Ethics in Materials Engineering

Transcription

1 Ethics in Materials Engineering Dr. Parviz Yavari Dr. Ehsan Barjasteh Picture :

2 Contents 1.Ethics/ Morality/Laws 2.Ethics in Engineering 3.Ethics in material Engineering 4.Term Project 5.References

3 Learning Objectives (a) Introduction to ethical concepts, ethics in engineering particularly in material engineering (b) Understanding the consequences and effects of unethical behavior on the individual and society (c) Implementation of ethical principles to other engineering subjects, as well as personal and professional lives.

4 Ethics and Morality Ethics and Morality Related to right and wrong conduct, Often used interchangeably, NOT exactly the SAME Picture:

5 Ethics and Morality Morality: Refers to Moral Conduct defined by individuals in relation to right or wrong conduct Ethics: Refers to the Formal Study of moral conducts (rules defined by an external source such as Codes of Conduct in a workplace) and often called Moral Philosophy

6 Morality It comes from various sources: Parents Religion Peers Technology Etc. mkandermom/ethics/

7 Morality vs. Laws Action can be : Legal & Moral Designing a Airplane to be safe. Legal & Immoral At the pre-civil war in the US, Owning a slave. Illegal & Moral In order to help an injured person, parking in a no parking zone Illegal & Immoral innocent person being killed. engineering.sjsu.edu/e10/wp-content/uploads/ethics_in_eng_lec1_f2012.ppt ethics in engineering ppt

8 Ethics vs. Laws Picture below shows the differences between Ethics and Law Source:

9 Does Ethics Fits into Engineering? What do Engineers do? Build Products Such as cars, Airplanes, Bridges, Valves. Engineers are building new technologies and hence advance the society Develop Processes Such as process to distill crude oil to make it to a usable product Engineers changes how we live

10 What Could go wrong? The bridge fails if the bridge has an inadequate support. The gas tank might explode from a small incident if it is positioned too close to the bumper. Improper doses of medication can be produced If a medical instrument isn t accurate. Etc

11 Typical Ethical Issues Safety Acceptable risk Compliance Confidentiality Environmental health Data integrity Conflict of interest Honesty/Dishonesty Societal impact Fairness Accounting for uncertainty, etc.

12 Ethics/Ethical Reasoning Engineers make decisions on daily basis Serious consequences on people resulting from engineer s decisions What guide Decision Making for Engineers: Ethics and Ethical Reasoning

13 Ethics/Ethical Reasoning Ethical reasoning: A type of practical reasoning It affects certain social or life-form objectives, including: justice, equality, freedom, health and safety

14 Engineering and Ethics Engineering responsibilities: A) Social responsibilities Engineers build product and develop processes Society will be impacted by such product and processes in various ways B) Professional Responsibilities It is required by social responsibilities Any individual professionally has duty and obligation to the society

15 Engineering Ethics Engineering Has been one of core human activities Has large impact on society and delegate significant responsibility Engineers are often exposed to conflict situations: Should be capable of resolving conflicts based on ethical manners ABET (Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology ) defines the requirement for teaching engineering ethics Goal is to prepare students for ethical challenges Engineering ethics: Type: Applied ethics What does it do? Engineers has responsibility to the public, clients, employers and profession Engineering Ethics concentrates on set of standards that covers those responsibilities

16 Engineering Disasters The primary causes of engineering disasters are usually considered to be Human factors (including both 'ethical' failure and accidents) Design flaws (many of which are also the result of unethical practices) Materials failures Extreme conditions or environments (the most commonly and importantly)

17 Example: Failure Study A recent study conducted at the Swiss federal Institute of technology in Zurich analyzed: 800 cases of failure in which 504 people were killed, 592 people injured, and millions of dollars of damage incurred When engineers were at fault, the researchers classified the causes of failure as follows: Insufficient knowledge... 36% Underestimation of influence... 16% Ignorance, carelessness, negligence... 14% Forgetfulness, error... 13% Relying upon others without sufficient control... 9% Objectively unknown situation... 8% Choice of bad quality... 4%

18 Example: Failure Study It is evident that materials failure plays a major role in engineering disasters. The accidents related to materials failure are not just random occurrences, instead resulting mostly from poor materials engineering decisions that are always preventable. Ethical practices are essential

19 Materials Engineering vs. Ethics Role of material engineer is. Responding to a need by creating something along a certain set of guidelines (or specifications), which performs a given function. Such creation should perform its function without fail. The materials engineer must struggle to select materials in such a way as to avoid failure and, more importantly, the catastrophic failure that could result in the loss of property, damage to the environment of the user of that technology, and possible injury or loss of life.

20 Materials Engineering vs. Ethics Root cause of materials failure: A deficiency in materials engineering ethics is found to be one of the root causes Materials engineer are responsible to Their client or employer Their profession General public

21 Who is the Ethical Materials Engineer? An ethical material engineer is one who: Fulfills the terms of their contracts or agreements in a thorough and professional manner Promotes the education of young materials engineers within their field.

22 Who is the Ethical Materials Engineer? An ethical material engineer is one who: Avoids conflicts of interest, Does not attempt to misrepresent their knowledge so as to accept jobs outside their area of expertise, acts in the best interests of society and the environment,

23 Ford Pinto Case There were defects in gas tank, revealed by the crash test Test shows the rupture and explosion would happen if the rear-end accident happens while the speed is over 25 mph

24 Cost analysis of Dangerous design Cost-Benefit Analysis according to Ford: The unsafe design would cause: Ford estimated that 180 Burn Deaths 180 Serious burn injuries 2100 Burned vehicles per year Now they assumed: $200,000 per death $67,000 per injury $700 per vehicle

25 Cost analysis of Dangerous design Ford calculated that altering the part can cost $11.00 per car, therefore Capital to make safe Ford Pinot $12.5 million cars x $11 = $137 million What would be the legal costs not altering the parts 180 Deaths +180 Injured Burned Cars = $ 49.5 million

26 What happened? Over $450 million of lawsuits and personal injury filed against Ford The rear-end collisions resulted in over 500 deaths Ford got almost out of business after the lawsuits settled The story generated lack of trust to the company s products

27 Discussion of Pinto Case What went wrong? Who was/were responsible? What were the ethical or unethical decisions? If any? Describe the cost analysis by Ford?

28 Case Studies: Challenger Blew Up Many of the engineering disasters that have been witnessed in the last few decades in the US were due primarily to the fact that engineers or engineering managers made unethical choices in their work. In some cases, these choices were not simply doing something dishonest, but making a technical choice that was NOT based on the best technical information, but for some other, expedient reason (political, monetary, or simply the easier choice ).

29 The Incident January 28, 1986 Launch About 80 seconds after Launch

30 Challenger Model

31 First Damage In less than 1 second, smoke appeared at the ring joint, indicating that the rings are burnt and failed to seal.

32 First Damage: Post Effects The leak lasted only about 2 seconds then the shuttle rose. In less then a minute of ignition when Challenger was 6 miles up thick flames start evolving.

33 Last Damage Shuttle exploded and broke up in 75 seconds. Rockets crisscrossed and continued flying wildly.

34 The Investigation Why the Challenger Blew UP Engineers had all the data they needed. They knew cold O-Rings were likely to fail. Engineering management believed them and told NASA not to launch. NASA asked for the supporting data and engineers presented the data poorly, NASA was unconvinced. Engineering and management reversed their position and approved the launch.

35 Chart by Rogers Commission Showing all launches Temperature at Challenger Launch, 32ºF

36 O-Rings They are Fuel Tank joint but too sensitive in winter. Mid1985: Scorching becomes noticeable Analysis shows worse on colder days Engineer Roger Boisjoly warns superiors WE COULD LOSE A FLIGHT August 1985: NASA Meeting No changes please.

37 Night Before Launch too cold, delay launch! Until 53ºF and it was 29ºF Every single launch in cold temperatures showed damage Competition with Russians to be the first to observe Halley s comet.

38 Result The cold O-Rings failed, system exploded and the crew died. R.I.P.

39 Term Project Pick an example of a materials engineering failure or disaster of some type (i.e. space shuttle(s), nuclear plant failure, plane crashes, building collapse), preferably occurred in the last ten years

40 Term Project Describe the practice in the questionable case study in details Discuss what ethical issues might have been at least partly responsible for the failure. In other words, create a failure analysis report for the incident that includes: What has/have failed / Why failed /Possible corrective actions (How to make it not fail) / Who was at fault, and why Describe how a lack of "professionalism" or "conscientiousness" may have helped lead to this failure.

41 References A. Engineering Ethics. By Davis, publisher: Ashgate Publishing Co., B. "To Engineer is Human: The Role of Failure in Successful Design by Henry Petroski, Publisher: Vintage Books, 1992, C. "When Technology Fails" by Neil Schlager, publisher: Cengage Gale, 1994 D. Engineering Ethics: Balancing Cost, Schedule, and Risk - Lessons Learned from the Space Shuttle Pinkus, R. L. B, publisher: Cambridge University Press, 1997

42 Challenger Space Shuttle Disaster Like all space shuttles, Challenger had two solid-fuel booster rockets that used rubberized propellant, made by Thiokol. The booster rocket tubes were made in pieces, assembled close to the site. Tubes were connected using rubber O-rings and putty between the sections. The day of the launch (January 28, 1986) was cold and windy (~ 18 earlier, ~28-29 F at launch). Engineers warned that seals were fragile in cold weather. Thiokol management initially supported engineers recommendation to postpone the launch. NASA staff opposed a delay, arguing that if the primary O-ring failed the secondary O-ring would still seal. This assertion was unproven, and was in any case an illegitimate argument for a Criticality 1 component. (it was forbidden to rely on a backup for a Criticality 1 part).

43 Challenger Space Shuttle Disaster NASA did not know that Thiokol had earlier recorded concerns about the effects of the cold on the O-rings. Because of NASA opposition, Thiokol management reversed itself and recommended that the launch proceed as scheduled. In the aftermath of the accident opinions were expressed that NASA managers frequently evaded safety regulations to assure that launches were on schedule. Thiokol engineers argued that low overnight temperatures of 18 F ( 8 C) the evening prior to launch would almost certainly result in booster temperatures below their redline of 40 F (4 C). Ice had accumulated all over the launch pad, raising concerns that ice could damage the shuttle upon lift-off. The temperature on the day of the launch was far lower than had been the case with previous launches: 28 or 29 F as high as 35 F). Previously, the coldest at 53 F (12 C).