A Feedback on an Industrial Application of the FORMAT Methodology

  • Sebastien Dubois
  • Roland De GuioEmail author
  • Aurélien Brouillon
  • Laetitia Angelo
Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 541)


One of the main issues of industrial product evolution planning is the current state of the art, related to the product itself, its market competitors, and also the available resources that can become parts of the future product. Moreover, to plan evolution, it is required to well understand how the performance of the product will be evaluated, on a future market, and surely it won’t be the same performance criteria as today habits.

This issue has been tackled and defined as Analysis of Initial Situation. A combination of TRIZ based approaches and Design of Experiments has been defined to clarify the problem to be solved. But all these approaches are dedicated to analyze today product and to choose the prior problem to be considered, but these methods have not been defined to analyze long-term evolution planning of products.

For this long-term planning, a method, FORMAT, has been developed and proposed. The purpose of this article is to describe the application of this methodology on an industrial case, to plan the evolution of kitchen hoods. The article will state the different methods to perform the Analysis of Initial Situation but also the benefits and the difficulties of FORMAT application.


Analysis of initial situation FORMAT method Long-term prospective 


  1. 1.
    Carmichael, D.G.: Problem Solving for Engineers, 432 p. CRC Press (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Horvath, L., Rudas, I.J.: Modeling and Problem Solving Techniques for Engineers. Elsevier Academic Press (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pahl, G., Beitz, W.: Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach. Springer Verlag, New York (1988)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Le Masson, P., Weil, B., Hatchuel, A.: Design Theory: Methods and Organization for Innovation. Springer, Heidelberg (2017). Scholar
  5. 5.
    NORmalisation AFd: Analyse de la Valeur, Caractéristiques Fondamentales (1990)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Haupt, R.L., Haupt, S.E.: Practical Genetic Algorithms with CD-ROM. Wiley-Interscience (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Altshuller, G.S.: Creativity as an Exact Science. Gordon and Breach, New York (1988)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Suh, N.P.: Axiomatic Design: Advances and Applications. Oxford University Press, New York (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Altshuller, G.S.: The Innovation Algorithm: TRIZ, Systematic Innovation and Technical Creativity. Technical Innovation Center, Inc., Worcester (1999)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Altshuller, G.S.: Algorithm of Inventive Problem Solving (ARIZ-85C), p. 32. OTSM-TRIZ Technologies Center, Minsk (1985)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zlotin, B., Zusman, A.: ARIZ on the move. TRIZ J. 13, 145–159 (1999)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Burgard, L., Dubois, S., De Guio, R., et al.: Sequential experimentation to perform the analysis of initial situation. In: Cascini, G., Vaneker, T. (eds.) TRIZ Future Conference 2011, pp. 35–45. Institute of Technology Tallaght, Dublin (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lin, L., Rasovska, I., De Guio, R., Dubois, S.: Optimization methods for inventive design. TRIZ – The Theory of Inventive Problem Solving, pp. 151–185. Springer, Cham (2017). Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dubois, S., Chibane, H., De Guio, R., et al.: From simulation to contradictions, different ways to formulate innovation directions. In: ETRIA TRIZ Future Conference 2017, Lappeenranta, Finland (2017)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kucharavy, D., Schenk, E., De Guio, R.: Long-run forecasting of emerging technologies with logistic models and growth of knowledge. In: 19th CIRP Design Conference – Competitive Design, p. 277. Cranfield University (2009)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    FORMAT Project (Forecast and Roadmapping for Manufacturing Technologies). Handbook of the FORMAT project (2014).
  17. 17.
    Kucharavy, D.: Theory and practice of ARIZ. In: Materials for Master of Innovative Design, Module 6, INSA de Strasbourg (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Altshuller, G.S., Zlotin, B., Philatov, V.I.: Analysis of the initial situation. In: Profession: to search for new, pp. 181–182. Kartya Moldovenyaske Publishing House, Kishinev (1985)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dubois, S., De Guio, R., Rasovska, I., et al.: From simulation to inventive problem resolution, a global method. In: Maier, A., et al. (eds.) 21st International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 2017), Vancouver, Canada, pp. 503–512 (2017)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nikulin Chandia, C.N.: A method for forecasting design requirements based on experts’ knowledge and logistic growth model. Dipartimento di Meccanica, Politecnico di Milano (2015)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kucharavy, D., De Guio, R.: Logistic substitution model and technological forecasting. In: TRIZ Future 2008 - Synthesis in Innovation, Enschede, Netherlands, pp. 65–73 (2008)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rasovska, I., De Guio, R., Dubois, S.: Using dominance relation to identify relevant generalized technical contradictions in innovative design. In: IESM 2017, Sarrebruck, Germany (2017)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sebastien Dubois
    • 1
  • Roland De Guio
    • 1
    Email author
  • Aurélien Brouillon
    • 1
  • Laetitia Angelo
    • 1
  1. 1.CSIP, ICube Laboratory, INSA de StrasbourgStrasbourgFrance

Personalised recommendations