increase the likelihood of wasting time on prototypes. A historical example is Thomas Edison, who avoided modeling despite Nikola Tesla’s suggestions to incorporate some physics. Tesla had little patience for the trial-and-error approach that Edison preferred. Sometimes, trial and error can be excessively slow. Even basic subsystem models can save time, especially when physics is complex. Models help establish the levels of control features, aiding in visualizing the final system. If the physics isn’t well understood, it can be beneficial to hypothesize and create a model based on that hypothesis. The author often finds that many conceptual models can be developed by returning to foundational principles, such as conservation and continuity.

Rapid Prototyping Versus Modeling
In certain situations, rapid prototyping can be faster than modeling, allowing this step to be disregarded. This is especially true when running models, such as computational fluid dynamics, can be time-consuming. However, remain open to advancements in challenging modeling areas.

Example—Cleaning Shoes

Initially, we will proceed directly to prototyping and will not require this step.

Address Problems with Experiments and Prototypes

Method

Step 1: If possible, create scale models or drawings of the subsystem for prototyping. You may need to repeat this several times to establish a simple design.

Step 2: Construct basic prototypes and conduct tests to gauge the effect you are focusing on and the effectiveness of different structures.

Step 3: If the physics differ from what you expected, identify which features are truly influencing the results. Are you observing what you anticipated, or are there unexpected outcomes?

Step 4: If you can quickly try different configurations, do so to maximize your understanding of the features that affect performance.

Step 5: Tackle problems as they arise. If they are significant enough to hinder you, consult TRIZ Power Tools—Resolving Problems.

Explanation

Regardless of modeling, conducting real experiments and/or building prototypes is crucial to confirming your understanding of the physics involved. Often, I have realized I overlooked something.

Build to Think and Think to Build
Creating and testing functional prototypes helps us understand the physics better and think deeply about what is happening. IDEO[1] refers to this concept as “Build to Think and Think to Build.” This is where the most significant learning occurs because we observe how various parameters influence our intended functions. Humans naturally learn through hands-on experiences[2]. There is no substitute for making things ourselves, as the creation process teaches us in numerous ways. This is where intuition arises, gaining practical experience. The more senses we engage, the clearer our understanding becomes. Such knowledge is often not found in textbooks and is frequently undervalued in education. When we act and engage, our brains collect a wealth of “tacit knowledge.” Skilled craftsmen possess such understanding, as do those who create their own prototypes, no matter how rough. Repurposing materials from other devices also enhances our tacit knowledge. While these resources aim to provide intellectual tools for innovation, we must also develop the skills and experience needed for intuitive invention. Even as these resources guide us intellectually, some elements of invention arise solely from hands-on experience. Collaborating with individuals who possess practical knowledge can significantly reduce the time spent figuring out how to bring your ideas to life.

Prototyping enriches our personal knowledge for future projects. Our ability to prototype improves with each project, as do our tools and materials.

How Dumb We Really Are
Sometimes, people overestimate their intelligence. It is not uncommon for innovation consultants to help someone develop a “breakthrough” idea only to uncover many unresolved issues. Prototyping reveals challenges such as harmful functions and contradictions. These should be addressed immediately. TRIZ Power Tools—Resolving Problems assists in systematically overcoming these issues. This iterative process can be demanding and time-consuming for each subsystem. The emotional and intellectual journey of the innovator can be intriguing as we witness our hypotheses in action. Occasionally, discouragement may arise, but taking a brief pause to reflect is perfectly fine as long as it does not hinder progress.

The Value of Simple Prototypes
Many product developers fall into the trap of overcomplicating prototypes, expending excessive time and resources. IDEO emphasizes that starting simple and crude is best. Simple prototypes provide significant insights. The intended purpose and audience of the prototype will be discussed further. Remember, the prototype should cater to its audience, with the product developer being the most crucial initial audience. You need to be convinced that your idea holds value before continuing. Patrick Hale provided a compelling example of this spirit of prototyping during the Mark Niver memorial.

My name is Patrick Hale, and I would like to share a story about a unique friend of mine known for his unusual ways of giving and sharing. Back when Jimmy Carter was President, I started drag racing around the same time as Mark Niver, making my first pass at Beeline Dragway in 1970 during my freshman year at ASU. In 1978, I bought my first dragster from Mike Abby, one of our hosts tonight. Thanks to everyone for honoring Mark Niver.

I was a young engineer, fresh from college, working at AiResearch, and also developing a computer program to predict ET and MPH for various drag racing cars. This program worked well for my own dragster, and other racers took notice.

At the end of 1979, another AiResearch engineer asked if I could create a simulation for a Pro Comp dragster. He wanted to predict how much faster a dragster could go with a new type of supercharger called the “Lysholm compressor.” That engineer was Norm Drazy, and I quickly agreed, provided I could learn about the weight and horsepower of a Pro Comp dragster. As we dug deeper into the simulation, we recognized the aerodynamic differences between my small block Chevy and a large, Hemi-powered Pro Comp dragster needed to be understood. In early 1980, there was no wind tunnel data for dragsters, and my experience with Lear jets didn’t apply.

Norm promised to get us the data, and I was thrilled – engineers love data. A few weeks later, Norm called and said, “We are ready.” He wanted me to ride my 750 Honda down the freeway to Riggs Road south of Phoenix, on the way to Casa Grande. I asked how far it was, having never heard of Riggs Road. He replied it was about eight miles south of Maricopa Road. This was long before Charlie Allen imagined leaving OCIR to build Firebird.

After work, I arrived around 5:30 PM, took the exit, and saw a Pro Comp dragster parked on the roadside. Norm was tying a rope from the dragster to his little blue Datsun pickup truck. Whose dragster is it? Mark Niver’s.

What were we about to do? We planned to tow Mark’s dragster down Riggs Road – a two-lane public road on the Indian Reservation during peak traffic and measure how much power it took. I thought, “What a brilliant idea! The Indian police should be here any moment.” Mark yelled, “Let’s go!” and jumped in the dragster, eager to help with this “crazy” science project. Norm took the truck wheel, instructing me to hop in the back to check the beam scale measuring the force needed to tow Mark’s dragster. We started at 20 MPH, needing 45 pounds of force. I jotted down notes with my mechanical pencil – it was just after work. We accelerated to 30, 40, and then 50 MPH. Mark gave us a thumbs up, shouting, “Faster, faster!” He was used to speeds over 200 MPH, while I was getting tossed around in the back of the Datsun at just 60 MPH, ready to call it off. Still, we collected great data from a real Pro Comp dragster. The adrenaline was flowing, and we were all young and excited. After a few miles, Norm floored the pickup truck, and we slowly picked up speed. The tugging train of the Datsun, a long tow rope, and the Pro Comp dragster hit 65 MPH, but the truck began overheating.

They managed to safely stop, and Mark was still eager to hit 100 MPH, but we cooled off and returned toward Mark’s trailer. On the way back, we attempted to go faster than 65 MPH, but the little Datsun just did not have the horsepower. We loaded Mark’s dragster back in its trailer and went our separate ways. Life was good; I had great data, nothing broke, no traffic accidents, and thankfully avoided jail time with the Indian police. Reflecting on the drive home, I wondered, what type of man allows two crazy aerospace engineers to tow his dragster down a public road on a Wednesday afternoon? Mark Niver.

Prototype at the Level You Need
Different levels of prototypes serve vital functions. Generally, one should start with very simple, crude prototypes before progressing to more complex versions. In the early stages, you are the prototype’s audience. You must be convinced of its validity. The effects of a prototype can be both motivating and disheartening. You may expect a home run, only to find a modest outcome. It can be discouraging. Conversely, you might discover results exceeding your expectations. More typically, however, the physics likely differ from your assumptions, which can also be disheartening, even for those with years of experience. The key takeaway is not to give up too soon. Overcome your “failures” quickly by learning from them. When learning that the physics differ, the next question becomes: what features and feature levels govern what’s happening.

As an example from my gardening hobby, I am passionate about vegetable cultivation in the desert. In the Arizona desert, ensuring plants are properly watered has little margin for error. During winter, the plants growing in this season prefer overhead watering. Newcomers to the desert often overlook the benefits of overhead watering, like reducing aphids and thrips. My garden boxes span about 4 or 5 ft and sit approximately 3 feet above the ground.

Surprisingly, few sprinklers work effectively for overhead watering in my garden setup. To minimize water waste, I’ve resorted to creating my own. My early prototypes resembled showerheads. They worked decent, but the narrow streams failed to cover the plants randomly, which is crucial for bug removal. I aimed to devise a random watering pattern. The methods in this chapter guided me. Attempting to idealize the function, I sought a physical phenomenon to produce a random spray pattern. I realized shooting water at a target or allowing drips to hit a surface could create this splash effect. I hypothesized that different target shapes would yield various spray patterns. Eventually, I discovered a commercial sprinkler I could adjust to enable both a water stream and a target in one design. While it was capable of avoiding calcium deposits, the problem surfaced during testing. The water did not flow off the target as I had assumed. When turning the water low enough to attain the desired spray size, the water clung to the target, revealing the Coanda effect, where fluids tend to adhere to surfaces longer than expected, often shooting off at unusual angles.

Initially disheartened, I set it aside for a couple of days. Later, experimenting with smaller target sizes led to a breakthrough. The water wrapped around the smaller rounded targets, flowing from the opposite side. As it converged there, drops formed and sprayed across the air in predictable ways. The drops were random, but the overall pattern was stable, adequately covering my garden boxes. The controlling features became clear. This story remains ongoing, as prototyping continues.

Note that this process can feel uncontrolled, which is precisely why we prototype. We do it to learn, often encountering the unexpected. While discouragement is common, it can also be exhilarating to discover overlooked insights. Enjoy the process!

Create the Crudest Prototype to Get the Job Done
The functional prototype simply needs to perform its task. Occasionally, it showcases critical aspects of the system. Often, a polished prototype is not necessary to sell the idea, especially if you are your own audience.

Many overinvest in prototype development. Sometimes a basic, rough prototype is more valuable than a refined, costly one. Building a prototype prompts us to consider and observe what we might otherwise miss. Crude prototypes frequently reveal critical information. Pondering how to create the cheapest version often presents an inventive challenge requiring mental effort. Keep in mind that during early prototypes, the audience is mainly you. This first prototype will provide insight and, eventually, the confidence to move forward. Be open to multiple iterations, refining each step.

Crude Dimensioned Drawings
Now that you recognize the parameters at play, creating scale models or drawings of the subsystem is beneficial. These sketches can clarify how components fit together and potential issues. They can also inspire ideas for optimizing how sub-system components interact.

This step can either help or hinder crude prototypes. In initial stages, you may want to skip this step to quickly create basic prototypes. However, to save materials, it is wise to draw at least a rough sketch with dimensions to ensure proper material purchases and fit. Knowing when to create detailed drawings comes with experience. Typically, highly detailed drawings are unnecessary. When working with a modeling shop, a simple dimensioned drawing often suffices, but at early stages, this may be excessive. Building your prototype in a garage typically allows for quicker, more iterative learning than having someone else build it for you.

Addressing Harmful Functions
While designing or prototyping, we might encounter harmful functions. These need to be resolved or mitigated. It may seem counterintuitive to consider idealizing something harmful, but there are ways to transform these harms into something beneficial.

How we manage the objects that cause or absorb harm relates directly to their functions within the system. Typically, objects supporting the primary function can be removed, transferring their useful function to another part of the system. If an object serves a primary function, removing it is difficult; hence we must explore alternative approaches. If it cannot be removed, it should be modified, redirected, or weakened.

Example—Cleaning Shoes

Step 1: If possible, create scale models or drawings of the subsystem. You may need to repeat this several times to produce a simple design.

In the initial round, we are diving directly into a basic prototype without needing drawings.

Step 2: Construct basic prototypes and conduct tests to understand the magnitude of the effect you’re focusing on and which structures work effectively.

The shoes were placed beneath the dryer vent, expecting minimal effect. Halfway through the drying cycle, I checked and found them thoroughly dry! It worked too well! Clearly, anyone with an outside dryer vent can do this easily. If I aimed to create a product, this wouldn’t be a viable candidate since the target audience needs nothing more than an external vent. This forces us to reassess earlier assumptions. Initially, it was thought that the target market would need help overcoming constraints, but now it becomes evident they should be narrowed to those without outdoor vents or whose shoes require assistance drying due to poor air circulation.

Step 3: If you discover that the physics differ from expectations, identify the features truly affecting the results. Is the phenomenon as you envisioned, or is it different?

Step 4: If you can rapidly try different configurations, take the opportunity to enhance your understanding of features affecting performance.

Step 5: Iteratively resolve any problems that you may encounter. If the issues are significant enough to hinder your progress, then refer to TRIZ Power Tools—Resolving Problems.

The first round involves creating a crude and simple prototype. The shoes are positioned directly at the exit of the dryer and remain there while a load of clothes is being dried. Below is an image of this basic prototype. The shoes are placed beneath the dryer vent with the expectation that it may not perform very well. The author checked halfway through the drying cycle and discovered that they were completely dry. It may have worked too effectively! Clearly, anyone with an external vent for their dryer can easily do this. If I were attempting to develop a product, this would not be a suitable candidate, as the target market requires nothing more than an external vent on their dryer. This leads us to reassess our assumptions from previous steps. The assumption was that the target market might need some assistance to overcome specific constraints. Now, the target market needs to be narrowed down to those who are still facing limitations, such as not having an external vent, or there may be shoes that still require assistance drying due to inadequate air circulation.

Iterate Steps in Functional Protyping Until Satisfied

Method

Step 1: Are all requirements met for the prototype? If not, return to Identify the Most Ideal System Elements and try again.

Iteratively Prototype the Manufacturing Process

Method

Use the same steps taken to create the prototype to enhance the manufacturing process.

Step 1: Determine if the prototyping methods can be applied for large-scale production.

Step 2: If not, explore ways to produce the product at the lowest cost. This may require creative solutions for the product or the process. Utilize similar problem-solving skills as with products or services.

Step 3: Assess the ongoing costs of materials and labor.

Step 4: Identify necessary modifications to existing equipment or whether new equipment is needed. This will clarify one-time costs.

Step 5: Discover any one-time labor costs associated with design.

Explanation

While creating the functional prototype, you can begin examining the manufacturing process.

Building the prototype helps you understand how the product or service will be produced. Even though the prototype may differ from the final manufacturing method, it demonstrates the precision required for certain features to function properly.

Ultimately, you’ll need to investigate how to produce the product or service. This often involves discussions with industry experts. Don’t hesitate to consider innovative manufacturing techniques.

Previously, we may have encountered a limitation in the manufacturing process itself. If so, the manufacturing techniques and prototypes are crucial to innovation. We may need to direct our creativity toward how the product or service is produced. The development of the prototype can even inform the manufacturing process.

Understanding the manufacturing process is essential if you plan to license or sell your idea. A potential licensee will require information about costs and any expenses related to modifying or acquiring machinery for production. Therefore, anticipating all possible questions is vital.

The aim of this book is to create prototypes that can be showcased to customers and businesses. If we notice that a customer issue needs addressing during manufacturing, the prototypes we’ve developed will illustrate the manufacturing process. However, this step focuses on understanding both one-time and ongoing costs associated with producing the product or delivering the service. Will new equipment be necessary, or can we modify existing equipment? What will the ongoing costs be? It’s challenging for a business to make decisions without this information. Thus, exploring production methods is a key part of the prototyping process.

Create the Aesthetic Prototype for Feedback

Explanation of Create the Aesthetic Prototype for Feedback

Public Testing of Prototypes
We are back to our main focus. With the prototype, we can revisit the eBook on Creating Offerings and continue interviewing potential customers. Having the prototype allows us to present our idea and gather their honest feedback. This feedback is crucial as we will invest significant time and money into this concept, and it may also assist us if we decide to license or sell the idea.

The Different Types of Prototypes
There are various types of prototypes. The first type we’ve encountered is the Effect Prototype, which helps us understand a physical phenomenon. These prototypes can be simple and are designed to demonstrate the physical effect necessary for the desired functions. Often, they consist of basic experiments.

The next level is the Functional Prototype. Here, we evaluate if we have the right components and whether they work for their intended purpose. A polished prototype is usually not required to determine how well it performs. We want to ensure that there are no major risks left and confirm that nothing essential has been overlooked before filing for a patent. These prototypes can also help convince stakeholders and potential customers that our idea is marketable.

Lastly, an Aesthetic Prototype might be necessary to prevent biased reactions from users. Some individuals may be disinclined to use our product if it appears unacceptable. Their aversion to a functional prototype might outweigh their willingness to try it. Creating these prototypes can be costly, so we may need to wait for the manufacturer to build them.

Keep it Simple for Initial Prototypes
Many people invest too much time and money into Effect and Functional prototypes. Making expensive prototypes can deplete your resources and lead to discouragement, potentially hindering the final product from materializing. Remember, the goal of these initial prototypes is to assure YOU that the ideas work together. The additional costs are often not justified.

There are solid reasons to keep prototypes simple. Building them often reveals insights that we might otherwise overlook. If we create costly prototypes, it can take too long to identify what we need to learn. Initial prototypes will likely have flaws, which is beneficial as they provide valuable lessons. Simple prototypes can highlight both strengths and weaknesses. When we build something that fails, we can discover potential issues that may arise in a well-made expensive prototype.

Another advantage of these prototypes is that they help evaluate the importance of each feature. Quickly changing features enhances our understanding of their effects on the outcome. So, just assemble some materials together and start experimenting.

Keep in mind that during the first round of prototypes, the primary viewer is you. This prototype will provide you the insights and confidence to move forward. Be open to multiple rounds of refinement, improving with each iteration. Even in later aesthetic versions, you are the one who needs the insights to proceed.

Considering how to create the most cost-effective prototype is an inventive challenge and requires considerable mental effort. This effort is valuable as it sharpens our skills and encourages productive thinking for the business.

From Prototype to Production
While simplicity is often best for prototypes, caution is necessary when transitioning to production prototypes. The author has observed many instances where this transition has gone poorly. When converting a prototype to production, designers may make small changes that have significant impacts. For example, handmade prototypes can have features that are difficult to replicate in production. Designers may not recognize which aspects are critical for proper function and make slight adjustments believing there is no harm. They may also need to accommodate packaging constraints that impact key features. This is not an exhaustive list of potential pitfalls.

To avoid issues, first acknowledge that they are likely to occur. Second, develop production-grade prototypes as early in the process as possible. (The earlier discussion focuses on the research and development stages, not production). Testing should be conducted on components that are as close to production standards as possible.

Determine the Prototype Requirements

Method

Step 1: Identify your target audience: a customer, a potential partner, a manufacturer, or your own business team. Initially, the focus will be on a potential customer whose feedback we need.

Step 2: Determine how polished the prototype should be for your audience. If there are safety concerns then address these at this time. (For instance, designing for UL approval).

Refine the Aesthetic Form

Method

Step 1: Sketch various styles of the product in your journal.

Step 2: Share your pictures with others and seek their feedback.

Step 3: Now that you’ve filed for the patent, consider consulting with experts on design or production methods.

Step 4: Improve the user interface you created in Creating Offerings.

Explanation

The appearance of your invention is crucial, especially for consumer products. Consider how you decide which product to purchase when faced with similar options. Typically, you choose the one that looks the best. Even if your product doesn’t have significant competition, strong design can persuade customers that it will perform reliably. If a manufacturer prioritizes design, they likely care about functionality as well! Don’t forget the user interface you developed in TRIZ Power Tools–Creating Offerings.

Build The Refined Aesthetic Prototype

Method

Step 1: Identify the parts required to construct your prototype, such as motors, fans, and electrical components.

Step 2: Clearly sketch the parts, ensuring they fit together properly. While exact measurements are not always necessary for builders, they can aid in cost estimation.

Step 3: Assemble the prototype using affordable materials that we previously discussed.

Step 4: Verify that the prototype complies with the requirements outlined in TRIZ Power Tools–Creating Offerings.

Explanation

We are building another prototype. This version is more complete and has a better appearance. Its purpose is to assess whether people will accept your invention. It also showcases the ideal look for your invention and possibly the best method for producing it.

The final appearance will depend on your budget. The closer it is to the finished product, the better feedback you will receive. Having quality tools is beneficial if you plan to construct it yourself.

Consider hiring a prototype shop; however, it can be expensive. Detailed drawings are often necessary to communicate your ideas effectively. However, if you can create a functional prototype with a good visual representation of the final product, you may not require them. A 3D printer can be useful for producing the prototype.

File for Patents (If Applicable)

Explanation of File for Patents (If applicable)

Now that we understand the manufacturing processes, we can file for patents or at least secure a place at the patent office with a provisional patent. While this isn’t always necessary, it does offer maximum protection before we publicly test our prototypes. We may want to apply for patents for the product and/or the manufacturing process.

There are two types of patents: a provisional or “poor man’s” patent and a non-provisional or regular patent. Congress introduced the provisional patent in the late 90s to encourage small business growth. A provisional patent serves as a filing date placeholder, as the patent examiner will not review it until the regular patent is submitted. It can also act as a stand-in for building working prototypes, known as “reduction to practice.” The provisional patent should include enough details so that someone skilled in the field can create your invention. While it’s important to provide detailed information, you don’t need to use complex legal language or drawings. Include clear illustrations and the cover sheet from the USPTO website, and pay a fee of around $80. Provisional patents last for up to one year from the filing date.

These patents must be converted to a regular patent within the year, or your invention will be considered abandoned. One strategy is to file for a provisional patent and then license the product or service. The business agreement can include upfront payments, which can be used to file the non-provisional patent with a patent attorney or agent.

Traditional patents can be significantly more expensive. If you are running your own business, it can be challenging to justify the cost of a non-provisional patent before the market validates itself. In contrast, large companies often have the resources and typically prefer to bypass the time and effort of obtaining a provisional patent.

Once you have a filing date, your patent is now pending. Mark your prototypes as patent pending. This allows you to sell, license, or manufacture your invention. Be aware that there’s still some risk that someone else may have already patented the idea. The level of risk depends on how thoroughly you searched for patents and how closely your invention resembles existing patents.

Patents are a complex subject that cannot be fully addressed here. It is recommended to read a book on patenting. A lone inventor can effectively patent their invention and may perform better than most professional patent attorneys and agents. However, there are several important principles to learn. Remember, you know your invention best.

To secure a patent, you need to pass several tests, with the two key ones being novelty and non-obviousness. The novelty test is generally straightforward; we need to determine if it is physically different from previous inventions. The non-obviousness test is more challenging. It must not be obvious to someone familiar with all prior art. Additionally, it must be non-obvious after reviewing prior art. Consider whether your invention has a non-obvious effect, such as solving a previously unsolved problem. Practical guidelines for non-obviousness are somewhat outlined in the USPTO literature.

Document your Inventions

Method

Step 1: Document your observations and tests in your journal; the more details you provide, the better.

Step 2: Sign and date your invention in a journal.

Step 3: Have two trustworthy witnesses sign and date an entry confirming they understand the invention and have seen it successfully created. Choose witnesses who are knowledgeable about the device. Avoid family members or co-inventors. Make sure to select someone you can depend on.

Step 4: Mark the material as confidential, such as stating, “I confidently witnessed this invention.”

Explanation

Documenting the Idea and Witnessing the Creation
Once you are confident your idea works, it’s advisable to document it and have it witnessed. In jurisdictions where “first to patent” is the rule, timing is of the essence, and filing a patent may become necessary soon. In the U.S., the first to witness the creation holds the advantage, so consider waiting until you’ve completed all elements before filing.

Documenting that your invention has been “reduced to practice” is critical. This will be required later when submitting your patent. Every inventor should maintain a patent journal, ideally with a separate journal for each idea to avoid confusion over entries.

The journal entries should capture as much of the work as possible, regardless of the prototyping stage. In the U.S., rights are established by the first to practice, not the first to file. Therefore, the journal serves as vital evidence of when ideas were developed.

Generally, journals should be hard-bound with numbered pages. Use permanent ink for numbering. Always write and draw entries in permanent ink to prevent doubts about alterations. If you need to change something written earlier, follow a consistent method for changes. Cross out the incorrect information, write the correct details, and date the change. It’s safer to rewrite the entire entry on the next available page and date it.

When possible, review entries with someone who can confirm them and sign that they understand. Do not ask family members to sign for you.

Perform a Patent Search (If not already done)

Method

Begin by conducting a patent search to understand existing patents and determine if your invention could infringe on any. For more details about this process, refer to the section on idealizing physical phenomena in the book TRIZ Power Tools — Idealizing Useful Functions.

Explanation

If you haven’t done so already, it’s advisable to investigate which patents have been filed to avoid infringing on others’ intellectual property. You may have completed this while identifying the physical phenomena you intend to utilize. A patent search can provide valuable insights, including information about companies producing similar products.

Determine a Patent Strategy

Method

Step 1: If you have a problem, try to find a different angle to gain protection. Seek help from a professional if necessary.

Step 2: If your idea can be patented, expand on the invention.

–Expand the market—(Perform the same function in more markets)

–Expand the jobs it can assist with.

–Add more functions it can perform.

–Explore different methods to implement the invention.

–Expand the physical phenomena.

–Expand the architecture.

–Assess the solution sets.

–Rank the solution sets.

Step 3: Check if a patent is needed for the product or service and if a different one is required for the method of making it.

Explanation

Typically, filing for a provisional patent is sufficient before you sell or license your invention. In some cases, the patent situation can be more complex, and you might need to perform additional work. If you find that your idea isn’t new as it stands, you may need to resolve more issues to make it sufficiently novel.

Patent interest can go beyond obtaining just one patent. Some cases require multiple patents to create a “patent fence” to keep competitors out.

Since most examiners prefer not to see a patent covering both a product and its manufacturing method, you may need separate patents for these.

File Provisional Patents

Method

Step 1: Obtain provisional patent forms from the USPTO website.

Step 2: Complete the forms and attach an explanation of the invention, along with the drawings.

Step 3: Include a check for approximately $80.

Step 4: Enclose a self-addressed postcard with checkboxes for everything you have sent. They will check the boxes and return the card to you. Ensure the card has a postage stamp.

Step 5: Send the package via U.S. Overnight Express Mail. The postage date will be considered the filing date.

Step 6: If everything is in order at the USPTO, you will receive a filing date in 6-8 weeks. You are now “Patent Pending.”

Explanation

If you are unsure whether your idea has a strong market or cannot afford the cost of a regular patent application, you may want to file a provisional patent first. Provisional patents were created in the late ’90s as a more accessible patent option. They serve as a filing date placeholder and allow the holder to be “patent pending.” This enables the inventor to seek out customers. In other words, you can test both the function and marketability in public. Provisional patents are considerably less formal than non-provisional patents. They usually require a cover letter from the patent office and an informal explanation along with drawings. The drawback of the provisional patent is that any aspects overlooked that later need to be included in the non-provisional patent cannot claim the filing date of the provisional patent.

File Traditional Utility Patents for a Small Entity

Method

Step 1: Read a comprehensive book on the subject. One notable book is Patent It Yourself by attorney David Pressman. NOLO publishes this book, which can be found at Nolo.com. It contains forms and detailed explanations of the intricacies of patenting. Whether you choose to patent your invention yourself or hire someone else, reading this book is highly recommended.

Step 2: Follow all the steps outlined in Patent it Yourself. It is highly recommended to conduct a patent search first. This search is conducted early in the process and helps identify available ideas, preventing unnecessary work on concepts that may not succeed.

Explanation

If you believe your idea has strong market potential and you can manage the costs, consider filing a traditional patent first. An individual inventor can file a patent without being a patent agent or lawyer, as the patent office does not require one. A solo inventor can handle the patent application process with the USPTO. Alternatively, you can collaborate with a patent agent or attorney, but costs can reach several thousand dollars. If you hire someone, follow the same guidelines as the “Traditional Patent for a Large Company.” If you’re doing it yourself, then:

File Traditional Utility Patents for a Large Company

Method

Step 1: Assist the company attorneys in filing the patents. This typically involves some form of disclosure of the invention, meeting with the attorney, sharing drawings of the concept, and providing copies of laboratory notebooks.

Step 2: Assist in the patent search. The company will typically hire a search firm to conduct this. The patents that are returned must be reviewed. Some search firms are more reliable than others. If you have developed the skills to search for patents yourself, you can offer assistance.

Step 3: Review the patent application for accuracy. Remember, you are the one who truly understands how your patent functions. Take the time to review it thoroughly and provide necessary feedback. Pay special attention to carefully reviewing the claims. Create a claim tree to help you understand the completeness of the claims. The strength of the patent will significantly depend on the robustness of the claims.

Explanation

If you work for a company, it is often the policy that a regular patent is filed first. This is because a non-provisional patent is more comprehensive. It is filed once and holds a stronger position than the provisional patent.

References

[1] IDEO is a leading company that designs products and services for various organizations. They can be considered as hired experts equipped with exceptional skills and resources. They are especially recognized for their design process, commonly known as “Design Thinking.” The steps of this process are outlined in the TRIZ Power Tools book suite.

[2] Tim Hunkin– TECHNOLOGY IS WHAT MAKES US HUMAN 2008 http://www.timhunkin.com/a118_technology_is_human.htm

[3] Patrick Hale www.DragRacingPro.com

[4] Inventive Principle #15—Dynamicity: The characteristics of an object or the external environment should be modified to ensure optimal performance at each stage of an operation. If an object is stationary, make it mobile. Make it interchangeable. Divide an object into elements capable of changing their positions relative to one another. Genrich Altshuller, The Innovation Algorithm, page 288.

[5] Inventive Principle #23—Feedback: Introduce feedback. If feedback already exists, modify it accordingly. Genrich Altshuller, The Innovation Algorithm, page 288.

[6] Inventive Principle #23—Feedback: Introduce feedback. If feedback already exists, modify it accordingly. Genrich Altshuller, The Innovation Algorithm, page 288.

[7] Inventive Principle #25—Self-service: An object must be capable of self-maintenance and perform supplementary and repair operations. Utilize waste materials and energy efficiently. Genrich Altshuller, The Innovation Algorithm, page 288.

[8] Utilizing critical points extends Standard 1-2-5. Numerous physical phenomena exhibit critical points. Operations around these critical points allow for the generation of large forces, which can then be harnessed for actuation. STANDARD 1-2-5. If decomposition of a SFM with a magnetic field is required, the problem can be solved by employing physical effects that can “switch off” the ferromagnetic properties of materials, e.g., through demagnetization during an impact or heating beyond the Curie point. Notes: A magnetic field may emerge at the right moment if a system of magnets is used to compensate for each other’s fields. When one magnet is demagnetized, a magnetic field appears in the system. Example: During welding, it is challenging to introduce ferromagnetic powder into the welding zone as the electromagnetic field of the welding current causes the particles to disperse from that area. It is advisable to heat the powders above the Curie point to render them non-magnetic.

[9] The Innovation Algorithm by Genrich Altshuller, page 215—While Altshuller’s life was a study of the history of systems, this chapter specifically illustrates the various stages of technology. Altshuller emphasized the importance of taking an existing system and examining the evolutionary history of that particular system.

Subscribe to receive updates on new eBooks and exclusive content.

*By subscribing you agree to our Terms & Conditions