In the modern world, the role of engineers and engineering as a profession has an enormous impact on our everyday lives. Almost everything we touch was designed by engineers; from the cars we drive to the houses we live in. It is essential, then, that a system is in place to ensure engineering decisions are handled with moral integrity and safety in mind. This is known as ethics. On some level, all engineering decisions are governed by an overarching code of ethics in the form of a code of conduct put in place by engineering institutions. These require the professional engineers under their authority to act in the best interest of the public and public welfare.
The purpose of this essay is to discuss the NASAs handling of ethical issues in
…show more content…
NASA’s engineers were of the opinion that liquid fuel boosters were the best, and more importantly safest, design as they were controllable, among other factors. It was eventually decided by the Office of Management and Budget, however, that the cheaper solid rocket boosters (SRBs) would result in lower production costs and were therefore the best choice. [2] This initial decision presented an ethical dilemma in that keeping costs down took priority over potential safety concerns, but it was a calculated risk that was not directly to blame for the accident. A company named Morton-Thiokol won the contract to build the SRB for the …show more content…
The known cause of the explosion was the erosion of O-rings in the SRBs due to combustion gases which then contacted the adjacent tank, causing structural failure. In a design review by McDonnell Douglas in 1971, it was suggested that it would not be possible to abort if a burnthrough of the O-rings occurred, which was exactly what happened. Further testing of field joints (the joints between each SRB section in which the O-rings were located) by engineers at the Marshall Space Flight Center also suggested that the design of the field joints was unacceptable. Despite repeated warnings, the manager of the SRB project, George Hardy, did not pass on these concerns and the design was finalised and accepted for flight in 1980. [3]
As part of the presidential commission responsible for investigating the disaster, Richard Feynman famously demonstrated the effect of freezing temperatures on the O-rings. He found that, upon placing the material in ice water, it became less resilient to pressure and did not return to its original shape when pressure was removed [4]. This is crucial because, on the day before the eventual launch, engineers and managers from Morton-Thiokol had a conference call with NASA managers to discuss the unusually cold forecast for the following day. Thiokol engineers (and managers, initially) re-expressed their
for the workers of the company. All the blame is not due to poor design and construction flaws, but to the oil companies for not teaching the employees about the system. This disaster could have been prevented if the engineers and oil companies were not blinded by their ignorant beliefs that the Ocean Ranger was unsinkable. Citations 1. http://www.canadianheritage.org/reproductions/21050.htm.
...ve material, and detonators. As a result, the bomb casing was destroyed; most of the explosive material burned up, but a case of four spare detonators and the nuclear capsule were recovered undamaged. Since the components were separated, it was impossible for a nuclear detonation to occur. Had these safety measures not been put in place, the situation could very well have been much worse.
The Challenger disaster of 1986 was a shock felt around the country. During liftoff, the shuttle exploded, creating a fireball in the sky. The seven astronauts on board were killed and the shuttle was obliterated. Immediately after the catastrophe, blame was spread to various people who were in charge of creating the shuttle and the parts of the shuttle itself. The Presidential Commission was decisive in blaming the disaster on a faulty O-ring, used to connect the pieces of the craft. On the other hand, Harry Collins and Trevor Pinch, in The Golem at Large, believe that blame cannot be isolated to any person or reason of failure. The authors prove that there are too many factors to decide concretely as to why the Challenger exploded. Collins and Pinch do believe that it was the organizational culture of NASA and Morton Thiokol that allowed the disaster. While NASA and Thiokol were deciding whether to launch, there was not a concrete reason to postpone the mission.
To clarify, the Engineering Code of Ethics is the set of rules established by the National Society of Professional Engineers that all engineers are expected to adhere to. In essence, the fundamental tenets of this code are that all engineers are expected to prioritize public safety, as well as be honest with their clients and the general public while only doing work that they are qualified to do. (“Code of Ethics,” n.d.). The reason this code is crucial in this case is because it offers guiding principles for the men and women who are in charge of so many of the various structures and buildings that are used by everyone in society. If the engineering population were to fail to adhere to this code, many people’s lives would be put in jeopardy; buildings might crumble, planes may crash, and bridges could collapse. This means that this code serves to keep engineers in check so that the world maintains stability, therefore its importance cannot be emphasized enough. Furthermore, since this code is nationally recognized, if a company’s engineers were to violate any aspect of it, it would be seen nation-wide as a misuse of power for the sake
The National Society of Professional Engineers Code of Ethics lays out guidelines and standards to which all engineers should abide when making professional decisions and communicating with their peers and the public. Ethics and communications played a large role in the cause of the event and the end result of the mission. The following section will discuss the ethics of the events that transpired prior to the launch, the communication of the crews and the NASA public relations office, and the ethics of the actions taken by the engineers after the incident.
Safety in the ethics and industry of aerospace technology is of prime importance for preventing tragic malfunctions and crashes. Opposed to automobiles for example, if an airplane breaks down while in mid-flight, it has nowhere to go but down. And sadly it will often go down “hard” and with a high probability of killing people. The Engineering Code of Ethics states first and foremost that, “Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public.” In the aerospace industry, this as well holds very true, both in manufacturing and in air safety itself. Airline safety has recently become a much-debated topic, although arguments over air safety and travel have been going ...
...nciples of engineering; in doing so, they will aid in the protection of society by having a high standard of ethics, honesty, and integrity. In order to become a world-class engineering student, I will have to continue to be conscious of academic dishonest behavior, alerting my professors if I am witness to its occurrence and deterring myself from it, in addition to familiarizing myself with the professional ethical codes related to engineering as engineers are expected to exhibit these fundamental principles when fulfilling their professional duties.
I believe that Roger Boisjoly act accordingly to his ethical obligations. First, he acted accordingly to the ACM code of ethics by recognizing and informing their superiors of the problems that he had encounter with the O-rings which. Although his findings did not stop NASA from launching the Challenger, Boisjoly try until the very last minute to stop the flight because he knew that at very low temperatures, the O-rings were going to be seriously compromise. Furthermore, he was transparent and honest with the presidential commission. He gave accounts of everything he did that could have prevented the disaster, unfortunately, this cause the end of his career in NASA.
Engineers and scientists began trying to find what went wrong almost right away. They studied the film of the take-off. When they studied the film, they noticed a small jet of flame coming from inside the casing for one of the rocket boosters. The flame got bigger and bigger. It started to touch a strut that connected the booster to the big fuel tank attached to the space shuttle. About two or three seconds later, hydrogen began leaking from the gigantic fuel tank. About seventy-two seconds after take-off, the hydrogen caught on fire and the booster swung around. That punctured the fuel tank, which caused a big explosion.
After the accident, a full-scale investigation was launched by the United States National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). It concluded that the accident was caused by metal fatigue exacerbated by crevice corrosion, the corrosion is exacerbated by the salt water and the age of the aircraft was already 19 years old as the plane operated in a salt water environment.
Ethics is the moral behavior that guides our actions; it motivates us in our personal behavior and is relevant in a business setting as well. Many organizations have set forth a set of guidelines known as a “Code of Ethics”. The Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, being one of these organizations, has set forth their code as a requirement for students and engineer members to adhere to. Heading towards a career in electrical engineering I choose this organization to elaborate on for my ethics project.
Is the field of practical ethics and method of moral principles that apply to the practice of engineering. The field studies decisions confronting individuals and organizations engaged in engineering and sets the responsibilities by engineers to society, to their clients, and to the profession. Bas...
Engineers design, build or maintain applications and systems to solve various societal problems. Their behaviors thus have a non-negligible impact on human development. Oftentimes, however, engineers are faced with the dilemma to choose between compromising their code of ethics and threatening their promising careers. It is important that engineers deem public welfare as a supreme concern and stand their ground so that they will report any observed situations that potentially can harm public safety to their superiors. The Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) case study is a good example of engineers being responsible with society in that they attempted multiple times to inform their supervisors in management about their concerns with the possible imminent system failure of BART. Even though their voices were ignored and they were fired by the company in the end, they made the passengers realize the probable dangers underneath this regional rail service. Consequently, on October 2nd, 1972, as a result of Automatic Train Control (ATC) failure, a BART train overshot the station at Fremont and wounded several people. In order to prevent these tragic accidents from happening, the BART case needs to be further examined for deeper understanding of the problem. This paper will use deontological ethical framework to address the cause of BART train system failure and recommend feasible plans to avert similar tragedies from occurring in the future to BART employees. Therefore, not only engineers, but also managers and board of directors should be educated about ethics and should be familiar with basic technical knowledge regarding their business.
McLaren, B. (2010, July 22). The ethical responsibility of engineers and the rest of us, too [Web log article]. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brian-d-mclaren/the-ethical-responsibilit_b_653812.html
Engineering ethics can be described as moral principles that are applied to the engineering practice (Van et al, 2011). Engineering bodies, such as the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, conducts field examines and set obligations that engineers are supposed to fulfill, to their clients, society and professi...