Automotive Front Seat Design Trade-Offs: An OTSM-TRIZ-Based Approach

Year 2025, Volume: 9 Issue: 4, 686 - 696, 31.12.2025

Koray Altun

https://doi.org/10.30939/ijastech..1783118

Abstract

Automotive seat design involves multiple and often conflicting requirements, including comfort, durability, safety, ergonomics, and climate control, which must be addressed simultaneously within a constrained design space. Conventional optimization and trade-off–based methods typically resolve these conflicts through compromise, leading to locally optimal solutions that limit inventive improvement and long-term adaptability. To overcome these limitations, this study proposes an inventive negotiation approach that integrates OTSM-TRIZ (“Общая Теория Сильного Мышления” – General Theory of Powerful Thinking) with a structured multi-issue negotiation process. Rather than balancing requirements through direct trade-offs, the proposed workflow systematically maps contradictions, classifies design, need, and intermediary parameters, and supports the negotiation of inventive design choices. The approach is demonstrated through an automotive front-seat design case study, in which three alternative inventive concepts (composite materials, air bladder systems, and shape-memory materials) are evaluated. Each concept is analyzed with respect to its functional benefits, implementation challenges, and compatibility with long-term technology evolution trends. The results indicate that composite-based solutions currently offer the most feasible balance between comfort, durability, and manufacturability, while air bladder and shape-memory systems represent promising but less mature future-oriented options. The analysis further shows that hybrid configurations combining these concepts can move seat design closer to the Ideal Final Result (IFR). The main contribution of this study lies in demonstrating how OTSM-TRIZ and multi-issue negotiation can be jointly employed to manage both first-order and second-order contradictions, while explicitly linking design decisions to Trends of Engineering System Evolution. This integration provides a systematic and forward-looking framework for inventive decision-making in automotive engineering.

Keywords

Automotive seat design , Design trade-offs , OTSM-TRIZ , Multi-issue negotiation , Negotiation

References

• [1] Epstein HT. An outline of the role of brain in human cognitive development. Brain and Cognition. 2001; 45: 44-51. https://doi.org/10.1006/brcg.2000.1253
• [2] Elmaraghy W, Elmaraghy H, Tomiyama T, Monostori L. Complexity in engineering design and manufacturing. CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology. 2012; 61(2): 793–814. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2012.05.001
• [3] Khomenko N, Ashtiani M. Classical TRIZ and OTSM as a scientific theoretical background for non-typical problem-solving instruments. 2007; Frankfurt: ETRIA Future.
• [4] Fiorineschi L, Frillici FS, Rissone P. A Comparison of Classical TRIZ and OTSM-TRIZ in Dealing with Complex Problems. Procedia Engineering. 2015; 131, 86–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2015.12.350
• [5] Wang K, Tan R, Peng Q, Zhang L, Wang F. A systematic problem analysis network for product conceptual design. Computers & Industrial Engineering. 2024; 194, 110382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2024.110382
• [6] Altun K, Dereli T, Baykasoglu A. Development of a framework for customer co-creation in NPD through multi-issue negotiation with issue trade-offs. Expert Systems with Applications. 2013; 40, 873–880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2012.05.043
• [7] Altun K, von Zedtwitz M, Dereli T. Multi-issue negotiation in quality function deployment: Modified Even-Swaps in new product development. Computers & Industrial Engineering. 2016; 92, 31–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2015.11.017
• [8] Altun K, Berber RO, Kurt R, Bektas E, Turan S, Korkmaz V. Front seat development for autonomous driving: A case of innovative product development. Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University. 2022; 37, 1441-1452. https://doi.org/10.17341/gazimmfd.936325
• [9] Altun K. A proof-of-concept for parameter manipulation in TRIZ: Automotive case study. International Journal of Automotive Science and Technology. 2025; 9(2), 166-173. https://doi.org/10.30939/ijastech..1592053
• [10] Khomenko N, De Guio R, Cavallucci D. Enhancing ECN's abilities to address inventive strategies using OTSM-TRIZ. International Journal of Collaborative Engineering. 2009; 1(1-2), 98-113. https://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJCE.2009.027441
• [11] Brad S. Mapping the evolutionary journey of TRIZ and pioneering its next s-curve in the age of AI-aided invention. In: Cavallucci, D., Livotov, P., Brad, S. (eds) Towards AI-aided invention and innovation. TFC 2023. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology. 2023; vol 682. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42532-5_1
• [12] Altshuller G. And suddenly the inventor appeared: TRIZ, the theory of inventive problem solving. Worcester: Technical Innovation Center. 1996.
• [13] Khomenko N, Kucharavy D. OTSM-TRIZ problem solving process: solutions and their classification. Proceedings of TRIZ Future Conference. 2002; 6–8 November, Strasbourg, France.
• [14] Cavallucci D, Fuhlhaber S, Riwan A. Assisting Decisions in Inventive Design of Complex Engineering Systems. Procedia Engineering. 2015; 131, 975–983. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2015.12.409
• [15] Borgianni Y, Frillici FS, Rotini F. Integration of OTSM-TRIZ and Analytic Hierarchy Process for choosing the right solution. Procedia Engineering. 2015; 131, 388–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2015.12.431
• [16] Peng D, Schroeder R, Shah R. Linking routines to operations capabilities: a new perspective. J Oper Manag. 2008; 26(6), 730–748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2007.11.001
• [17] Aslam F, Aimin W, Li M, Rehman KU. Innovation in the era of IoT and Industry 5.0: Absolute innovation management (AIM) framework. Information. 2020; 11, 124. https://doi.org/10.3390/info11020124
• [18] Altun K. Inventive Multi-Issue Negotiation: A TRIZ-Aided Behavioral Approach with the Wolf Game and Modified Even Swaps. Group Decision and Negotiation. 2025; 1-42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-025-09943-y
• [19] Khomenko N, De Guio R. OTSM network of problems for representing and analyzing problem situations with computer support. IFIP CAI 2007, Michigan, USA. 2007; 77-88.
• [20] Eltzer T, Cavallucci D, Khomenkho N, Lutz P, Caillaud E. Inventive Design Applied to Injection Molding, in: ElMaraghy, H.A., ElMaraghy, W.H. (Eds.), Advances in Design, Springer Series in Advanced Manufacturing. Springer London, London. 2006; 169–182. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-84628-210-1_14
• [21] Dereli T, Altun K. Modified Even-Swaps: A novel, clear, rational and an easy-to-use mechanism for multi-issue negotiation. Computers & Industrial Engineering. 2012; 63, 1013–1029. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2012.06.013
• [22] Sheu DD. Parameter deployment and manipulation: An overarching approach for identifying and solving contradictions. The 15th International Conference & Global Competition on Systematic Innovation (ICSI & GCSI). 2024; Bursa, Turkey.
• [23] Sheu DD. Yeh, R. Parameter Deployment and Separation for Solving Physical Contradictions. 18th TRIZ Future Conference. 2018; Strasbourg, France.
• [24] Mishra U. The Ideal IFR is No IFR: Criticism to the TRIZ Concept of Ideality. 2013; Available at SSRN 2282002.
• [25] Ghane M, Ang MC, Cavallucci D, Kadir RA, Ng KW. Sorooshian, S. TRIZ trend of engineering system evolution: A review on applications, benefits, challenges and enhancement with computer-aided aspects. Computers & Industrial Engineering. 2022; 174, 108833. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2022.108833
• [26] Sheu DD, Chiu SC. Prioritized relevant trend identification for problem solving based on quantitative measures. Computers & Industrial Engineering. 2017; 107, 327-344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2016.03.028
• [27] Mann D. Emergent contradictions: A synthesis of TRIZ and complex systems theory. In N. LeonRovira (Ed.), Trends in Computer Aided Innovation. 2007; 250, 23-32, New York, Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-75456-7_3
• [28] Nahler HT, Gronauer B. (2016). Using enhanced nested function models for strategic product development. In Research and Practice on the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving (TRIZ). 2016; 55-75, Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31782-3_4