Technical contradiction (TC) is a model for describing IS, in which the desired and undesirable consequences of a specific change in the TS are highlighted. Spurs on Robot Design and RTS - file Spurs.doc

What is TP. TP formulas. Why is it necessary to formulate a TP. TP examples.

Understanding the technical controversy

The technical contradiction is formulated immediately after the AP and is a combination of positive and negative consequences in the implementation of the method for solving the problem.

The generalized formulations of the TP are as follows:

TP1: If A, then B +, but C -,

TP2: If Ã, then B -, but C +

Here A is the selected action or state,

à (read "not A") - the opposite action or state.

B and C are two types of consequences.

Example. The task is to find a job.

TP1: If you go to a recruitment agency, you can find a job (plus B-consequence), but you have to pay money (minus C-consequence).

TP2: If you do not contact a recruitment agency, then the money will be safe (plus C-consequence), but there will be no work (minus B-consequence).

Why is it necessary to formulate a TP

First of all, an attempt to formulate the TP makes it possible to determine whether there is a contradiction in the problem or not. The presence of a contradiction, especially when solving the problem “with a beard”, which for many years could not be solved by professionals, means that it is possible to find a non-standard, breakthrough solution that develops a given industry or system.

The second result of formulating the TP: there are 40 techniques for resolving such contradictions and a search table for the most suitable techniques.

The third result of the formulation of the TP: after it, it is easy to formulate a physical contradiction, even more rigid, but only three steps are required to resolve it.

4.3. Physical contradiction

What is FP. What is the formula for FP. Why is it necessary to formulate the OP. FP examples. What is done after the formulation of the OP.

Understanding physical contradiction

A physical contradiction is a combination of opposing requirements, actions, states, and various positive consequences.

FP1: You need to apply to a recruitment agency to find a job.

FP2: Don't go to a recruitment agency to save money.

Why is it necessary to formulate the OP

A physical contradiction is formulated in order to find a non-standard solution with the help of methods for resolving it in space, in time, in relationships (states).

FP formula

FP formulas can be as follows:

“A is necessary and A is not necessary”, “A should be and B should be”.

5. Techniques for resolving contradictions

What is "reception". Examples of techniques for resolving technical contradictions. Why do you need tricks. When and how techniques are used. Examples of application of techniques.

Acceptance understanding.

Acceptance is an action or an indication of an action that leads to a desired result.

For example: a long bus can be divide into two parts (reception "crushing") and connect hinge (reception "association").

TP permission methods.

In the Technology of Inventive Problem Solving (TRIZ), more than 40 techniques for resolving technical contradictions are known.

For example: the “do it in advance” technique, the “do it the other way around” technique, and others.

6. Ideal end result (calf)

What is ICR. Why use IFR, in what situations. What is the result of the application of IFR. What is the IFR formula, give examples of formulation in different situations.

7. RESOURCES

What are resources. What are the resources. Why do you need resources when looking for a solution. How to look for resources in a situation. How resources are turned into a solution to a problem.

Resource understanding.

A resource is something that can be used to solve a problem, from which a solution can be built using a technique. In other words, a resource is the capabilities of the system itself and the environment used to create the desired situation. And possibilities are properties, means, methods, features.

8. SOLUTION

What is the solution. Why do you need a solution and why.

9. LAW OF CAUSE AND EFFECT

Understanding the law

They say about the law that it is "a stable, recurring connection between certain phenomena, events."

The wording of the law: Everything is a cause and everything is an effect. Option: everything has a cause, everything has a consequence. Everything has a cause, everything has an effect.

Use of the law

The formulations of TP1 and TP2 show the operation of the law of cause and effect.

Examples of the use of the law

10. THE LAW OF CONSOLIDATION AND DISCORDING

The wording of the law

Use of the law

Examples of the use of the law

12. THE LAW OF INCREASING IDEALITY

The wording of the law

Use of the law

Examples of the use of the law

13. THE LAW OF DEVELOPMENT THROUGH CONTRADICTIONS

The wording of the law

Use of the law

Examples of the use of the law

3/ Organization

Why organizations are needed. What will happen in the absence of organizations. What is "organization" as an object. What is "organization" as a process. An example of an organization as a subject and as a process.

9/Activity

What is activity. What is the result of activity. What are the attributes of the activity.

What is the main difference between activity and work? An example of activity and work.

9/ Planning

What is a "plan" and why is it needed. What is "planning". What is the result of planning. What is the difference between a plan and a program and a business plan. How to protect the plan from failure and force majeure.

Plan example.

10/ Function

What is a function. How is a function different from a task? What is the result of executing the function.

Function example.

11/ Solution

What is the solution. Why a decision is needed. What is the difficulty in making a decision? What is the outcome of the decision. What is the outcome of the decision. Solution example.

12/ Effective Solution

What is an "effective solution"? What is the difference between an effective solution and a conventional one?

13/ Solution development process

How to develop an effective solution. Where does the decision making process begin? What is the outcome of the decision. Example.

14/ Solution quality assessment

Why do you need to evaluate the quality of the solution. On what grounds the solution is classified as excellent.

An example of a solution and its evaluation.

15/ Decision making process

Where does the decision making process begin? How does the decision making process end? How does an effective decision making process work? Why the decision-making process is inefficient.

16/ Implementation process

How does the execution process begin? How does the implementation process end? Give an example of the decision execution process.

17/ Monitoring the implementation of the decision

What is "control". Why control is needed. What is control for? When control is not needed. What forms of control are possible. Give examples.

EXAMPLE.

Already in ancient times, people hunted in order to survive. For successful hunting of animals, people used various types of baits. In our time, there is a real hunt for sellers for buyers.

Especially sophisticated inventive techniques are used by drug dealers. Here's the invention a drug dealer uses to get a new client involved.

The seller carries the “goods” in a matchbox.

AP: We need to attract a new client, but how? How to do it discreetly?

Method: give a smoke to try and get involved.

TP: if you smoke a drug yourself, then the client will be involved, but an expensive product will also be spent, your own state will change.

FP: you have to smoke your product to get the newbie involved, and you can't smoke so you don't use up the product.

Here is the solution.

The seller treats beginners for free. At the same time, he himself lights up and with all his appearance shows what pleasure he gets from this. But the trick is that the box is double-sided. On one side is the real drug, and on the other side is the herb that mimics the drug. He himself smokes weed, and offers drugs to others. Once a young man gets used to the drug, he can only get it for money. The first technique used by the seller is called “copying”: when smoking (you can’t smoke), a copy of it is used instead of the drug.

The second technique is association: the herb and the drug are combined into one system in a box, and only the owner knows where the drug is and where the herb is.

The third method is of local quality: in one place of the box there is a herb, and in another - a drug.

By making the ship's hull narrower, we reduce friction costs and get a high speed. But at the same time, the stability of the ship also decreases; when the sea is rough, it can capsize. By making the ship wider, we will achieve good stability, but the speed will decrease.

By reducing the size of the buttons on the panel of a mobile phone, we make it as compact as possible. But dialing the number will become inconvenient. By increasing the size of the buttons, we get the possibility of convenient dialing, but to accommodate such buttons, a large case is required.

Using passwords consisting of several tens of characters, we increase the protection of computer programs from hacking. But such a password is hard to remember. A short password is easy to remember, but easy to forge.

By using more spacious buses, we reduce the number of buses on the routes and the cost of drivers' wages, but at the same time, the time of boarding and exiting passengers and the intervals of movement increase. By using small buses, we shorten traffic intervals, but the cost of drivers' wages increases.

Treez

The technical contradiction can be displayed by the following diagram (Fig. 10):

IDENTIFICATION OF TECHNICAL CONTRADICTIONS

This work can be done in several steps.

Rice. 11. TP scheme for a window

Rice. 12. TP scheme for scuba

The formulation of IS in the form of TP has a heuristic potential - it cuts off the search for compromise, not ideal solutions, as it were, and also allows you to use the tool "Techniques for eliminating technical contradictions".

contradictions

PHYSICAL CONTRADICTION

A physical contradiction has even greater heuristic potential.

The standard way to improve the TS is optimization, that is, the choice of the optimal values ​​of their characteristics. At the same time, they try to achieve a simple compromise between opposing requirements for the TS. But this is not always possible. When optimization does not allow achieving the desired consumer quality, it is necessary to solve an inventive problem.

To do this, you need to accurately set the task - to achieve the highest possible level of realization of opposite properties. Such a problem is formulated in the form of a so-called physical contradiction.

Large Thickness Small Thickness Large Small

for durability for transparency for autonomy for maneuverability

Rice. 13, OP for the window Fig. 14. FP for scuba

Technical controversy

Let's try to solve the sprinkler problem by the usual methods. It is necessary to triple the wingspan; Well, it is technically feasible to make a three-hundred-meter farm. What do we lose with this? The weight will increase. If the wingspan is tripled, the truss will become 27 times heavier.

Machines and mechanisms (in general, technical objects) have several important indicators that characterize the degree of their perfection: weight, dimensions, power, reliability, etc. There are certain interdependencies between these indicators. Say, one unit of power requires a certain weight of the structure. In order to increase one of the indicators in ways already known in the given branch of technology, one has to “pay” with the deterioration of the other.

Here is a typical example from aircraft design practice: “A two-fold increase in the area of ​​the vertical tail of one of the types of aircraft reduced the amplitude of the aircraft’s oscillations by only 50%. But this, in turn, increased the aircraft's susceptibility to wind gusts, increased drag, and made the aircraft structure heavier, which posed additional complex tasks.

The designer, taking into account specific conditions, chooses the most favorable combination of characteristics: something wins, and something loses. “When you think over the solution and technical conditions,” says the famous aircraft designer O. Antonov, “which, perhaps, will never be written down on paper, highlight the most important thing. Only as a last resort, if something can't be done, go for the acceptable one. Permissible is some non-fulfillment of the specified technical conditions, so to speak, a compromise solution. Suppose, when designing an aircraft, you meet the requirements for carrying capacity and speed, but you will not succeed a little with the takeoff run. Then you will begin to weigh these three important requirements and, perhaps, give up a little on the run - let the run be not 500, but 550 meters, but all other qualities will be achieved. This is just what is allowed.”

Academician A.N. Krylov in his memoirs talks about such an episode. In 1924, the scientist worked as part of a Soviet-French commission that examined Russian warships in the harbor of Bizerte, taken there by Wrangel. Here, side by side with the Russian destroyer, was a French destroyer - about the same age and size. The difference in the combat power of the ships was so great that Admiral Bui, the chairman of the commission, could not stand it and exclaimed: “You have guns, but we have farts! How did you achieve such a difference in the weapons of the destroyers? Krylov answered as follows: “Look, admiral, on the deck: except for the stringer, in which the entire fortress, everything else, representing, as it were, a roof, is rusted almost through, pipes, their casings, cuttings, etc. - everything is worn out. Look at your destroyer, everything is like new on it, however, our destroyer has been without maintenance and painting for six years, but this is not the main point. Your destroyer is built of ordinary steel and has a calculated stress of 7 kg per 1 mm 2 on it, as if it were a commercial ship that should serve at least 24 years. Ours is built entirely of high resistance steel, the stress is allowed to be 12 kg or more - in some places 23 kg / mm 2. A destroyer is built for 10-12 years, because during this time it manages to become so obsolete that it no longer represents a true fighting force. The entire gain in hull weight is used to strengthen military weapons, and you see that in an artillery battle our destroyer will smash to smithereens at least four, that is, your division, before they approach the firing range of their farts. "How easy it is!" - said the admiral.

The art of a designer largely depends on the ability to determine what needs to be won and what can be sacrificed for it. Inventive creativity consists in finding a way in which no concession is required at all (or it is disproportionately small compared to the result obtained).

Suppose, to speed up loading and unloading at non-equipped airfields, it is necessary to create a portable lifting device mounted on heavy transport aircraft. Such a problem can be completely solved by the means already available in modern technology. Based on the general principles of hoist design and using, say, the experience of building light truck cranes, a qualified designer is able to design the required device. It is clear that this will increase to some extent the "dead" weight of the aircraft. Winning in one, the designer simultaneously loses in something else. Often this can be put up with, and the task of the designer is to win more and lose less.

The need for an invention arises when the task contains an additional requirement: to win and ... not to lose anything. For example, the lifting device must be strong enough and at the same time must not weigh down the aircraft. It is impossible to solve this problem by known methods: even the best mobile cranes have a considerable weight. Here we need a new approach, we need an invention.

Thus, an ordinary problem passes into the category of inventive ones in those cases when the necessary condition for its solution is the elimination of a technical contradiction.

It is not difficult to create a new machine, ignoring technical contradictions. But then the machine will be inoperable and lifeless.

Does an invention always consist in the elimination of a technical contradiction?

I must say that there are two concepts of "invention" - legal (patent) and technical. The legal concept is different in different countries, moreover, it often changes.

The legal concept seeks to reflect as accurately as possible the boundaries within which the legal protection of new engineering structures is currently economically feasible. For a technical concept, it is not so much these boundaries that are important, but the core of the invention, its historically stable essence.

From the point of view of an engineer, the creation of a new invention always comes down to overcoming (total or partial) a technical contradiction.

The emergence and overcoming of contradictions is one of the main features of technological progress. Analyzing the development of mills, Marx wrote in Capital: “The increase in the size of the working machine and the number of its simultaneously operating tools requires a larger propulsion mechanism ... Already in the 18th century, an attempt was made to set in motion two runners and two sets using one water wheel . But the increase in the size of the transmission mechanism came into conflict with the insufficient power of the water ... "

This is a prime example of a technical contradiction: an attempt to improve some property of a machine comes into conflict with another property.

Numerous examples of technical contradictions are given by Friedrich Engels in the article "The History of the Rifle". In essence, this entire article is an analysis of the internal contradictions that determine the historical development of the rifle. Engels shows, for example, that from the moment the rifle appeared until the invention of breech-loading rifles, the main contradiction was that in order to enhance the firing properties, the barrel was required to be shortened (loading was carried out from the barrel and was easier with a short barrel), and to strengthen " bayonet properties of the rifle, on the contrary, it was necessary to lengthen the barrel. These conflicting qualities were combined in a breech-loading rifle.

Here are some problems from different branches of technology that contain technical contradictions. These tasks were not invented by the author, but taken from newspapers, magazines, books.

Mining

For a long time, to isolate the area of ​​an underground fire, miners have been building lintels - special walls made of brick, concrete or paving stones. The construction of jumpers is greatly complicated if gases are released in the mine. In this case, the jumper must be made airtight, each crack must be carefully sealed, and all this is under the constant threat of an explosion. To protect themselves, the miners began to build two jumpers. The first - temporary - is laid hastily. It lets air through and serves only as a barricade, under the cover of which it is possible, without haste, to build a second, permanent one. Thus, the miners benefited in safety, but lost in labor intensity.

Chemical Technology

With increasing pressure, the synthesis rate increases and, consequently, the productivity of the synthesis column increases. But at the same time, the energy consumption for compressing a given amount of gas increases: for design reasons, it is necessary to limit the size of the apparatus and, consequently, their power. The solubility of the nitric-hydrogen mixture in liquid ammonia and its losses increase.

Electronics

Modern electronics is faced with a serious dilemma: on the one hand, performance requirements are constantly increasing and, accordingly, electronic systems are becoming more complicated; on the other hand, the restrictions on dimensions, weight, and power consumption are becoming more and more stringent... Reliability problems caused by the increased complexity of equipment are of the same, and perhaps even greater importance.

Radio engineering

A radio telescope antenna has two main characteristics - sensitivity and resolution. The larger the area of ​​the antenna, the higher the sensitivity of the telescope and the further it can look into the depths of the universe. Resolution is the "sharpness of vision" of a telescope. It shows how well the device distinguishes between two different radiation sources located at a small angular distance from each other. In addition, a large "radio eye" should cover with its gaze as much of the sky as possible. To do this, the antenna must be mobile. But it is very difficult to move a bulky antenna, keeping its shape unchanged to within millimeters.

Until this contradiction is resolved, the design of telescopes proceeds in two directions: either very large but fixed antennas are built, or mobile and relatively small ones.

Motor building

The valve timing mechanism consists mainly of reciprocating parts. To increase the number of revolutions of the engine means to increase the inertial loads. To avoid this, they try to reduce the mass of reciprocating parts, for which the valve mechanism is placed directly in the cylinder block. But the combustion chamber at the same time becomes flattened, slit-like, with a large heat transfer surface. This is one of the contradictions: an increase in the number of revolutions with a lower valve arrangement leads to an increase in power and efficiency, while a slit-like chamber nullifies all the gain.

Agricultural engineering

There is such a thing - power on the hook. This is that part of the power of the tractor engine that can actually do useful work. The indicator of this power for a given tractor depends primarily on the coupling properties of its movers (wheels or tracks) and on the coupling weight of the machine. A powerful but light machine slips under heavy loads, so only a small part of the tractor engine power can be used to perform useful work. Heavy tractors grip the soil better, but a significant part of their engine energy is spent on moving its own weight across the field ... Designers lighten the machine and increase its power. And in the process of operation, the movement in the opposite direction begins, since weight reduction means a deterioration in grip properties, that is, a decrease in effective power on the hook. So you have to weight the car on the spot - put cast-iron disks on the wheels, make expanders on the tracks and wheels, nullifying the achievements of the designers.

Automotive

It is worth increasing the engine power without applying any new design solutions, its weight and fuel consumption will increase. This means that the carrier system (frame, body) of the car should be more powerful, heavy, and there is less space for passengers.

Soft tires provide a quiet ride, the car floats on rough roads like a canoe. But the lower the pressure in the tires, the greater the resistance of the road, the lower the speed. You can make a car that is low and stable, but it won't run on a bad road. The designer finds a golden mean, weighs which of the qualities of the car can be neglected, and which one can be brought to the fore.

Shipbuilding

When designing a yacht hull, three main requirements must be taken into account: 1) minimum hull shape resistance, 2) minimum frictional resistance, 3) maximum stability.

These requirements are mutually contradictory. A narrow, long yacht has a low form resistance, but it is not very stable, it cannot carry a sufficiently large windage. An increase in stability by increasing the weight of the ballast is accompanied by a simultaneous increase in draft and, consequently, an increase in frictional resistance. Increasing stability by increasing the width of the hull causes an increase in the shape resistance of the hull. The designer's task is to find the "golden mean", to reconcile the conflicting design conditions.

Aircraft building

The chief designer has an idea. Well, let's say you need an aircraft to transport bulky and heavy cargo; it is necessary to ensure the convenience and speed of loading. For this purpose, it is required that the fuselage, roomy and streamlined, be as close to the ground as possible in the parking lot, which means that a low landing gear is needed, it is easier to remove it into the fuselage.

The weight of the payload determines the weight of the structure, and all together - the power and number of engines. If the engines are turboprops, they are mounted on the wing and the wing must be raised so that the propellers do not hit the concrete. Another detail is clear: the wing must be placed on top of the fuselage.

This is just the first step of the project. Many different requirements gradually refine the "face" of the future aircraft. The need for good takeoff and landing properties on unpaved airfields leads to the use of volumetric tires with low pressure, a straight wing with powerful aerodynamic mechanization.

In this case, however, a very high speed cannot be obtained, but for the sake of other important qualities, the designer has to look for a reasonable compromise.

The invention must be "substantially new". But what does the word "essential" mean? The “Instructions on the methodology for the examination of applications for inventions” says this: “A significant novelty in solving a technical problem is characterized by the fact that this solution has new, previously unknown features that tell the object of the invention (device, method, substance) new properties that create a positive effect ". With minor variations, this definition has been used for decades and has led to countless disputes over applications. Novelty, the definition says, is the presence of new properties. But what are the new features? There are no precise guidelines for this.

And it turns out: novelty is when there is novelty ...

In practice, "substantial novelty" inevitably comes down to the concept of "substantial change" (compared to the prototype) and further to the concept of "significant change". Changed a lot - there is an invention, changed a little - no invention. Moreover, "a lot" or "little" is ultimately determined by the personal opinion of the expert.

Meanwhile, there is an objective criterion: an invention is the elimination of a technical contradiction. Using this criterion, it is possible to largely objectify the examination of applications.

Let's turn to a specific example.

The journal "Inventor and Rationalizer" published an article by expert E. Nemirovsky "What is an invention?". In it, the author cited an episode from personal practice.

Two engineers designed a feeder to feed book covers into the machine. “Reviewing this application,” the expert writes, “I remembered about the same device, which is available in one of the German patents. The only difference is that our inventors set the walls of the slip box at a distance less than the length of the binding cover ... I considered this difference insignificant and prepared a draft decision to refuse to issue an author's certificate.

Everything is typical here. This is a classic example of a comparison method. The expert is not interested in why the changes were made, what results are obtained. No, the principle of formal comparison applies. The expert is looking for a prototype. The change seems insignificant to him: just think, they changed some length of the wall! And an insignificant, insignificant change means, according to the expert, the absence of significant novelty. And he calmly writes a draft refusal.

But the comparison method this time gave a clear misfire. E. Nemirovsky says: “However, our inventors explained that the side stops described in the German patent must be very rigid in order to eliminate the deflection of the foot. On the other hand, if the stops are too tight, the suction cups won't be able to pull the lid out of the box. This contradiction made self-feeding unworkable. It was only necessary to change the distance between the walls, as they began to perceive the weight of the covers ... the new size ratio adopted by Moscow inventors made it possible to make an inoperative device operational. I admitted that I was wrong. The inventors were issued a copyright certificate. Here, at the very end of the article, Nemirovsky uttered the word with which one should have begun: "contradiction." It turns out that the point is not in the significance or insignificance of the change, but in the fact that there was a technical contradiction and the invention made it possible to eliminate it.

One more example.

Leningrad engineers L. Ginzburg and J. Persky sent an application for a lamp unit with a toroidal transformer. “You managed to create a very good design,” the expert replied, “but there are no elements of significant novelty in it.” The Leningrad Regional Council of VOIR considered the application and ... found a significant novelty. Here is what it consisted of:

“When designing a lamp unit in which a high-voltage lamp (valve) and an incandescent transformer supplying this lamp are combined, it is necessary to isolate the lamp sockets and other points of the valve under high voltage from surrounding objects of a different potential, including from the incandescent transformer. Until now, the practice of designing everywhere has followed the path of creating a sufficiently large discharge distance between the lamp sockets and the transformer case. To do this, it was necessary to install a long insulator with high-voltage mounting between the transformer and the valve. Meanwhile, when designing equipment, it is important not to increase, but to reduce the dimensions.

And so the engineers L. Ginzburg and Y. Persky proposed to slightly increase the window of the toroidal filament transformer and place lamp sockets and other high-potential points (resistance "grid" - "cathode" and high-voltage output) inside this window, filling it with a compound. An ingenious solution made it possible to abandon the insulator and external high-voltage wiring. But the most important thing is that the overall dimensions of the block have been reduced, and with this design principle, they no longer need to be expanded as the valve voltage increases.”

The dispute with the expertise ended like this: “It was proved that the authors managed to overcome the contradiction noted above and solve the problem precisely because in their design the incandescent transformer plays the role of not only a transformer, but also an insulator of high-voltage points of the valve. The use of a transformer as an insulator is the novelty of the design.” The inventors received a copyright certificate.

If inventors learn to see in inventions the elimination of technical inconsistencies, and examiners learn to find ways to resolve such inconsistencies in applications, the number of rejected applications will be greatly reduced.

Sometimes the technical contradiction contained in the problem is clearly visible. Such, for example, are problems whose solution in the usual way encounters an unacceptable increase in weight. Sometimes the contradiction is imperceptible, it is, as it were, dissolved in the conditions of the problem. Nevertheless, the inventor must always keep in mind the technical contradiction that he has to overcome.

“It is necessary to achieve such and such a result” is only half of the task; the inventor needs to see the other half: "achieve without losing this and that."

Questionnaires show that experienced inventors are good at seeing the technical contradiction contained in the problem. Thus, P. Fridman (Leningrad), who has more than twenty copyright certificates for inventions, writes: "I am studying the difficulties and contradictions of existing machines, devices and systems." The Kaunas inventor J. Chepele very accurately characterizes this most important feature of inventive skill: “You need to find a technical contradiction in the problem, then use the methods suggested by experience and knowledge to eliminate the contradiction.”

The well-known Soviet inventor B. Blinov, summing up his thirty years of inventive work, writes: “Based on experience, I say: you will not become an inventor if you do not learn to clearly see the contradictions in things.”

The inventor Yu. Chinnov had nine copyright certificates; Having mastered the technique of invention, Yu. Chinnov received another three dozen copyright certificates, solving a number of problems that were considered unsolvable. One of Yu. Chinnov's main tools is the analysis of technical contradictions. When Yu. Chinnov was instructed to design a high-performance machine for twisting telephone cables, he first of all revealed the technical contradiction contained in the problem:

“When designing the machine, it turned out that the increase in its productivity is hindered by the tension force of the threads (wires), which arises from the friction of the threads during their movement against the walls of the torsional frame and leads to an unacceptable stretching of the threads (wires). With an increase in the speed of rotation of the frame and its diameter, the centrifugal force pressing the threads against the frame increases, and, consequently, the friction force of the threads. It turns out a vicious circle:

With an increase in the diameter and speed of rotation of the torsional frame, the centrifugal force increases unacceptably, which ultimately leads to stretching of the threads. On the other hand, by reducing the diameter of the torsional frame, it is possible to increase the speed of torsion, but then the diameter of the receiving coil installed inside the frame, and, consequently, the length of the cable being produced, is unacceptably reduced.

A clear technical contradiction!

In inventive practice, cases are not uncommon when the main thing is to detect a technical contradiction, and as soon as it is discovered, it is not difficult to overcome it. However, it also happens that a clearly visible technical contradiction frightens off the inventor: you need to combine the incompatible, but this seems impossible!

“We need to find a way to twist the cable into a passage,” says Yu. Chinnov, “that is, take the receiving coil out of the rotating frame and fix it on a fixed base outside the frame. Such a coil can be made of unlimited diameter, and the cable - of unlimited length, and, in addition, to increase the speed of torsion.

The head of the new technology design bureau of the Tashkent Cable Plant warned me that inventors and designers had worked a lot in this direction. In the end, they came to the conclusion that it was just as impossible to invent a method of torsion per pass as it was to invent a perpetual motion machine.

However, I did not give up the idea to cope with this task. I decided to act according to the method of invention ... "

Don't be afraid of technical contradictions!

Here is one of the easy ones. Solve it yourself; To do this, it is sufficient to clearly formulate a technical contradiction.

Task 3

“When you look at a racing car, the wheels immediately catch your eye. They give the car a fierce look. Meanwhile, they create additional air resistance, reduce the maximum speed. Even ordinary passenger cars have wheels covered with a streamlined hood. So why aren't race car wheels covered in fairings?

On bends, the rider keeps an eye on the front wheels all the time. Seeing their position, he receives the first information about the direction of the car. Now suppose that the wheels are covered by fenders. By turning the steering wheel, the rider must watch the car go and intervene after the car noticeably deviates from the intended path. That's why road racing cars are made without fenders. Another thing is cars designed for racing on specially equipped tracks. There is no need for agility. And the cars are hooded."

To solve this problem, it is necessary to accurately find the “incompatible” and answer the question: where and what will have to be changed to eliminate the “incompatibility”? The problem relates to racing cars. This means that the solution may not be designed for mass and long-term use.