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??