|
Arabic
Bengali
Chinese
English
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Malay
Polish
Portuguese
Spanish
Turkish
Ukrainian
Vietnamese|
BOOKS AND ARTICLES
THE ABC OF SU-FIELD ANALYSIS
Books and articles / And then came the inventor Su-field formulas can be compared with chemical formulas. Here, for example, is a recording of a “reaction” that gives the answer to problem 22:
A wavy arrow means “performing unsatisfactorily”, a double arrow means “we need to switch to the system”. The dotted arrow means “you need to enter an action.” How to construct and transform su-fields is an extensive section of the theory of solving inventive problems, called su-field analysis. For now, it’s enough for us to know a few simple rules. Rule one: if a problem is given a part of a su-field, to solve it you need to complete the su-field. Let us consider, for example, the problem of a gas tank. Given substance B1 (empty tank), which is unable to signal its state. Guided by the first rule, you can immediately write down the solution to the problem:
Please note: we write the fields that act on substances at the top, above the line; fields that are created by substances and “come out” - under the line. So, in the Su-field form the problem is solved. It remains to clarify what B2 and P are. The field must act on a person; This means that it can be electromagnetic (optical), mechanical (sound) or thermal. The optical field is inconvenient: additional optical signals will distract the driver. Even more inconvenient are thermal signals. What about sound ones? Now the role of B2 is clear. This substance, when the tank is empty, must interact with it, creating a sound signal. Problem solved! Let's throw some kind of float into the tank. As long as there is gasoline in the tank, the float floats “silently” (the sides of the float should be soft so that the float does not knock on the walls of the tank). As soon as there is little fuel, the float will knock on the bottom of the tank, and the driver will hear a strong extraneous sound. The resulting Su-Field system can be written as a rhombus:
Or more precisely:
The mechanical field P1 (shaking force) acts on the float B2, which interacts with the tank B1, and thanks to this, the sound field P2 is obtained. Many measurement and detection problems are solved by attaching a “summer attachment” to the substance, which is given according to the conditions of the problem:
This prefix is as typical for solving “measurement” and “detection” problems as the addition of the COOH group to the R radical in the formulas of organic acids:
R can vary, but every organic acid is known to contain a COOH group. Now about the second rule of Su-field analysis. Its essence is this: if, according to the conditions of the problem, an unnecessary su-field is given, then to destroy it, substance B1, which is a modification of B2 or B3, should be introduced between substances B1 and B2. This can be written as follows:
There are different ways to destroy a Su-Field. Change P, V1 or V2. Remove P. Remove B1 or B2. Enter B2. Enter B3. The last one is easiest. But usually, according to the conditions of the problem, you cannot enter B3. A contradiction arises: B3 must be introduced and B3 cannot be introduced. And so the rule indicates a “cunning” workaround - let’s introduce B3, but let it be one of the available substances, only slightly modified. Then the contradiction is easily overcome: B3 exists - and B3 seems to be absent. Let us explain this rule with an example. Many power plants run on coal. Coal is brought in railway cars and poured into huge bunkers - reinforced concrete funnels. Screw conveyors are installed under the funnels - something like meat grinders. True, the augers do not chop the coal, but only rake it towards the pipeline. Then the coal flows by gravity through inclined pipes to the ball mill. This is a huge rotating cylinder with heavy steel balls rolling inside it. Coal is ground into crumbs and dust. The air flow carries the ground coal into the separator, where the dust is separated and goes into the furnaces, and the crumbs are returned to the mill for secondary grinding. The system is generally simple and reliable... as long as the coal is not too wet. Well, wet coal enters the bunkers quite often. And this is where the torment begins. Coal hooks on the augers, sticks to the walls of the pipes, to the neck of the mill... Then, in the mill, excess water is squeezed out and separated, but before it gets into the mill, wet coal causes a lot of trouble. Many inventors in different countries have tried to outsmart wet coal. They dried it, changed the shape of the pipes, shook the pipes... Fine coal is a dangerous substance. During experiments, it ignited more than once, resulting in fires and explosions. Finally, the Americans patented fluoroplastic pipe coating. Such a coating was expensive, but it seemed that the problem had been solved, albeit at a high price. However, it soon became clear: the coal quickly tore off the fluoroplastic coating. The phrase “wet coal sticks to the pipe wall” in the language of su-field analysis sounds like this: “An unnecessary su-field is given - two substances and a field of mechanical adhesion forces.” Fluoroplastic is B3, and a completely unrelated B3 at that. The rule has been broken! As you probably guessed, VZ needs to be made not from fluoroplastic, but from a modified metal or, more simply, modified coal. B1 - wet coal. This means that dry coal can play the role of B3. Even a thin layer of dry coal between the pipe walls and the wet coal will immediately prevent sticking. (By sprinkling raw cutlets with crushed breadcrumbs, the housewife, without knowing it, uses the rule of Su-field analysis.) The coal crumbs, dried in the air flow and returning to the mill, were taken to the augers. An extremely simple change, but the problem was brilliantly solved! Please note: the problems about drops of liquid and about wet coal have something in common, although in the first case you need to build a suction field, and in the second you need to destroy it. In both tasks it is required to introduce a substance and it is impossible (undesirable, difficult) to introduce it. This contradiction is overcome by using the existing substance as the introduced substance, slightly changing it. A paradoxical situation arises: there is no new substance (we use the existing one) - and there is a new substance (we have changed the existing substance in some way).
Conventional thinking operates with simple logic: “yes” means “yes”, “no” means “no”, “black” is “black”, “white” is “white”, etc. The theory of solving inventive problems develops another a style of thinking based on dialectical logic: “yes” and “no” can coexist in “yes - no”, “black” can also be “white”...
Machine for thinning flowers in gardens
02.05.2024 Advanced Infrared Microscope
02.05.2024 Air trap for insects
01.05.2024
▪ Quantum dots - lamps of the future ▪ Freecom launches credit card-sized USB device ▪ Cats copy the behavior of their owners
▪ section of the site Consumer Electronics. Selection of articles ▪ article by Alexis de Tocqueville. Famous aphorisms ▪ article What is the web made of? Detailed answer ▪ article mechanical engineer. Job description ▪ article Electronic level gauge. Encyclopedia of radio electronics and electrical engineering
Home page | Library | Articles | Website map | Site Reviews
www.diagram.com.ua |
See other articles Section 
Latest news of science and technology, new electronics:
All languages of this page