ethics – part 2 ie491 october 31, 2005. review of ethics last week we looked briefly at – the...
TRANSCRIPT
Ethics – Part 2
IE491October 31, 2005
Review of Ethics
Last week we looked briefly at – the origins of ethics Theories of Ethics (Utilitarianism, Duty Ethics, Rights Ethics, Virtue Ethics) Engineering as a profession Codes of ethics (IIE, NSPE, Order of an Engineer) Ethics cases (e.g., space shuttles)
This week
Show how to analyze problems from an ethical viewpoint.
Analyzing Ethical Problems
1st Step – completely understand all issues involved and enumerate them. Three categories of issues – Factual – what is actually known about a
case. Conceptual – the meaning or
applicability of an idea. Moral – which moral principle is
applicable to the situation.
Two analysis techniques
Line Drawing
Flow Charting
Line Drawing
Useful for situations in which the applicable moral principles are clear, but there seems to be a great deal of “gray area” about which ethical principle applies. Polar opposites are established.
Positive paradigm (example, pattern). Negative paradigm.
Moral problems are placed along line in accordance with where each fall on a continuum.“P” is placed where you believe problem fits relative to entries.
Elementary line-drawing technique
Negative paradigm Positive paradigm (NP) (PP)
Example - Problem 1
Dispose of slightly hazardous waste into lake. Water source for nearby town. EPA limit 10 ppm. Average concentration of disposal – 5 ppm – Expect no health problems. Person not able to detect (taste) compound.
Problem 1 – hypothetical considerations
1. Dump 5 ppm waste in lake; harmless, but unusual taste.
2. Town’s water-treatment system can effectively remove waste.
3. Town can remove waste with company-purchased equipment.
4. Town can remove waste with taxpayer-purchased equipment.
5. Occasional (rare) illness, lasts for an hour.6. At 5 ppm people get fairly sick, lasts one
week, no long term effect.7. Special equipment can reduce ppm to “1.”
Hypotheticals on line and “problem” estimate
Negative paradigm Positive paradigm (NP) (PP)
6 5 4 1 P 7 2,3
Flow Charting
Helpful when there is a sequence of events or a series of consequences that flows from each decision. Gives a visual picture and readily allows one to see results of each decision.
Elementary flow chart
Operation
Decision
Example - Problem 2
Should Union Carbide build a plant at Bhophal? Investigate –
Laws. Safety standards. Cost considerations.
Union Carbide -Flow Chart
Please read –
Section 4.5: Conflict Problems 1st - Conflicting moral choices, but one is
obviously more significant than the other. 2nd – “Creative Middle Way,” an attempt at
a compromise that will work for everyone. 3rd – When 1 and 2 don’t work, bite the
bullet, use your “gut feelings” and make best possible choice from information available.
Section 4.6: Bribery/Acceptance of Gifts Bribery never acceptable.
Info source
Engineering Ethics, 2nd Edition, Charles B. Fleddermann, Chapter 4, Pearson Prentice Hall, 2004.
Ethical Problem Solving Techniques:
Addressing Airbus 330-300 Case Study
By:Joe Mathew
IE 491University at Buffalo
April 22, 2005
Incident SummaryAirbus A330-300 departed Vancouver Substantial amount of smoke and vapor seen emitting from Engine 2Emergency landing in Vancouver Engine 2 shut downInspection showed fuel was leaking
Causal Factors1. Incorrect entry on maintenance office duty board
Did not follow trouble shooting manual (TSM) Unnecessarily removed LP fuel line from fuel/oil
heat exchanger2. Unfamiliarity with Equipment
Retainer hidden from view Did not use Aircraft Maintenance Manual
(AMM)3. Engine vibration caused detachment of fuel/oil
heat exchanger LP fuel line Substantial leak from Engine 2
Line Drawing – Causal Factor 1, 2
Negative Paradigm Positive Paradigm
Compliance with TSM and AMM was not achieved.
Compliance with TSM and AMM was achieved.
Negative Paradigm: The workers do not follow the Trouble Shooting Manual and the Aircraft Maintenance Manual resulting in troubleshooting and performing maintenance without reference
Positive Paradigm: The workers followed the Trouble Shooting Manual and Aircraft Maintenance Manual so that all troubleshooting and maintenance is performed with proper reference and guidance.
P
Flow Charting – Causal Factor 3
Preventive fuel leak inspection needed on aircraft
Proper inspection with use of elevated platform?
High-Power Engine Run Performed?
Fuel Leak Detection Implemented?
Perform High-Power Engine Run
Implement Fuel LeakDetection
Perform inspection with use of elevated platform
Preventive Fuel Leak Inspection Performed
YesYes Yes
NoNoNo
Dharmy BhattIE 491: Ethics PresentationApril 22, 2005
Bell’s Amusement ParkTulsa, Oklahoma
Accident Summary
April 20, 1997 – Two roller coaster cars collided on the Wildcat roller coasterThe two cars were going up a hill and an anti-rollback device failed to keep the first car on the track and it slipped back and crashed into the car behind it.The roller coaster was inspected two weeks before this accident.One person was killed and five others were injured.
Causal Factors
1. The “chain dog” was riding up on the edge of the chain trough.
If the chain rides up the side of the car and onto the left leg of the chain near the top of the hill, the chain can disengage and the car could slip.
2. Maintenance records/maintenance of the roller coaster.
There was no documentation for scheduled or nonscheduled maintenance of The Wildcat, or for operating procedures.
Flowchart – The “chain dog” Factor
The Wildcat can operate.
Has the chain dog been changed?
No
Has someone inspected the changes?
A maintenance worker must inspect the
changes.
No
Yes
Is the “chain log” at the proper height?
Fix the height of the “chain dog” and inspect again.
The Wildcat can operate properly.
No
Yes
Yes
Line Drawing-- MaintenanceNegative Paradigm Positive Paradigm
Documentation hinders the performance of each car.
Proper documentation exists and the roller coaster is acceptable.
P
1. Every time The Wildcat breaks down, it is documented.2. Operating procedure are followed for the most part.3. Operators haven’t been trained at all.4. Changes made to the car don’t need to be written down.5. Proper part replacements should be followed.
123 54
Ethics Problem Solving:Whiteshell Air Service Ltd. Airplane Engine Failure
Theresa J MoehleIE 491
April 22, 2005
Accident Summary:
Airplane departed Lac du Bonnet, Manitoba without incidentAfter plane was leveled in air, large backfire heard and loss of engine powerPilot landed plane in swampy area with minor and severe injuries to passengers
Casual Factors
Incorrect installation of airplane parts Cylinder push rod tube Valve adjustment screw protrusion beyond
limits Caused damage to valve train – exhaust valve
would not open overtime
Failure to properly inspect airplane Field Barometric Power Reference Check Valve clearance checks on 400-hr schedule
Line Drawing: Incorrect Installation of Parts
NP PP
Airplane parts are installed incorrectly causing immediate,
fatal damage
Airplane parts are installed
correctly
1. Parts are installed incorrectly, but corrected immediately
2. Parts are installed incorrectly, and cause minor damage overtime
3. Parts are installed incorrectly, but cause no damage overtime
12 3P
Flow Chart: Failure to Properly Inspect Plane
Should plane be inspected?
Have parts been
replaced?
No
Yes
Inspect plane before flying
Had last Check within
400 hrs?
Yes
Inspect planebefore flying
Has pilot noticed Irregular
Sounds?
Inspectionis not needed
Inspect plane before flying
No No
Yes
Assignment
Work in group to – choose problem and get my permission before you start – sources of info on original class schedule and syllabus document. analyze problem using both techniques shown today. present your analysis in class using PPT. send me one copy of your electronic file via e-mail.
Due November 28th.
Groups 1 - 4
Group 1 – Beh, Brewster, Frankenfield
Group 2 – Geldard, Haseley, Henry, Hwang
Group 3 – Jain, Kapoor, KeumGroup 4 – Kingsley, Koperski, Lottes,
Mufalli
Groups 5 - 8
Group 5 – Muller, Munch, OhGroup 6 – Olsen, Oropeza, Pandit,
PatelGroup 7 – Pelchy, Saputra, SrinivaGroup 8 – Swanson, Thornton, Ward,
ZimmermannPresentation order will be randomly
drawn and announced on Nov. 28th.
The End
Questions??