Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of design innovation using the length-time dimension and regression analysis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although importance of innovation has been widely recognized, there is a lack of the effective method to evaluate the design innovation. Most of the existing methods for innovation evaluations are based on the qualitative analysis and domain experts. As the lack of objective indicators and rules, evaluation results from different designers are easy to differ. In order to reduce obstacles of the innovative design, this paper proposes a quantitative method to evaluate the innovation of conceptual schemes. From the perspective of product physical attributes, length-time dimensions are formed to represent the scheme type and innovation level. The degree of technical differences between existing products and new solutions is assigned as a measurable independent variable. Using a multiple regression model, sufficient case data are analyzed to obtain the evaluation formula with the statistical and engineering significance. The proposed method is applied to evaluate design of a series of practical products. Design of a tire breaker for the traffic control illustrates the method in detail, which proves the method potential to guide designers for searching innovative solutions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. A. B. Eisingerich, S. J. Bell and P. Tracey, How can clusters sustain performance? the role of network strength, network openness, and environmental uncertainty, Research Policy, 39(2) (2010) 239–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. G. A. Stevens and J. Burley, 3000 raw ideas = 1 commercial success!, Research-Technology Management, 40(3) (1997) 16–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. J. R. Chou, An ideation method for generating new product ideas using TRIZ, concept mapping, and fuzzy linguistic evaluation techniques, Advanced Engineering Informatics, 28(4) (2014) 441–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. M. Augustine, O. P. Yadav, R. Jain and A. P. S. Rathore, Concept convergence process: a framework for improving product concepts, Computers and Industrial Engineering, 59(3) (2010) 367–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. H. M. Lyu, W. H. Zhou, S. L. Shen and A. N. Zhou, Inundation risk assessment of metro system using AHP and TFN-AHP in Shenzhen, Sustainable Cities and Society, 56 (2020) 102103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. A. C. Mühlbacher, S. Bethge, A. Kaczynski and C. Juhnke, Patients preferences regarding the treatment of type II diabetes mellitus: comparison of best-worst scaling and analytic hierarchy process, Value in Health, 16(7) (2013) A446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. E. Jayamani, D. S. Perera, K. H. Soon and M. K. B. Bakri, Application of analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in the analysis of the fuel efficiency in the automobile industry with the utilization of natural fiber polymer composites (NFPC), IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 191(1) (2017) 012004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. S. H. Ghodsypour and C. O’Brien, A decision support system for supplier selection using an integrated analytic hierarchy process and linear programming, International Journal of Production Economics, 56 (1998) 199–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. K. Wang, R. Tan, Q. Peng, F. Wang, P. Shao and Z. Gao, A holistic method of complex product development based on a neural network-aided technological evolution system, Advanced Engineering Informatics, 48 (2021) 101294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. K. Jurij, Estimation of transportation energy efficiency by Bartini criterion L6T-4, Architecture and Engineering, 2(2) (2017) 15–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. H. N. Hsieh, J. F. Chen and Q. H. Do, A creative research based on DANP and TRIZ for an innovative cover shape design of machine tools, Journal of Engineering Design, 28(2) (2017) 77–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. C. W. Lee, Y. Suh, I. K. Kim, J. H. Park and M. H. Yun, A systematic framework for evaluating design concepts of a new product, Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing and Service Industries, 20(5) (2010) 424–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. H. Shidpour, C. Da Cunha and A. Bernard, Group multi-criteria design concept evaluation using combined rough set theory and fuzzy set theory, Expert Systems with Applications, 64 (2016) 633–644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. V. Tiwari, P. K. Jain and P. Tandon, An integrated Shannon entropy and TOPSIS for product design concept evaluation based on bijective soft set, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 30(4) (2019) 1645–1658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. K. Yada, E. Ip and N. Katoh, Is this brand ephemeral? a multivariate tree-based decision analysis of new product sustain-ability, Decision Support Systems, 44(1) (2007) 223–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. L. Y. Zhai, L. P. Khoo and Z. W. Zhong, Design concept evaluation in product development using rough sets and grey relation analysis, Expert Systems with Applications, 36(3) (2009) 7072–7079.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. E. F. MacDonald, R. Gonzalez and P. Y. Papalambros, Preference inconsistency in multidisciplinary design decision making, Journal of Mechanical Design, 131(3) (2009) 031009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. R. A. Gheorghe, A. Bufardi and P. Xirouchakis, Fuzzy multicritera decision aid method for conceptual design, CIRP Annals, 54(1) (2005) 151–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. V. Pandey and Z. P. Mourelatos, A new method for making design decisions: decision topologies, Journal of Mechanical Design, 137(3) (2015) 031401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. E. Nikolaidis, Decision-based approach for reliability design, Journal of Mechanical Design, 129(5) (2007) 466–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. W. Liu, R. Tan, G. Cao, Z. Zhang, S. Huang and L. Liu, A proposed radicality evaluation method for design ideas at conceptual design stage, Computers and Industrial Engineering, 132 (2019) 141–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. J. Guo, J. Sun, T. Liang and R. Tan, Evaluation model of disruptive innovative design scheme based on logistic regression, Computer Integrated Manufacturing System, 21(6) (2015) 1405–1416.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Z. Chen, G. Fu and Y. Zhao, Improved analysis method of risk priority number, Journal of Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 37(11) (2011) 1395.

    Google Scholar 

  24. A. Garg, The two cultures: SI and Gaussian units in electro-magnetism, European Journal of Physics, 39(4) (2018) 045205.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. R. O. di Bartini, Relations between physical constants, Progress in Physics, 3(10) (2005) 34–40.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Q. M. Tan, Dimensional Analysis: with Case Studies in Mechanics, Springer Science and Business Media, Berlin (2011).

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. D. Rajić, Verification of the LT-contradiction matrix using the TRIZ standards, Innovation as an Initiator of the Development, Belgrade (2020) 329–346.

  28. K. Wang, R. Tan, Q. Peng, Y. Sun, H. Li and J. Sun, Radical innovation of product design using an effect solving method, Computers and Industrial Engineering, 151 (2021) 106970.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. D. Rajić, Innovative synergism as a result of TRIZ and LT-system synthesis, Innovation as an Initiator of the Development, Belgrade (2019) 226–242.

  30. A. B. Bushuev and V. A. Kudriavtseva, Simulation of the block diagrams of the information energy converters, The International Conference on Innovative Applied Energy, Oxford, 272 (2019) 40.

  31. O. L. Kuznetsov and B. E. Bolshakov, Russian cosmism, global crisis, sustainable development, Partnership of Civilizations, 1(2) (2013) 112–139.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Z. Wei, Q. Li, D. Wang and Y. Tian, The application of LT-table in TRIZ contradiction resolving process, Growth and Development of Computer-Aided Innovation, Heidelberg (2009) 266–275.

  33. K. J. Lee, M. M. Wiest and J. B. Carlin, Statistics for clinicians: an introduction to linear regression, Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health, 50(12) (2014) 940–943.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. S. Sperandei, Understanding logistic regression analysis, Biochemia Medica, 24(1) (2014) 12–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Q. Wang, J. J. Koval, C. A. Mills and K. I. D. Lee, Determination of the selection statistics and best significance level in backward stepwise logistic regression, Communications in Statistics-Simulation and Computation, 37(1) (2007) 62–72.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  36. V. Nikolić, S. Sajjadi, D. Petković, S. Shamshirband, Ž. Ćojbašić and L. Y. Por, Design and state of art of innovative wind turbine systems, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 61 (2016) 258–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. M. D. Shieh, W. Yan and C. H. Chen, Soliciting customer requirements for product redesign based on picture sorts and ART2 neural network, Expert Systems with Applications, 34(1) (2008) 194–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. A. Bushuev, Physico-mathematical resources search, The TRIZ Journal, 7 (2008) 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  39. X. Lu, G. Cao and H. Tian, Solution of TRIZ conflict X-resource based on LT table, International Conference on Big Data Analytics for Cyber-Physical-Systems, Springer (2020) 1056–1063.

  40. P. Zhang, Z. Nie, Y. Dong, Z. Zhang, F. Yu and R. Tan, Smart concept design based on recessive inheritance in complex electromechanical system, Advanced Engineering Informatics, 43 (2020) 101010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. D. Rajić, Application of LT-contradiction matrix in development of weapons and military equipment, 9th International Scientific Conference of Defensive Technologies OTEH 2020, Belgrade (2020) 8–9.

  42. J. J. Shah, S. M. Smith and N. Vargas-Hernandez, Metrics for measuring ideation effectiveness, Design Studies, 24(2) (2003) 111–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. J. J. Shah, S. V. Kulkarni and N. Vargas-Hernandez, Evaluation of idea generation methods for conceptual design: effectiveness metrics and design of experiments, Journal of Mechanical Design, 122(4) (2000) 377–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. K. Wang, Q. Peng, R. Tan, J. Sun and M. Chen, Innovative product design based on general theory of powerful thinking, Computer-Aided Design and Applications, 17 (2019) 1007–1019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. H. Zhang and J. Shang, NLPIR-Parser: an intelligent semantic analysis toolkit for big data, Corpus Linguistics, 1(6) (2019) 87–104.

    Google Scholar 

  46. H. Zhang, J. Miao, Z. Liu, I. L. Wesson and J. Shang, NLPIR-Parser: making chinese and english semantic analysis easier and complete, 15th International Conference on the Statistical Analysis of Textual Data (2020).

  47. W. Yang, G. Cao, Q. Peng and Y. Sun, Effective radical innovations using integrated QFD and TRIZ, Computers and Industrial Engineering, 162 (2021) 107716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. M. T. Camacho Olmedo, M. Paegelow, J. F. Mas and F. Escobar, Geomatic Approaches for Modeling Land Change Scenarios, Springer, Cham (2018) 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  49. C. T. Su and F. M. Su, Yield improvement in color filter manufacturing using Taguchi methods and TRIZ’s substance-field analysis, IEEE Transactions on Components, Packaging and Manufacturing Technology, 8(12) (2018) 2198–2212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research is sponsored by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51675159). The first author would like to thank dear Ms. Lu Xiaoyan for her company and care in the revision process of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Mechanical Engineering, Hebei University of Technology, Tianjin, 300401, China

    Kang Wang, Runhua Tan & Lulu Zhang

  2. Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada

    Qingjin Peng

Authors
  1. Kang Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Runhua Tan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Qingjin Peng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lulu Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Runhua Tan.

Additional information

Kang Wang is a Doctoral Candidate from Hebei University of Technology. His research interests are mainly in the theory and application of product innovation, and innovative management. He has 5 published papers, and 2 authorised inventive patents.

Runhua Tan is a Professor and Director of China’s National Technological Innovation Method and Tool Engineering Research Center, the Vice-President of the Organisation of Computer-Aided Innovation (WG5.4) of International Federation for Information Processing (IFIP) in Asia. His research interests are mainly in TRIZ, product conceptual design, and innovation management approaches. Dr. Tan has published more than 90 articles in journals such as International Journal of Product Development, Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship.

Qingjin Peng is a Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Price Faculty of Engineering, University of Manitoba. Dr. Peng has published over 200 refereed papers in international journals and conferences. His research areas are intelligent manufacturing, product design for sustainability and personalization.

Lulu Zhang is a Doctoral Candidate from Hebei University of Technology. Her research interests are the product function base and enterprise knowledge base. She has 2 published papers, and 1 authorised inventive patent.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, K., Tan, R., Peng, Q. et al. Evaluation of design innovation using the length-time dimension and regression analysis. J Mech Sci Technol 36, 5625–5637 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12206-022-1025-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12206-022-1025-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation