CoBID: A co-evolutionary bio inspired design method

CoBID: A co-evolutionary bio inspired design method

Van Adrichem, M.E.

Smulders, F.E.H.M. (mentor)
De Pauw, I.C. (mentor)

Industrial Design Engineering

Product Innovation Management

Master of Science Integrated Product Design

2011-05-27

Bio inspired design (BID) is not a new way of designing, neither is this the first co-evolutionary design project. But combining these two design approaches into co-evolutionary bio inspired design (CoBID) is something that has not been done before. Bio inspired design can roughly be divided into two different approaches. The first approach is refered to as inspiration driven bio inspired design in this report. This approach focuses on designing an emulated application based on the discovery of an interesting phenomenon in nature. The other approach focuses on solving a design problem by looking into nature as a source of inspiration. As this approach is initiated from the field of application, this way of applying BID is refered to as application driven bio inspired design. The CoBID method which is developed in this project is aimed at inspiration driven bio inspired design. Currently there are no design methods available for this way of applying BID, since the inspiration driven approach is mostly executed in the form of a research into the possibilities of an interesting phenomenon found in nature. Some methods are available for application driven BID. But these methods are difficult to use in the inspiration driven field, as they are based on a different focus. The idea behind the CoBID method is that the knowledge about the source of inspiration and the design for the field of application co-evolve over time. At the start of the project only shear and shallow knowledge is available about the source of inspiration. This leaves space for imagination, which evokes ideas for possible applications. These ideas give rise to questions about the properties and abilities of the source of inspiration. Based on these questions the search for more knowledge about the source of inspiration is started. As more knowledge pops up, so will more ideas come to mind based on this knowledge. Earlier application ideas can be proven to be possible, or can be neglected as they do not fit the properties of the source of inspiration. In this way the source of inspiration and the field of application co-evolve towards one another, up to the point where they can be merged into an emulated application of the source of inspiration. Based on the design process of a co-evolutionary bio inspired design test case (Adrichem, 2011), an iterative model is created for CoBID. This model can be seen as two interdependent circular processes. The first circular process covers the search for knowledge about the source of inspiration. The second one aims at the field of application. Both these processes can be divided into three separate phases. The inspiration process is subdivided into familiarising, abstracting and comparing. In the familiarising phase the source of inspiration is examined within its natural context. This gives knowledge about properties like functions and the environmental influences. The abstracting phase detaches the source of inspiration from its natural context. This could be done by making a model, prototype and by making assumptions. Based on this it is possible to get to the core of the source of inspiration, which makes it measurable, scaleable and comparable. The third phase is comparing. By comparing the source of inspiration to other similar phenomena in nature it is possible to define what the strengths and weaknesses are. At the same time this comparison can give insights into how the source of inspiration works. The application process is subdivided into diverging, converging and evaluating. In the diverging phase application ideas and concepts are generated. These are based on the knowledge from the inspiration process. The converging phase narrows the amount of ideas down to the ones which seem to fit best to the source of inspiration and which seem the most promising for application. In the evaluating phase the current field of application is analysed. This analysis shows where the opportunities and threats are for an emulated source of inspiration. The six phases are all interrelated and there is no fixed order in which they should be executed. Due to the co-evolutionary character of this model, the outcomes of one phase automatically lead to the next phase. This makes that CoBID is an iterative process which continues up to the point where the source of inspiration can be emulated into a design application. In the test case CoBID was executed as an individual project, but it would be better to execute CoBID in a collaboration between a biologist and a designer. Biologists and designers have a different view on such a project and both bring a different quality to the table. For that reason designers should be involved in the process of gaining knowledge about the source of inspiration, as they have the ability to look at this on a higher level of abstraction. At the same time the biologists are needed in the process of designing an application, as they have basic knowledge about nature and the source of inspiration which can be put to use in this development. When comparing the CoBID method to biomimicry, it turns out that these two methods have a lot in common. The main points on which they differ are based on the difference in starting point. CoBID is developed for inspiration driven bio inspired design, whereas biomimicry is developed for the application driven version. The main idea behind both methods is that they allow for easy information and data exchange between the source of inspiration and the field of application. This is done by detaching the source of inspiration from its natural context and by biologising questions from the field of application.

bio inspired design
co-evolutionary design
moss peristome
design method

http://resolver.tudelft.nl/uuid:328a10ed-f971-491f-81b1-97c2c1c1c3f3

Campus only

Student theses

master thesis

(c) 2011 Van Adrichem, M.E.