Critical Thinking · Continuous Assessment 1

Problem Solving Using Six Thinking Hats

Name
Sanavi Shedge
PRN
26070127075
Branch
Robotics and Automation
Division
A3
Subject
Critical Thinking
Faculty
Prof. Riddhiben Pankhadiwala
01

Explanation of the Six Thinking Hats framework

The Six Thinking Hats methodology, formulated by Dr. Edward de Bono, is an essential parallel critical thinking framework designed to steer groups or individuals away from destructive adversarial arguments and redirect them into holistic collaborative brainstorming. By metaphorically putting on distinct coloured hats sequentially, thinkers view an identical engineering issue from isolated, focused perspectives.

White Hat

Facts & Information

Focuses entirely on raw data, verifiable parameters, historical evidence, and pinpointing exact gaps in our current information database.

Blue Hat

Process & Control

Acts as the conductor of the cognitive orchestra. It outlines the strategic roadmap, sets operational objectives, ensures structural track-keeping, and synthesizes overall conclusions.

Red Hat

Feelings & Intuition

Grants immediate, unfiltered validation to raw human emotions, fears, institutional anxieties, and intuitive gut feelings without requiring any logical justification.

Black Hat

Caution & Risk Analysis

Operates as the logical, objective critic. It intentionally illuminates operational threats, potential design breakdowns, financial limits, and structural hazards.

Yellow Hat

Benefits & Optimistic Value

Focuses on the positive attributes of a proposal, mapping long-term utility, operational efficiencies, and systemic upside.

Green Hat

Creativity & Actionable Solutions

Ignites unconventional problem-solving, innovative engineering models, out-of-the-box design shifts, and functional backup contingency paths.

02

Chosen case scenario

Case Scenario 1

Smart Campus Waste-Sorting System

A large engineering college intends to establish a drastically cleaner, circular ecosystem and systematically reduce landfill waste. Currently, students routinely discard miscellaneous plastic bottles, coffee cups, metal cans, food waste, and paper scraps indiscriminately into standard shared dustbins throughout the premises.

The college administration proposes deploying an autonomous, mobile Smart Waste-Sorting System. This robotic rover would move around campus gathering trash from designated points, identify waste materials utilizing advanced computer vision cameras and AI models, and automatically sort them into segregated internal compartments for specialized recycling.

However, the development team faces multi-layered engineering and structural roadblocks:

  • Crushed or soiled trash
  • Safe autonomous navigation
  • Dense student crowds
  • Scaling steps
  • Monsoonal rain
  • Limited institutional budget
  • Student apathy
03

The six hats, applied

White Hat — Facts and Information

Hat 1

Purpose To focus on objective information, data, and facts related to the problem.

We evaluate the current campus layout using verified infrastructural telemetry, measurable waste flow parameters, and identified gaps in environmental datasets.

Focus

1What do we know about the case scenario?

Context
A multi-acre educational institute attempting to implement a zero-waste policy and optimize material recovery pipelines.
Baseline Habits
Commensals toss heterogeneous refuse (polyethylene containers, paperboard cups, aluminium tins, organic scraps) into uniform, non-segregated receptacles.
Project Blueprint
A self-navigating, wheeled vehicular unit equipped with optical arrays and neural networks to capture, sort, and isolate trash items on the go.
Hard Parameters
Obstructed paths, variable terrain surfaces, high pedestrian densities during class shift changes, seasonal heavy downpours, rigid budget limits, and general student non-compliance.

2What information is missing?

  • Exact breakdown percentages of recyclable vs. compostable materials currently discarded daily.
  • Detailed structural blueprints detailing walkway load capacities, elevator load limits, and exact dimensions of doorways.
  • The precise capital expenditure allocation for the initial build versus operational costs over three years.
  • Minimum sensor latency requirements, exact required ingress protection (IP) codes for water resistance, and torque profiles for the drivetrain components.
Question

1What are the facts we have, and what facts do we still need?

Facts we have
Unsorted disposal tendencies, an architectural concept for an optical-sorting rover, and explicit operational bottlenecks.
Facts we still need
Volumetric waste patterns across different seasons, local power grid access points for recharging, and strict safety clearance dimensions for campus pathways.

Red Hat — Feelings and Intuition

Hat 2

Purpose To express gut feelings, emotions, and intuition without needing to justify them.

We detail our instinctive human reactions, internal team apprehensions, and initial impressions regarding system viability without using mathematical models.

Focus

1How do we feel about this case scenario?

Intrigued
The concept of developing a high-tech robotic solution for local environmental issues is highly motivating and builds institutional pride.
Intimidated & stressed
The scope feels bloated and overly complex for a single device. Expecting a single machine to successfully maneuver tight stairwells, process wet organic waste, survive downpours, and avoid accidents on a shoestring budget feels unrealistic.
Doubtful
A lingering suspicion that students will ignore the machine entirely unless forced by external rules.

2Will I be able to solve it?

Yes, provided we realign the system boundaries — moving away from a multi-terrain vehicle toward a distributed network of specialized sub-systems.

Question

1What is our gut reaction while trying to solve this problem?

Our primary instinct tells us that a complex mobile mechanism will suffer frequent sensor clouding and mechanical jams under real campus conditions unless we dramatically simplify the physical sorting interface.

Black Hat — Caution and Risk

Hat 3

Purpose To identify potential risks, dangers, drawbacks, and why something might not work.

We systematically map structural system vulnerabilities, critical component failures, environmental hazards, and fiscal deficits.

Focus

1What could go wrong?

  • Oily residues and moisture patches from food waste could smear across lens surfaces, completely blinding the object recognition layers.
  • The kinetic mass of the vehicle could pose an active collision hazard to students distracted by smartphones in tight corridors.
  • Traversing uneven terrain with shifting internal fluid weights could lead to balance loss, physical chassis damage, or motor stalls.
  • High humidity and sudden rainfall could compromise unsealed wiring harnesses, causing complete electronic failure.

2What are the potential obstacles or problems?

  • Procuring specialized multi-jointed arms and high-resolution spatial depth sensors will easily drain the project's tight funding allotment.
  • Deformed metal shapes and highly adhesive food waste might physically jam the sorting mechanisms and gate switches.
  • Persistent user indifference resulting in intentional system abuse or incorrect item insertion.
Question

1What are the potential downsides, problems, and risks involved while trying to solve them?

System vulnerability
Frequent mechanical blockages caused by irregular, sticky objects slowing down the operation.
Public liability risk
Tripping hazards along emergency evacuation paths or unexpected collisions in crowded areas.
Financial vulnerability
Spending the entire budget on advanced mechanical legs before refining the core sorting software.
Climatic risk
Corrosion and short circuits caused by moisture seepage during heavy downpours.

Yellow Hat — Benefits and Value

Hat 4

Purpose To focus on the positive aspects, benefits, and value of an idea or proposal.

We emphasize the structural, ecological, economic, and educational values derived from a successful rollout.

Focus

1What are the advantages?

  • Dramatically increases the pure recovery value of campus recyclables by preventing cross-contamination at the point of disposal.
  • Alleviates repetitive physical labor and mitigates biological contact risks for the university's maintenance staff.
  • Serves as an ongoing, open-source educational laboratory for engineering students specializing in embedded control, machine learning, and kinematics.

2What is the potential upside?

  • Establishes the university as a prominent forward-thinking hub for sustainable technology applications.
  • Generates an auxiliary revenue stream by selling highly sorted, industrial-grade plastic and metal directly to processing facilities.
  • Fosters an ongoing community awareness regarding waste footprints and automated green solutions.
Question

1What value does it create for the case scenario?

It turns a scattered operational waste issue into a highly efficient material recovery cycle, seamlessly combining environmental goals, hands-on academic research, and long-term budget savings.

Green Hat — Creativity and Ideas

Hat 5

Purpose To stimulate new ideas, possibilities, and alternative solutions.

We introduce alternative structural configurations, hardware modifications, and operational contingency systems.

Focus

1What new ideas or creative solutions can we generate?

Distributed sorting network
Utilize simple, low-cost autonomous cart units strictly for moving pre-bagged waste to a heavy-duty, grid-powered Central Sorting Depot equipped with conveyor belts and advanced hyperspectral sensors.
Ground-level transit optimization
Restrict the robot's navigation map entirely to flat pathways, continuous ramps, and cargo elevators, removing the need for costly stair-climbing gear.
Pre-separation drainage inlets
Install non-mechanical static dump points featuring integrated fluid collection trays so students can pour out drinks before dropping containers into the bins.
Digital engagement tokens
Deploy a campus-wide smartphone application that scans barcodes on the trash bins, awarding cafeteria discounts or printing credits to students who pre-sort correctly.

2What are some different perspectives?

Behavior-first design perspective
Instead of engineering a machine to handle messy, mixed trash, use clever structural design cues and digital rewards to clean up the trash before the robot ever touches it.
Modular component architecture
Break down the design into separate, self-contained functional packages (mobility base, waste holding bin, sorting head) instead of building a single complicated machine.
Question

1What is our primary plan to solve the case scenario?

Create a split-system architecture: deploy lightweight, simple collection carts operating exclusively along ramp-accessible paths during low-traffic periods, delivering waste to a stationary sorting station. Pair this with static sorting bins featuring liquid drains and a student rewards app to reduce input contamination.

2What is our alternative plan if the primary plan fails?

Fixed smart enclosures + centralized separation facility
If moving robots prove too dangerous in dense crowds or too expensive to ruggedize, cancel the mobile units completely. Instead, place solar-powered compacting trash stations across campus and have human workers move the compacted bags to a centralized automated separation room.

Blue Hat — Process and Control

Hat 6

Purpose To manage and organize the thinking process, set objectives, and ensure the discussion stays on track.

We lay out the conceptual evaluation matrix, synthesize our absolute findings, and formulate a clear development timeline.

Focus

1What is the agenda?

Methodically dissect the operational aspects of the automated sorting system using the Six Hats framework to systematically resolve mobility, recognition, financial, and usage bottlenecks.

2What is the order of the hats we plan to use?

  1. White · Information
  2. Blue · Process
  3. Red · Intuition
  4. Black · Constraints
  5. Yellow · Upsides
  6. Green · Innovation

3What are the conclusions?

  • Designing a single all-terrain machine that climbs stairs, separates messy trash, and balances high costs is inherently high-risk and mechanically inefficient.
  • The most reliable strategy is a split system (simple transit carts + a high-power stationary sorting hub) enhanced by ramp-restricted mapping and an app-based rewards program.
Question

1What is our thinking process?

  1. Audit established facts and dataset gaps
  2. Map the cognitive roadmap
  3. Express immediate emotional responses
  4. Rigorously catalog potential system failures
  5. Identify strategic value drivers
  6. Innovate alternative configurations
  7. Establish an actionable timeline

2How should we proceed?

  1. Phase 1

    Months 1–3

    Design and test the stationary optical classification module using real campus trash samples; install non-mechanical liquid-draining bins.

  2. Phase 2

    Months 4–6

    Assemble a basic, low-profile transport chassis running on simplified ramp-only path logic with off-peak timing.

  3. Phase 3

    Months 7+

    Introduce the student application and run weatherproofing tests in real rain conditions before deploying the system campus-wide.

04

Conclusions

Rejected approach

One all-terrain machine. Designing a single rover that climbs stairs, separates messy trash, and balances high costs is inherently high-risk and mechanically inefficient.

Primary plan

A split system. Simple transit carts on ramp-restricted maps feeding a high-power stationary sorting hub, enhanced by draining bins and an app-based rewards program.

Fallback plan

Fixed smart enclosures. Solar-powered compacting stations across campus, with human workers moving compacted bags to a centralized automated separation room.