14.1

CODE OF ETHICSCODE OF ETHICS

• Published by professional societies• National Society of Professional Engineers• American Society of Mechanical Engineers• Fundamental principles

- Must uphold the integrity, honor and dignity of the engineering profession by:

- Using their knowledge and skill for the enhancement of human welfare

- Being honest and impartial, and serving with fidelity the public, their employers and clients, and

- Strive to increase the competence and prestige of the engineering profession

• Fundamental canons

14.2

CODE OF ETHICSCODE OF ETHICS

• Fundamental canons- Hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public in the

performance of professional duties- Perform services only in areas of competence- Continue professional development throughout career and provide

opportunities for the professional and ethical development of the engineers supervised

- Act in professional manner for each employer and client, and avoid appearance of conflict of interest

- Build professional reputation on the merit of the services, and not compete unfairly with others

- Associate only with reputable persons or organizations- Issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner

ASME code of Ethics

14.3

KC Walkway CollapseKC Walkway Collapse

• On July 17, 1981, the Hyatt Regency Hotel in Kansas City, Missouri held a videotaped tea dance party in their atrium lobby.

• The hotel had only been open for approximately one year.• Many people were standing and dancing on the suspended walkways.• The connections supporting the ceiling rods that held up the second and

fourth-floor walkways across the atrium failed, and both walkways collapsed onto the crowded first-floor atrium below.

14.4

14.5

KC Walkway CollapseKC Walkway Collapse

• 114 people were killed, and over 200 injured. Millions of dollars in costs resulted from the collapse.

• A collapse occurred on October 14, 1979 while the hotel was under construction.

• Over 2700 square feet of the atrium roof collapsed because a roof connection failed.

• After this collapse, the engineering firm in charge promised to review all steel connections and requested on-site representation during construction.

• The owner rejected the request, due to the additional cost involved.

14.6

KC Walkway CollapseKC Walkway Collapse

• The fabricator did not want to have to thread the entire rod in order to install the washer and the nut.

• The revised design consisted of:- The top ends of the third and fourth floor support rods were

attached to the atrium roof.- The bottom ends went through the box beam where a washer and

nut were threaded on.

14.7

14.8

KC Walkway CollapseKC Walkway Collapse

• A second rod was attached to the box beam four inches from the first rod.

• The second floor walkway was suspended from the fourth floor walkway in a similar fashion.

14.9

14.10

14.11

14.12

14.13

14.14

14.15

• The fabricator, while in sworn testimony, claimed that his company had telephoned the engineering firm for change approval. The engineering firm declared they had not received the phone call.

• Even as originally designed, the walkways were barely capable of holding up the expected load, and would have failed to meet Kansas City building requirements.

• The Kansas City Building Code requires a minimum support value of 151 kN. The original design was capable of supporting 90 kN. With the design changes made during construction, the walkways would be supporting double that amount, or 180 kN, assuming the walkways were loaded at the maximum recommended weight limit.

14.16

ConsequencesConsequences

• 114 people were killed and over 200 injured.• Many principals involved lost engineering

licenses.• Engineers were found guilty of gross

negligence, misconduct, and unprofessional conduct in the practice of engineering.

• Expensive legal suits were settled out of court.

• Several firms involved went bankrupt.

14.17

CASE STUDIESCASE STUDIES

• From Engineering Digest, March 1964 Vol 3 No 6.• The cases show that it is tough to clearly determine what is

ethical and what is not. • There are often conflicts between what may be in your

employer’s best interest and what you conceive to be the ethical view.

14.18

CASE 1. THE EAGER APPLICANTCASE 1. THE EAGER APPLICANT

Roger is asked to interview an engineer who has applied for a position that Stardust Chemical Co. has in its process development department. The applicant’s resume discloses that he now works in process development for one of Stardust Chemical’s prime competitors.

When the engineer sits down in Roger’s office, the conversation soon comes around to the work that the applicant is currently doing. Warming to the subject, the applicant discloses some valuable information about the process that his present employer is now investigating.

After the interview is over, Rogers files two reports with his supervisor. The first details all of the information he has been able to gather about the secret processes. In the second he advises against hiring the engineer because he talks too much.

14.19

CASE 1. THE EAGER APPLICANTCASE 1. THE EAGER APPLICANT

• Is it ethical for Rogers to use the secret information if it was volunteered freely?

• Would it have been ethical if he had gotten the information by skillfully pumping the applicant?

14.20

CASE 2. SECOND GUESSING ON BIDSCASE 2. SECOND GUESSING ON BIDS

Benson is a project engineer involved in the construction of a new refining unit. The design calls for several heat exchangers of a special type. Benson sends drawings out for bids to six fabricators.

Five of the fabricators return quotes on the design as submitted. The sixth firm, Company F, redesigns the unit and shows how considerable money can be saved in fabrication. Company F’s accompanying bid is considerably lower than the others.

After approving Company F’s design, Benson resubmits the new design to the other five fabricators requesting a second bid. This time around, the five that have smaller engineering staff all submit lower bids than company F.

Benson goes along with the lowest bid. Should he?

14.21

CASE 2. SECOND GUESSING ON BIDSCASE 2. SECOND GUESSING ON BIDS

• Was it ethical to pass Company F’s design out for bids?

• Would it have been if this procedure was standard company practice?

14.22

CASE 3. SPY IN THE SKYCASE 3. SPY IN THE SKY

Flynn works for a chemical company and is asked to estimate production costs for a chemical that a competitor is producing. He can determine fairly accurately the type of process to use and the probable flow sheet.

The analysis shows however that the costs of production are very sensitive to the size of the plant. He needs a good estimate of capacity, which could be determined by estimating the sizes of the major pieces of equipment.

Flynn discovers that driving by the competitor’s plant, he gets a good view of the unit in question. With a camera, he takes a picture and can quickly size the distillation towers, but he does not know the number and size of the reactors

Flynn’s boss suggests he rents a plane and get the needed photos. Flynn does, and indeed gets the information sought after.

14.23

CASE 3. SPY IN THE SKYCASE 3. SPY IN THE SKY

• Is Aerial photography ethical?

• If the answer is no, should Flynn have turned down his Boss’s suggestion?

• Would you take these pictures if your boss asked you to?

• Are photos taken from the road ethical?