Transcript IE496 Industrial Engineering Internship Dr. Barnes March 17, 2008 Lecture # 8 Ethics – Part 2

IE496
Industrial Engineering
Internship
Dr. Barnes
March 17, 2008
Lecture # 8
Ethics – Part 2
Review of Ethics
Last time 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 shuttle)
This week
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
1.
2.
Line Drawing
Flow Charting (lines must have
directional arrowheads)
Supporting narrative and
1. 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.
• Negative paradigm.


Moral problems are placed along line in
accordance with where it is perceived that each
fall on a continuum.
“P” is placed where you believe problem fits
relative to entries.
Elementary line-drawing technique
Negative paradigm
(NP)
Positive paradigm
(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 continued –
Hypothetical Considerations
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Dump 5 ppm waste in lake; harmless, but
unusual taste.
Town’s water-treatment system can effectively
remove waste.
Town can remove waste with companypurchased equipment.
Town can remove waste with taxpayerpurchased equipment.
Occasional (rare) illness, lasts for an hour.
At 5 ppm people get fairly sick, lasts one week,
no long term effect.
Special equipment can reduce ppm to “1.”
Hypotheticals on line and
“problem” estimate
Negative paradigm
(NP)
6
5
Positive paradigm
(PP)
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 –

Info Source
Engineering Ethics, 2nd Edition, Charles B. Fleddermann,
Chapter 4, Pearson Prentice Hall, 2004.
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.
Ethical Problem Solving Techniques:
Addressing Airbus 330-300 Case
Study
By:
Joe Mathew
IE 491
University at Buffalo
April 22, 2005
Incident Summary





Airbus A330-300 departed Vancouver
Substantial amount of smoke and
vapor seen emitting from Engine 2
Emergency landing in Vancouver
Engine 2 shut down
Inspection showed fuel was leaking
Causal Factors
1. Incorrect entry on maintenance office duty board
• Did not follow trouble shooting manual (TSM)
• Unnecessarily removed LP fuel line from
fuel/oil heat exchanger
2. 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
Compliance with
TSM and AMM was
not achieved.
Positive Paradigm
P
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.
Flow Charting – Causal Factor 3
Preventive
fuel leak
inspection
needed on
aircraft
Proper
inspection with
use of elevated
platform?
No
Perform
inspection with
use of elevated
platform
Yes
High-Power
Engine Run
Performed?
Yes
Yes
Fuel Leak
Detection
Implemented?
No
Perform
High-Power Engine Run
No
Implement Fuel Leak
Detection
Preventive Fuel
Leak Inspection
Performed
Dharmy Bhatt
IE 491: Ethics Presentation
April 22, 2005
Bell’s Amusement Park
Tulsa, Oklahoma
Accident Summary




April 20, 1997 – Two roller coaster cars collided
on the Wildcat roller coaster
The two cars were going up a hill and an antirollback 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
Has the chain dog been
changed?
No
The Wildcat can
operate.
Yes
Has someone inspected the
changes?
No
A maintenance worker
must inspect the
changes.
No
Fix the height of the
“chain dog” and
inspect again.
Yes
Is the “chain log” at the proper
height?
Yes
The Wildcat can operate
properly.
Line Drawing-- Maintenance
Negative Paradigm
P
3
Documentation hinders
the performance of each
car.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Positive Paradigm
4
2
5
1
Proper documentation
exists and the roller
coaster is acceptable.
Every time The Wildcat breaks down, it is documented.
Operating procedure are followed for the most part.
Operators haven’t been trained at all.
Changes made to the car don’t need to be written down.
Proper part replacements should be followed.
Ethics Problem Solving:
Whiteshell Air Service Ltd.
Airplane Engine Failure
Theresa J Moehle
IE 491
April 22, 2005
Accident Summary:



Airplane departed Lac du Bonnet,
Manitoba without incident
After plane was leveled in air, large
backfire heard and loss of engine
power
Pilot 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
P
2
Airplane parts are
installed incorrectly
causing immediate,
fatal damage
3
1
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
Flow Chart: Failure to Properly Inspect Plane
Should plane be
inspected?
Have parts
been
replaced?
Yes
Inspect plane
before flying
No
Had last
Has pilot
Yes
Yes Inspect plane
Check within
noticed Irregular
before flying
400 hrs?
Sounds?
No
Inspect plane
before flying
No
Inspection
is not needed
Assignment
Work in groups to –
 Choose one problem/accident and e-mail
it to me to get my permission before you
start – sources of info on original class
“Schedule and Syllabus” document.
Earliest date and time will decide who get
problem if more that one group asks for it.
 Analyze problem/accident using both
techniques shown today.
 Present your analysis in class using PPT.
 Send me one copy of your electronic file
via e-mail.
Assignment - continued




Dates: April 14th, 21st, 28th in class
All reports due April 14th: one written
report and accompanying PowerPoint
slides per group – paper and electronic
copies to me; supporting material such as
diagrams or photos are useful
Presentation order announced April 14th
12 minutes per group, 4 minutes per
person
Groups
Group
Group
Group
Group
Group
Group
Group
Group
Group
Group
1: Anipindi, Awad, Bednowitz
2: Brown, Chandra, Chang
3: Cheng, Chung, Davis
4: Devendorf, Dooling, Frank
5: Henchey, Hyde, Indraputra
6: Jackson, Luo, Lyke
7: Markin, Mohd Yusof, Myers
8: Pedicone, Piecuch, Prok
9: Snyder, Stange, Stovers
10: Szalkowski, Willis, Worthy
The End
Questions??