Enhancing Innovation Through Biologically Inspired Design

Mixing upper level undergraduates majoring in engineering with those majoring in biology, we have devised a course on biologically-inspired design (BID) that provides practical training in methods and techniques that facilitate the identification and translation of biological principles into solutions for human challenges. The challenges of interdisciplinary courses generally, and the specific challenges of fostering exchange among biologists and engineers lead us to define these learning goals: (1) basic knowledge of successful examples of BID, (2) interdisciplinary communication skills, (3) knowledge about domains outside of their core training, (4) a uniquely interdisciplinary design process, and (5) how to apply existing technical knowledge to a new discipline. We developed the following course components to meet the key learning objectives: BID Lectures; Design Lectures; Found object exercises; Quantitative assessments; Analogy exercises; Research assignments; Interdisciplinary Collaboration, Mentorship; Idea Journals and Reflections. We will provide an extensive description of these elements, which we have chosen to incorporate based on our own experience with interdisciplinary communication, as well as findings from cognitive science regarding how students actually learn. This 15 week course is organized using assignments of increasing complexity that allow students to learn and apply essential skills of BID methodology and practice. Early exercises, which combine lectures, group discussions and individual assignments, have these objectives: 1) allow students to develop the necessary inter-disciplinary communication and research skills to facilitate their design project work; 2) expose students to ideation and design skills that will encourage them to work outside of their comfort zone; 3) practice the analogical reasoning skills that facilitate the successful search for and application of relevant biological concepts. This initial portion of the course stresses that BID occurs at the early phase of a design process and that identifying solutions from the biological domain requires that students have a sufficient breakdown of their problem combined with sufficient biological knowledge to suggest appropriate mappings between problem and solution. Two primary barriers are a lack of appreciation for how the evolutionary “design” process differs from human design, and the use of different terminology for describing similar processes in biology vs. engineering. We describe some teaching practices and activities that allow students to overcome these difficulties. The course culminates in a group project, which is a detailed conceptual design including a preliminary analysis of expected performance, value, and feasibility. A unique feature of the course is that it represents the efforts of not only biologists and engineers, but also contributions from cognitive scientists engaged in understanding human cognition and creativity. Our course strategy has been deeply influenced by findings in that field. We have studied the activity of classroom participants for the last three years, examining the processes they use, and intermediate and final design representations. Analysis of this has yielded a number of observations about the cognitive process of biologically inspired design that may provide insights regarding how to enhance BID education, as well as provide useful insight for professionals in the design field. Key words: biologically-inspired design (BID); interdisciplinary communication

[1]  Gabriela Goldschmidt,et al.  Expertise and the use of visual analogy: implications for design education , 1999 .

[2]  Diane Ebert-May,et al.  Scientific Teaching , 2004, Science.

[3]  D. Tyler,et al.  Stimuli-Responsive Polymer Nanocomposites Inspired by the Sea Cucumber Dermis , 2008, Science.

[4]  Bruce P. Lee,et al.  A reversible wet/dry adhesive inspired by mussels and geckos , 2007, Nature.

[5]  Amaresh Chakrabarti,et al.  The effect of representation of triggers on design outcomes , 2008, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[6]  J. Yen,et al.  Advertisement and concealment in the plankton: what makes a copepod hydrodynamically conspicuous? , 1996 .

[7]  Todd A. Blackledge,et al.  Variation in the material properties of spider dragline silk across species , 2006 .

[8]  R J Full,et al.  Distributed mechanical feedback in arthropods and robots simplifies control of rapid running on challenging terrain , 2007, Bioinspiration & biomimetics.

[9]  R. Full,et al.  Dynamics of rapid vertical climbing in cockroaches reveals a template , 2006, Journal of Experimental Biology.

[10]  Lorenzo Magnani,et al.  Model-Based Reasoning in Scientific Discovery , 1999, Springer US.

[11]  Ashok K. Goel,et al.  Structure, behavior, and function of complex systems: The structure, behavior, and function modeling language , 2008, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[12]  Nancy J. Nersessian,et al.  Model-Based Reasoning in Conceptual Change , 1999 .

[13]  K. Dugosh,et al.  Cognitive stimulation in brainstorming. , 2000, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[14]  Cornelius Herstatt,et al.  How To Use Analogies For Breakthrough Innovations , 2005 .

[15]  Lucienne Blessing,et al.  Understanding the differences between how novice and experienced designers approach design tasks , 2003 .

[16]  Cynthia J. Atman,et al.  Engineering Design Processes: A Comparison of Students and Expert Practitioners , 2007 .

[17]  Bert Bras Teaching Environmentally Conscious Design and Manufacturing at the Undergraduate Level: A Georgia Tech Perspective , 2003 .

[18]  L. H. Shu,et al.  Biomimetic design through natural language analysis to facilitate cross-domain information retrieval , 2007, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[19]  Ashok K. Goel,et al.  Use of design patterns in analogy-based design , 2004, Adv. Eng. Informatics.

[20]  John S. Gero,et al.  Design and other types of fixation , 1996 .

[21]  Michael C. Quick,et al.  Invention and evolution — design in nature and engineering , 1995 .

[22]  Philip Ball,et al.  Life's lessons in design , 2001, Nature.

[23]  Ashok K. Goel Model Revision: A Theory of Incremental Model Learning , 1991, ML.

[24]  Carolyn A. Maher,et al.  Using Discourse Analysis to Study a Cross-Disciplinary Learning Community: Insights from an IGERT Training Program , 2007 .

[25]  J. Vincent,et al.  Systematic technology transfer from biology to engineering , 2002, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[26]  Sven G. Bilen,et al.  Developing and Assessing Students' Entrepreneurial Skills and Mind‐Set * , 2005 .

[27]  J. Gosline,et al.  The mechanical design of spider silks: from fibroin sequence to mechanical function. , 1999, The Journal of experimental biology.

[28]  Ashok K. Goel,et al.  Biologically-Inspired Innovation in Engineering Design: a Cognitive Study , 2007 .

[29]  H. Arkes,et al.  The Psychology of Sunk Cost , 1985 .

[30]  Jan Noyes QWERTY-the immortal keyboard , 1998 .

[31]  R. Dehaan,et al.  The Impending Revolution in Undergraduate Science Education , 2005 .

[32]  Brian Chan,et al.  Building a better snail: Lubrication and adhesive locomotion , 2005 .

[33]  Jack Mostow,et al.  Design by Derivational Analogy: Issues in the Automated Replay of Design Plans , 1989, Artif. Intell..

[34]  Juan C. Lucena,et al.  When Students Resist: Ethnography Of A Senior Design Experience , 2002 .

[35]  Ashok K. Goel,et al.  Problem-Driven and Solution-Based Design: Twin Processes of Biologically Inspired Design , 2008 .

[36]  Craig A. Tovey,et al.  On Honey Bees and Dynamic Server Allocation in Internet Hosting Centers , 2004, Adapt. Behav..

[37]  Richard H. C. Bonser,et al.  Technology trajectories, innovation, and the growth of biomimetics , 2007 .

[38]  D. Schoen,et al.  The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action , 1985 .

[39]  C. Hansel Scientific Teaching , 1972, Nature.

[40]  Julian F. V. Vincent,et al.  Stealing Ideas from Nature , 2001 .

[41]  Chen Li,et al.  Sensitive dependence of the motion of a legged robot on granular media , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[42]  Kai N. Lee Sustainability: A Philosophy of Adaptive Ecosystem Management , 2006 .

[43]  Ashok K. Goel Design, Analogy, and Creativity , 1997, IEEE Expert.

[44]  David W. Rosen,et al.  Refined metrics for measuring ideation effectiveness , 2009 .

[45]  Yoseph Bar-Cohen,et al.  Biomimetics : Biologically Inspired Technologies , 2011 .

[46]  Jim Davies,et al.  A computational model of visual analogies in design , 2009, Cognitive Systems Research.

[47]  Ashok K. Goel,et al.  Nature of creative analogies in biologically inspired innovative design , 2009, C&C '09.

[48]  Michael French,et al.  Invention and evolution : design in nature and engineering, 2nd ed. , 1988 .

[49]  Amaresh Chakrabarti,et al.  A functional representation for aiding biomimetic and artificial inspiration of new ideas , 2005, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[50]  John S. Gero,et al.  Function–behavior–structure paths and their role in analogy-based design , 1996, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[51]  N. Nersessian The Cognitive Basis of Science: The cognitive basis of model-based reasoning in science , 2002 .

[52]  L. H. Shu,et al.  Bridging Cross-Domain Terminology for Biomimetic Design , 2005 .

[53]  Felice Frankel,et al.  Translating Science into Pictures: A Powerful Learning Tool , 2005 .

[54]  Ashok K. Goel,et al.  Compound Analogical Design: Interaction between Problem Decomposition and Analogical Transfer in Biologically Inspired Design , 2008 .

[55]  M. L. Maher,et al.  Using analogical reasoning to design buildings , 2005, Engineering with Computers.

[56]  Jordi Bascompte,et al.  Asymmetric Coevolutionary Networks Facilitate Biodiversity Maintenance , 2006, Science.

[57]  R. J. Bogumil,et al.  The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action , 1985, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[58]  Donald A. Schön The reflective practitioner : how professionals think in action , 1986 .

[59]  Todd A Blackledge,et al.  Unraveling the mechanical properties of composite silk threads spun by cribellate orb-weaving spiders , 2006, Journal of Experimental Biology.

[60]  W. Barthlott,et al.  Purity of the sacred lotus, or escape from contamination in biological surfaces , 1997, Planta.

[61]  Mark D. Gross,et al.  DRAWING ANALOGIES Supporting Creative Architectural Design with Visual References , 1996 .

[62]  A. Geim,et al.  Microfabricated adhesive mimicking gecko foot-hair , 2003, Nature materials.

[63]  Kellar Autumn,et al.  Properties, Principles, and Parameters of the Gecko Adhesive System , 2006 .

[64]  The impact of exposure to biologically-inspired design on environmental ethics of undergraduate engineering students , 2009 .

[65]  Ashok K. Goel,et al.  Structure , Behavior and Function of Complex Systems : The SBF Modeling Language , 2008 .

[66]  Marc J. Weissburg,et al.  EDITORIAL: Perspectives on biologically inspired design: introduction to the collected contributions , 2007 .

[67]  Sung-Weon Yeom,et al.  A biomimetic jellyfish robot based on ionic polymer metal composite actuators , 2009 .

[68]  Janine M. Benyus,et al.  Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired by Nature , 1997 .

[69]  U. Wilensky,et al.  Complex Systems in Education: Scientific and Educational Importance and Implications for the Learning Sciences , 2006 .

[70]  Kazem Kazerounian,et al.  Barriers to Creativity in Engineering Education: A Study of Instructors and Students Perceptions , 2007 .

[71]  David G. Ullman,et al.  The Mechanical Design Process , 1992 .

[72]  Barbara M. Moskal,et al.  Assessment in Engineering Education: Evolution, Approaches and Future Collaborations , 2005 .

[73]  A. Smits,et al.  Energy harvesting eel , 2001 .

[74]  D. Dahl,et al.  The Influence and Value of Analogical Thinking during New Product Ideation , 2002 .

[75]  S. Gorb,et al.  From micro to nano contacts in biological attachment devices , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[76]  Steven Vogel,et al.  Comparative Biomechanics: Life's Physical World , 2003 .

[77]  John J. Videler,et al.  Escape from viscosity: the kinematics and hydrodynamics of copepod foraging and escape swimming , 2003, Journal of Experimental Biology.

[78]  Marc A. Meyers,et al.  Growth and structure in abalone shell , 2005 .

[79]  Joseph Ayers,et al.  Biomimetic approaches to the control of underwater walking machines , 2007, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.