MODULE – 3

Creative thinking and Prototyping

Session 21 3.1 Introduction – Creative Thinking
• Researchers have discovered that the thought processes or mental
operations used to develop a creative idea are the same processes that
everyone uses.
• The good news about this view of creativity is that these strategies for
achieving creative thinking can be accomplished by deliberate use of
particular techniques, methods,
• The study of creativity has two basic strategies.
• The first is to study people who are considered to be creative;
• the second is to study the development of inventions that display
creativity.
The assumption is that studying the thinking processes of the creative
people will lead to a set of steps or procedures that can improve the
creativity of anyone’s thinking. Similarly, studying the development of a
creative artifact should reveal a key decision or defining moment that
 Session 22 3.2 Creativity and Problem Solving
• Creative thinkers are distinguished by their ability to solve problems and perform tasks
(e.g., create designs) with novel and effective solutions. A creative engineer is one who
produces many useful ideas. These can be completely original ideas inspired by a
discovery.
• A creative person is adept at breaking a problem solving task down to take a fresh look at
its parts, or in making connections between the current problem and seemingly
unrelated observations or facts. researchers of the creative process assure us that most
ideas occur by a slow, deliberate process that can be cultivated and enhanced with study
and practice.
• A characteristic of the creative process is that initially the idea is only imperfectly
understood. Usually the creative person senses the total structure of the idea but initially
perceives only a limited number of its details.
• The creative process can be viewed as moving from a vague idea to a well-structured
idea, from the chaotic to the organized, from the implicit to the explicit. Engineers, by
nature and training, usually value order and explicit detail and abhor chaos and
ambiguity. Thus, we need to train ourselves to be open to these aspects of the creative
 Session 23 3.2.1 Supports of Creative Thinking
A group of researchers in the sciences named the successful use of thought processes and
existing knowledge to produce creative ideas creative cognition.Creative cognition is the use
of regular cognitive operations to solve problems in novel ways. One way to increase the
likelihood of positive outcomes is to apply methods found to be useful for others.
Following are steps you can take to enhance your creative thinking.
• Develop a creative attitude: To be creative it is essential to develop confidence that you
can provide a creative solution to a problem. Although you may not visualize the
complete path through to the final solution at the time you first tackle a problem, you
must have self-confidence; you must believe that a solution will develop before you are
finished.
• Unlock your imagination: Rekindle the vivid imagination you had as a child. One way to
do so is to begin to question again. Ask “why” and “what if,” even at the risk of
displaying a bit of naïveté. Scholars of the creative process have developed thought
games that are designed to provide practice in unlocking your imagination and
sharpening creative ability.
 Be persistent: Creativity often requires hard work. Most problems will not succumb to
the first attack. They must be pursued with persistence. After all, Edison tested over
6000 materials before he discovered the species of bamboo that acted as a successful
filament for the incandescent light bulb. It was also Edison who made the famous
comment, “Invention is 95 percent perspiration and 5 percent inspiration.
• Develop an open mind: Having an open mind means being receptive to ideas from any
and all sources.
• Suspend your judgment: Nothing inhibits the creative process more than critical
judgment of an emerging idea. Engineers, by nature, tend toward analysis and
comparison of results. This behavior may be interpreted as criticizing. It is important to
avoid judgment at an early stage of conceptual design.
• Set problem boundaries: We place great emphasis on proper problem definition as a
step toward problem solution. Experience shows that setting problem boundaries
appropriately, not too tight or not too open, is critical to achieving a creative solution.
Some psychologists describe the creative thinking process and problem
solving in terms of a simple four-stage model.

Preparation (stage 1): The elements of the problem are examined and their
interrelations are studied. the design problem is clarified and defined.
Information is gathered, assimilated, and discussed among the team.

Incubation (stage 2): You “sleep on the problem.” Sleep disengages your
conscious mind, allowing the unconscious mind to work on a problem freely.
A creative experience often occurs when the individual is not expecting it
and after a period when he or she has been thinking about something else.
Observing this relationship between fixation and incubation led Smith to
conclude that incubation time is a necessary pause in the processIncubation
time allows fixation to lessen so that thinking can continue.
Inspiration (stage 3): A solution or a path toward the solution emerges.
Inspiration is the name science gives to the sudden realization of a solution.
Consultants in creativity train people to encourage the occurrence of
inspiration, even though it is not a well-understood one. Inspiration can
occur when the mind has restructured a problem in such a way that the
previous impediments to solutions are eliminated, and unfulfilled
constraints are suddenly satisfied.

Verification (stage 4): The inspired solution is checked against the desired
result. the ideas generated must be validated against the problem
specification using the evaluation methods
 3.2.2 Barriers of Creative thinking
Mental blocks interfere with creative thinking. A mental block is a mental wall that
prevents the problem solver from moving forward in the thinking process. A mental block
is an event that inhibits the successful use of normal cognitive processes to come to a
solution. There are many different types of mental blocks.

➢ Perceptual Blocks
Perceptual blocks have to do with not properly defining the problem and not recognizing
the information needed to solve it.
• Stereotyping: Thinking conventionally or in a formulaic way about an event, person, or
way of doing something. As a result, it is difficult to combine apparently unrelated
images into an entirely new creative solution for the design.
• Information overload: The thinker may attempt to focus on too many details of a task
and become unable to sort out the critical aspects of the problem.
• Limiting the problem unnecessarily: Broad statements of the problem help keep the
mind open to a wider range of ideas.
• Fixation: People’s thinking can be influenced so greatly by their previous experience or
some other bias that they are not able to sufficiently recognize alternative ideas. A kind
of fixation called memory blocking is discussed in the section on intellectual blocks.
• Conformity with cues: If the thinking process is started by giving examples or solution
cues, it is possible for thinking to stay

➢ Emotional Blocks
These are obstacles that are concerned with the psychological safety of the individual.
These blocks reduce the feeling of freedom to explore ideas without worry about
judgment. They also interfere with your ability to conceptualize readily.
• Fear of risk taking: This is the fear of proposing an idea that is ultimately found to be
faulty. Truly creative people must be comfortable with taking risks.
• Unease with chaos: People in general, and many engineers in particular, are
uncomfortable with highly unstructured situations.
• Inability or unwillingness to incubate new ideas: It is important to allow enough time
for ideas to incubate before evaluation of the ideas takes place.
➢ Intellectual Blocks
Intellectual blocks arise from a poor choice of the problem-solving strategy or having
inadequate background and knowledge.
• Poor choice of problem-solving language or problem representation: Problems can be
solved in either a mathematical, verbal, or a visual mode. Changing the representation
of a problem from the original one to a new one (presumably more useful for finding a
solution) is recognized as fostering creativity.
• Memory block: Memory holds strategies and tactics for finding solutions as well as
solutions themselves. A common form of blocking is maintaining a particular search
path through memory because of the false belief that it will lead to a solution.
• Insufficient knowledge base: Usually, ideas are generated from a person’s education
and experience. Thus, an electrical engineer is more likely to suggest an electronics-
based idea, when a cheaper and simpler mechanical design would be better. This is a
strong reason for working in interdisciplinary design teams.
• Incorrect information: Faulty information can lead to poor results. One form of the
creative process is the combining of previously unrelated elements or ideas
(information); if part of the information is wrong then the result of creative combination
will be flawed.
• Physical environment: This is a very personal factor in its effects on creativity. Some
people can work creatively with all kinds of distractions; others require strict quiet and
isolation. It is important for each person to determine his or her preferred conditions for
creative work and to try to achieve this in the workplace.
Session 24 3.3 Creative Thinking Methods
These methods are aimed at improving the following characteristics of the problem solver:
• Sensitivity: The ability to recognize that a problem exists
• Fluency: The ability to produce a large number of alternative solutions to a problem
• Flexibility: The ability to develop a wide range of approaches to a problem
• Originality: The ability to produce original solutions to a problem

3.3.1 Brain Storming

• Brainstorming is the most common method used by design teams for generating ideas.
This method was developed to stimulate creative magazine advertisements. It has been
widely adopted in other areas such as design.
• A well-done brainstorming session is an enthusiastic session of rapid, free flowing
ideas.
• One way to help the brainstorming process is to break up the normal thought pattern
by using a checklist to help develop new ideas.
➢ the SCAMPER checklist is used as a stimulant when the flow of ideas begins to fall off
during the brainstorming activity. The questions in the SCAMPER checklist are applied
to the problem in the following way:
• Read aloud the first SCAMPER question.
• Write down ideas or sketch ideas that are stimulated by the question.
• Rephrase the question and apply it to the other aspects of the problem.
• Continue applying the questions until the ideas cease to flow.
➢ Because the SCAMPER questions are generalized, they sometimes will not apply to a
specific technical problem. A group that will be doing product development over time
in a particular area should attempt to develop his or her own checklist questions
tailored to the situation.
➢ Brainstorming has benefits and is an appropriate activity for idea generation in a team
setting. However, brainstorming does not surmount many emotional and
environmental mental blocks. In fact, the process can intensify some of the mental
blocks in some team members (e.g., unease with chaos, fear of criticism, and
perpetuation of incorrect assumptions). To mitigate these effects that dampen
creativity, a team can conduct a brainwriting exercise prior to the formal brainstorming
session.
Session 25 3.3.1 Quick Idea Generation Tool

➢ Six Key Questions

Journalism students are taught to ask six simple questions to ensure that they have
covered the entire story. These same questions can be used to help you approach the
problem from different angles.
• Who? Who uses it, wants it, will benefit by it?
• What? What happens if X occurs? What resulted in success? What resulted in failure?
• When? Can it be speeded up or slowed down? Is sooner better than later?
• Where? Where will X occur? Where else is possible?
• Why? Why is this done? Why is that particular rule, action, solution, problem, failure
involved?
• How? How could it be done, should it be done, prevented, improved, changed, made?
Five Whys
The Five Whys technique is used to get to the root of a problem. It is based on the premise
that it is not enough to just ask why one time. For example:
• Why has the machine stopped? A fuse blew because of fan overload.
• Why was there an overload? There was inadequate lubrication for the bearings.
• Why wasn’t there enough lubrication? The lube pump wasn’t working.
• Why wasn’t the pump working? The pump shaft was vibrating because it had worn due to
abrasion.
• Why was there abrasion? There was no filter on the lube pump, allowing debris into the
pump.

Checklists
Checklists of various types often are used to help stimulate creative thoughts. checklists are
used often in design in a completely different way. They are used in a way to remember
important functions or tasks in a complex operation.
Fantasy or Wishful Thinking
A strong block to creativity is the mind’s tenacious grip on reality. One way to stimulate
creativity is to entice the mind to think in a flight of fancy, in the hope of bringing out
really creative ideas. This can be done by posing questions in an “invitational way” so as to
encourage an upbeat, positive climate for idea generation.

Typical questions would be:

Wouldn’t it be nice if . . .?
What I really want to do is . . . .
If I did not have to consider cost, . . . .
I wish . . . .

The use of an invitational turn of phrase is critical to the success of this approach. For
example, rather than stating, “This design is too heavy,” it would be much better to say
“How can we make the design lighter?” The first phrase implies criticism, the latter
suggests improvement for use.
Session 26 3.4 Methods for Design generation

The motivation for applying any creativity technique to a design task is to

generate as many ideas as possible. Quantity counts above quality, and wild
ideas are encouraged at the early stages of the design work.

Once an initial pool of concepts for alternative designs exists, these

alternatives can be reviewed more critically. Then the goal becomes sorting
out infeasible ideas. The team is identifying a smaller subset of ideas that can
be developed into practical solutions.
 3.4.1 Generating Design Concepts
➢ Generative design is a theoretical construct of a
process that creates many feasible alternatives to a
given product design specification (PDS).
➢ The set of all possible and feasible designs created
in response to the articulation of a design task is
pictured as a problem space or a design space that
consists of states.
➢ Each state is a different conceptual design. The
space has a boundary that encloses only the
feasible designs, many of which are unknown to the
designer.
➢ The set of all possible designs is an n-dimensional
hyperspace called a design space. The space is
more than three dimensions because there are so
many characteristics that can categorize a design
➢ There are many, many, many different solutions for any design problem.
The number of potential solutions can be as high as the order of n! where
n is equal to the number of different engineering characteristics it takes to
fully describe the design.
➢ The design space of solutions is the dominant model of problem solving in
both the artificial intelligence and cognitive psychology fields.1 It is also a
well-recognized model for a given set of designs to many engineering
design researchers.
➢ The design space is discrete, meaning that there are distinct and
distinguishable differences between design alternatives. It is the job of the
designer to find the best of all available designs. In the context of a design
space that defines all feasible solutions, design becomes a search of the
space to find the best available state that represents a solution to the task.
➢ Searching a design space is a job complicated by the fact that the feasible designs differ
in many ways (i.e., the values assigned to the engineering characteristics).
➢ There is no common metric to pinpoint the coordinates of any single design. It is
reasonable to assume that once one feasible design is found, another feasible design
that is close to the first one will be similar in all but one or a very few engineering
characteristics.
➢ Once designers find a feasible solution to a design problem, they search the nearby
design space by making small changes to one or more of the design’s engineering
characteristics.
➢ This is good if the first design is close to the best design, but this will not help the
designers sample different parts of the design space to find a set of very different
designs.
➢ Creative idea generation methods can help a design team find designs in different areas
of the space but are not as reliable as engineering design requires.
➢ Systematic design methods help the design team consider the broadest possible set of
feasible conceptual designs for a given task.
Session 27 3.4.2 Systematic Methods for Designing
➢ Functional Decomposition and Synthesis
▪ Functional analysis is a logical approach for describing the transformation between the
initial and final states of a system or device.
▪ The ability to describe devices in terms of physical behavior or actions, rather than
components, allows for a logical breakdown of a product in the most general way, which
often leads to creative concepts of how to achieve the function.
➢ Morphological Analysis
▪ The morphological chart approach to design generates alternatives from an
understanding of the structure of necessary component parts.
▪ Entries from an atlas, directory, or one or more catalogs of components can then be
identified and ordered in the prescribed configuration.
▪ The goal of the method is to achieve a nearly complete enumeration of all feasible
solutions to a design problem.
▪ Often, the morphological method is used in conjunction with other generative methods
like the functional decomposition and synthesis method
➢ Theory of Inventive Problem Solving
▪ TRIZ, the better-known Russian acronym for this method, is a creative problem-solving
methodology especially tailored for scientific and engineering problems.
▪ Genrich Altshuller and coworkers in Russia started developing the method around
1940.
▪ From a study of over 1.5 million Russian patents they were able to deduce general
characteristics of technical problems and recurring inventive principles.
➢ WordTree Method :
▪ WordTree uses design-by-analogy to aid in concept generation.
▪ The development of the WordNet enables this method. The WordNet includes a vast
database of common words (nouns and verbs) and the information to relate them to
each other semantically.
▪ The semantic relations enable the user to construct a tree diagram showing verbs
(function words) in clusters determined by the context in which the verb is used.
▪ This way, a user can navigate to new domains and explore unexpected potential
analogies.
➢ Axiomatic Design
▪ Design models include Suh’s axiomatic design that articulates and
explicates design independence and information axioms (i.e., maintain
functional independence and minimize information content).
▪ Suh’s methods provide a means to translate a design task into functional
requirements (the engineering equivalent of what the customer wants)
and use those to identify design parameters (the physical components of
the design).
▪ Suh’s principles lead to theorems and corollaries that help designers
diagnose a candidate solution now represented as a matrix equation with
function requirements and design parameters.
➢ Design Optimization
▪ Many of the strongest and currently recognized design methods are
actually searches of a design space using optimization strategies.
▪ These algorithms predict a design engineering performance once the
design specifications have been set.
▪ This method is treating design as an engineering science problem and is
effective at analyzing potential designs.
▪ There are many valid and verified optimization approaches to design.
▪ They range from single-objective and single-variable models to multi
objective, multi-variable models that are solved using different
decompositions and sequences.
▪ Methods are deterministic, stochastic, and combinations of the two.
 Session 28 3.5 Decision Making and Concept Selection
➢ Figure depicts the concept generation and selection
processes as a succession of divergent and convergent
steps. Initially the net is spread wide to capture all kinds
of customer and industry information about a proposed
design.
➢ This is then condensed into a product design specification
(PDS). Then, with efficient information gathering and
creativity stimulation methods, we formulate a set of
design concepts using divergent ways of thinking.
➢ Convergent thinking comes into play as the design
concepts are evaluated. Often new concepts emerge as
the team begins to think about new combinations and
adaptations among the concepts—a divergent step. Once
again there is an evaluation of concepts against obvious
selection criteria that assess broad acceptability of the
concepts.
➢ The steps of widening the pool of possible concepts and eliminating the clearly inferior
ones can repeat until only a small set of concepts remains. The successive concept
generation and selection cycles modeled in

➢ The above figure result in a set of improving concepts if the cycles are controlled by the
proper design specification criteria. The product or system’s design selection criteria are
developed from the House of Quality, consultation with design sponsors, and changing
regulations or the unceasing demands of a competitive marketplace.

➢ During any stage of the design process selecting among design alternatives requires
• (1) a set of design selection criteria,
• (2) a set of alternatives believed to satisfy the criteria, and
• (3) a means to evaluate the design alternatives with respect to each criterion.

➢ focuses on determining decision strategy methods appropriate to both the design

environment and the phase of the design process. Using these methods, a designer or
team can decide on one design to carry forward into the embodiment design process
Session 29
3.6 Behavioural Aspects of Decision Making
➢ Decision making during design is mostly a human process. Behavioral
psychology provides an understanding of the influence of risk taking in
individuals and teams.
➢ Making a decision is a stressful situation for most people when there is no
way to be certain about the information about the past or the predictions
of the future. This psychological stress arises from at least two sources.
▪ First, decision makers are concerned about the material and social
losses that will result from either course of action that is chosen.
▪ Second, they recognize that their reputations and self-esteem as
competent decision makers are at stake.
➢ Severe psychological stress brought on by decisional conflict can be a
major cause of errors in decision making.
➢ There are five basic patterns by which people cope with the challenge of
decision making.
• Unconflicted adherence: Decide to continue with current action and
ignore information about risk of losses.
• Unconflicted change: Uncritically adopt whichever course of action is
most strongly recommended.
• Defensive avoidance: Evade conflict by procrastinating, shifting
responsibility to someone else, and remaining inattentive to corrective
information.
• Hypervigilance: Search frantically for an immediate problem solution.
• Vigilance: Search painstakingly for relevant information that is
assimilated in an unbiased manner and appraised carefully before a
decision is made.
➢ A decision is made on the basis of available facts. Great effort should be made to
evaluate possible bias and relevance of the facts. It is important to ask the right
questions to pinpoint the problem. Emphasis should be on prevention of arriving at the
right answer to the wrong question.
➢ Facts must be carefully weighed in an attempt to extract the real meaning (knowledge).
Seek advice in the absence of real knowledge. It is good practice to check opinions
against the counsel of experienced associates.
➢ A decision usually leads to an action. A situation requiring action can be thought of as
having four aspects : should, actual, must, and want.
▪ The should aspect identifies what ought to be done if there are no obstacles to the
action. A should is the expected standard of performance if organizational
objectives are to be obtained.
▪ The should is compared with the actual, the performance that is occurring at the
present point in time.
▪ The must action draws the line between the acceptable and the unacceptable
action. A must is a requirement that cannot be compromised.
▪ A want action is a requirement that is subject to bargaining and negotiation. Want
actions are usually ranked and weighted to give an order of priority.
Sequence of steps that are taken in making a good decision.
1. The objectives of a decision must be established first.
2. The objectives are classified as to importance.
3. Alternative actions are developed.
4. The alternatives are evaluated against the objectives.
5. The choice of the alternative that holds the best promise of achieving
all of the objectives represents the tentative decision.
6. The tentative decision is explored for future possible adverse
consequences.
7. The effects of the final decision are controlled by taking other actions
to prevent possible adverse consequences from becoming problems
and by making sure that the actions decided on are carried out.
Session 30 3.7 Evaluation Processes
➢ Evaluation is a type of process in which alternatives are first appraised according to
some standard. Their scores or rank as determined by that standard are compared to
make the decision as to which is best.
➢ The Figure reviews the main steps in concept generation and shows the steps that make
up concept evaluation. Note that these evaluation steps are not limited to the
conceptual design phase of the design process. They are just as applicable, and should
be used, in embodiment design when deciding which of several component designs is
best or which materials should be chosen.
➢ In an absolute comparison the concept is directly compared with a fixed and known set
of requirements such as a PDS or design code. In a relative comparison the concepts
are compared with each other on the basis of a metric.
➢ Checking to see if a design alternative would be under the weight limit specified in the
PDS is an example of an absolute comparison.
➢ On the other hand, if the best design possible would be the lightest design, the design
team would need to estimate the weight of each design alternative, and then compare
the results. The most suitable alternative in terms of weight would be the one with the
lowest estimate. This is a relative comparison.
Session 30
3.7.1 Design Selection Based on Judgement and
Experience

➢ It makes no sense to subject several design concepts to a rigorous evaluation

process if it is obvious, or soon becomes clear, that some aspect about the
concept disqualifies it for selection.
➢ Therefore, it is good practice to begin the evaluation process by using a series of
absolute filters.
1. Evaluation based on judgment of functional feasibility of the
design:
The initial screening is based on the overall evaluation of the design
team as to the feasibility of each concept. Concepts should be placed
into one of three categories:
• It is not feasible (it will never work). Before discarding an idea ask,
“Why is this not feasible?” The answer may provide new insight
into the problem.
• Feasibility is conditional—it might work if something else
happens. The something else could be the development of a
critical element of technology or the appearance in the market of
a new microchip that enhances some function of the product.
• It will work. This is a concept that seems worth developing
further.
2. Evaluation based on assessment of technology readiness

Except in unusual circumstances, the technology used in a design must be

mature enough that it can be used in the product design without additional
research effort.
Product design is not the appropriate place to do R&D. Some indicators of
technology maturity are:
a) Can the technology be manufactured with known processes?
b) Are the critical parameters that control the function identified?
c) Are the safe operating latitude and sensitivity of the parameters known?
d) Have the failure modes been identified?
e) Does hardware exist that demonstrates positive answers to questions (a)
through (d)
3. Evaluation based on go/no-go screening of the constraints and
threshold levels of engineering characteristics:

• After a design concept has passed filters 1 and 2, the emphasis shifts to
establishing whether it satisfies the constraints of the problem.
• The emphasis is not on a detailed examination but on eliminating any
design concepts that clearly are not able to meet constraints or
minimum acceptable levels of important engineering characteristics.