This document provides information about engineering as social experimentation. It discusses how experimentation plays an important role in engineering design. Engineers conduct experiments and tests at various design stages to evaluate products. Engineering projects involve some uncertainty like standard experiments but lack experimental control and informed consent. Engineers have responsibilities as experimenters to protect safety, provide relevant information, ensure moral autonomy, and accept accountability. Codes of ethics provide guidance for engineers but have limitations. Laws and standards also influence engineering while balancing various factors. The document uses the Challenger disaster as a case study of engineering ethics issues.

1. Unit – III
ENGINEERING AS SOCIAL
EXPERIMENTATION

2. ENGINEERING AS SOCIAL
EXPERIMENTATION
 Engineering as Experimentation.
 Engineers as responsible Experimenters.
 Codes of Ethics.
 A Balanced Outlook on Law.

3. ENGINEERING AS
EXPERIMENTATION
 Experimentation (Preliminary tests or Simulations) plays a
important role in the design of a product or process.
 Experimentation refers the activity, process or practice of making
experiments
 In all stages of converting a new engineering concept into a design
like, First rough cut design,
 Usage of different types of materials and processes,
 Detailed design,
 Further stages of work design and
 The finished product,
 Experiments and tests are conducted to evaluate the product.
Modifications are made based on the outcome of these experiments.

4. Engineering Projects VS. Standard Experiments
SIMILARITIES TO STANDARD EXPERIMENTS
 Partial ignorance
 The project is usually executed in partial ignorance.
 Uncertainties exist in the model assumed.
 The behavior of materials purchased is uncertain and not constant
 Uncertainty
 The final outcomes of projects are also uncertain, as in experiments.
Some times unintended results, side effects (bye-products), and
unsafe operation have also occurred.
 Continuous monitoring
 Monitoring continually the progress and gaining new knowledge are
needed before, during, and after execution of project as in the case of
experimentation.

5. SIMILARITIES TO STANDARD
EXPERIMENTS
 Learning from the past
 Engineers normally learn from their own prior designs and infer
from the analysis of operation and results .
 The absence of interest and channels of communication, ego in not
seeking information, guilty upon the failure, fear of legal actions, and
mere negligence have caused many a failure.
 Eg: Titanic lacked sufficient number of life boats—it had only 825
boats for the actual passengers of 2227, the capacity of the ship being
3547!
 In the emergent situation, all the existing life boats could not be
launched. Forty years back, another steamship Arctic met with same
tragedy due to the same problem in the same region. But the lesson
was learned .

6. DISIMILARITIES TO STANDARD EXPERIMENTS
Experimental Control
 Members for two groups should be selected in a standard
experimental control ie.,Group A and Group B. The members
of the group ‘A’ should be given the special experimental
treatment. The group ‘B’ do not receive the same though they are
in the same environment. This group is called the ‘control group’
 Though it is not possible in engineering but for the projects
which are confirmed to laboratory experiments.
 Because, in engineering the experimental subjects are human
beings who are out of the control of the experimenter
 So An engineer has to work only with the past data available with
various groups who use the products.

7. DISIMILARITIES TO STANDARD EXPERIMENTS
Informed Consent
 Engineering experimentation is viewed as Societal Experiment since the
subject and the beneficiary are human beings. When new medicines
have been tested, it should be informed to the persons who
undergo the test.
 They have moral and legal rights to know about the fact which is based
on “informed consent” before take part in the experiment.
Engineering must also recognize these rights.
 Informed consent has two main principles such as knowledge and
voluntariness
 Knowledge: The persons who are put under the experiment has to
be given all the needed information to make an appropriate
decision
 Voluntariness: they must enter into the experiment without any
force, fraud and deception.

8. Valid informed consent
 The consent must be given voluntarily and not by any force.
 All relevant information shall be presented/stated in a clearly
understandable form
 The consenter must be capable of processing the
information and to make rational decisions in a quick
manner.
 The information needed by a rational person must be stated in
a form to understand without any difficulty and has to be
spread widely.
 The experimenter’s consent has to be offered in absentia
of the experimenter by a group which represents many
experiments.

9. Informed consent - Engineering
 The knowledge about the product
 Risks and benefits of using the product
 All relevant information on the product

10. DISIMILARITIES TO STANDARD EXPERIMENTS
Knowledge Gain:
 Scientific experiments have been conducted to acquire new
knowledge. Whereas engineering projects are conducted as
experiments not for getting new knowledge
 Suppose the outcomes of the experiment is best, it tells us nothing
new.
 Mean while, the unexpected outcomes put us search for new
knowledge.
 Engineering experiments at the most help us to
 verify the adequacy of the design .
 to check the stability of the design parameters .
 prepare for the unexpected outcomes .

11. Responsible engineers in social
experimentation
 The engineers have so many responsibilities for serving society.
 Conscientiousness: A primary obligation to protect the safety of
human subjects and respect their right of consent.
 Relevant information: A constant awareness of the experimental
nature of any project, imaginative forecasting of its possible side
effects and a reasonable effort to monitor them.
 Moral autonomy: Autonomous, personal involvement in all steps
of the project.
 Accountability: Accepting accountability for the results of the
project.

12. CONSCIENTIOUSNESS (sense of
awareness)
 Conscientious means showing that one cares about the doing
things well and thoroughly.
 It means commitment to live according to certain values.
 Engineers have to be sensitive to range of moral values and
responsibilities.
 Willingness to develop the skill and expend the effort needed to
reach the best balance possible among various considerations.
 Conscientiousness means consciousness because mere intent is
not sufficient.
 Respect foremost the safety and health of the affected, while they
seek to enrich their knowledge, rush for the profit, follow the
rules, or care for only the beneficiary.

13. Comprehensive Perspective
 The engineer should grasp the context of his work
and ensure that the work involved results in only
moral ends.
 Not to Accept Design :-A product has a built-in
obsolete or redundant component to boost sales with
a false claim.

14. Moral Autonomy
 Viewing engineering as social experimentation, and
anticipating unknown consequences should promote
an attitude of questioning about the adequacy of the
existing economic and safety standards.

15. Accountability
 Means - The capacity to understand and act on moral
reasons
 Means being responsible, liable, answerable or
obligated.
 Morally responsible peoples are expected to accept
morally responsibility for their actions
 According to standley milgram, people are not
willing to accept personal accountability when placed
under authority

16. CODES OF ETHICS
 Engineering Codes of Ethics have evolved over time
 Codes of ethics are propagated by various professional societies
 These codes of conduct are guidelines for specific group of
professionals to help them to perform their role
What are codes of ethics:
 it is also referred as codes of conduct.
 It express the commitment to the ethical conduct shared by members
of a profession.
 It also define the roles and responsibilities of professions
 This is used to help the professionals to apply moral & ethical
principles to the specific situations encountered in professional
practice
 The codes are based on 5canons- principles of ethics-integrity,
competence, individual responsibilities , professional responsibilities
and human concerns

17. Positive Roles of codes of ethics
1. Inspiration
 It provides +ve inspiration for the professional to
exercises their duties effectively.
2. Guidance
 It provide the guidelines for achieving the duties of
professionals.
3. Support for Responsible Conduct
 It offers +ve and potential support to engineers to perform
their duties in ethical manner.
4. discourage and disciplining professional conduct
 These codes can be used to discouraging & punishing
unethical professional conduct.

18. Positive Roles of codes of ethics
5. Education and promotion of mutual understanding
 The ethical codes can be used in educational institutions
and other places for highlighting the importance of moral
issues and values.
6. Contributing to positive image of the profession
 It discuss a positive image to the public of an ethically
committed professions.
7. Protecting the status quo(current situations) and
destroying disagreement within the profession.
8. Promoting business interests through limit of
trade.

19. Some of engineering societies
 ASME- American society of Mechanical Engineers.
 IE- The Institution of Engineers.
 NSPE- National Society of professional Engineers.
 IEEE- Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers.

20. Limitations of Codes of ethics
The codes are not remedy for all evils. They have many limitations, namely
1. Codes are restricted to general and vague wording.
 They cannot be straightaway applied to all situations.
2. It have internal conflicts, which may result in morel dilemma
3. The codes cant serve as the moral authority for professional
conduct
4. The circulation of codes of ethics for different branches of
engineering gives a feeling that ethical codes are relative
5. Not applicable to all situations
6. Even as members of the professional society, many are
unaware of the codes
7. Different societies have different codes

21. Balanced Outlook of Law
•A balanced outlook of laws emphasizes the necessity of
laws and regulations and their limitations in governing
engineering practice.
•What is Law?
• It is a body of rules of action prescribed by controlling legal authority and
having binding legal force
• In general laws means all the rules established by authority or custom for
regulating the behavior of members of a community or country
•Relationship between Laws and ethics:
• Ethics- what is ought to do, what is not
• Law – standard behavior required for individual
• 1969- Santa Barbara (offshore Spril)- 235000 gallon
crude oil
• 1758- babylons Building Code

22. Balanced Outlook of Law
 Laws with respect to social implementation.
 Laws are necessary because,
 People are not fully responsible.
 The companies are not encouraged to have moral initiative due to
competition.
 Engineers are expected to play vital role in framing
implementing and propagating the rules of
engineering.
 Laws lag in technological development.
 Industries feel that laws are imposing excessive
restrictions on engineering applications.

23. Proper Role of Laws
 The rules which govern engineering practice should be
construed as of responsible experimentation rather than
rules of a game.
 In situations where the experimentation is large and time
consuming, the rules must not try to cover all possible
outcomes, and they should not compel the engineers to
follow inflexible courses of action.
 The regulation should be broad, but make engineers
accountable for their decisions.

24. Industrial Standards
 Standardization primarily means setting up standards by which level,
quality, quantity, value performance or service may be evaluated.
 Simply, It is the process of defining and applying conditions required to
ensure that a given range of requirements can be easily met with minimum
changes in an economical and reproducible manner by the latest technique.
 What are standards?
 They are formed by companies for their in-house use and by professional
associations and trade associations for industry-wide use.
 Some times standards are parts of laws and official regulations.
 ISO 9000-2000 series are typical examples in this direction .

25. Standards Facilitate
 Interchangeability.
 Accuracy in measurement.
 Ease of handling.
 Prevention of harms.
 Decreased production costs.
 Quality products.

26. Types of standards

27. Benefits of standards
 It helps manufacturers, clients and public.
 It maintain a steady and balanced competition
among industries.
 It ensure a measure of quality .

28. Negative aspects of standards
 Reduce choice for customers.
 It reduce initiative and interests of workers.

29. Problems with law in engineering
 Minimal compliance.
 Technological development.
 Many laws are ‘no laws’ (without enforceable
sanctions).
 Influential powerful persons violate the laws.

30. The Challenger Disaster
A Case-study in Engineering Ethics
 Shuttle Components
 Orbiter
 Liquid Rocket Booster
 Solid Rocket Booster

31. Chronology of the Related Events
 1974
 NASA contracts Morton Thiokol
 1976
 NASA accepts the design based on the Titan missiles
 The joints are sealed by
 Two synthetic rubber O-rings,
 177 clevis pins,
 Heat shield putty

32. Early Problems
 1977
 Tests at Thiokol show O-ring leakage.
 Joint is made stronger by changing sizes.
 1981
 Post-launch investigation showed O-ring erosion due to hot
gages.

33. Early Problems
 January of 1985 launch
 First cold-weather launch
 Post-launch investigation showed joint failure
 Tests showed O-rings inability to fill the gap due to joint
rotation at lower temperatures

34. Early Problems
 July 1985
 Thiokol redesigns the joints w/o O-rings – The design was not
ready for Challenger launch

35. Days before Launch
 First launch attempt postponed.
 The next launch date was set and was to be attended
by Vice President Bush.
 The temperature at launch: 29 degrees F.

36. Days Before Launch
 NASA starts an investigation of the effect of low
temperatures on the O-ring seals.
 Organization involved
 NASA.
 Marshall Space Flight Center.
 Morton Thiokol.

37. Engineering Investigation Before Launch
 Players at NASA
 Larry Mulloy: SRB Project Manager at Marshall
 Players at Thiokol
 Roger Boisjoly: A SRB engineer
 Arnie Johnson: A SRB engineer
 Joe Kilminster: SRB engineering manager
 Alan McDonald: SRB engineering director
 Bob Lund: Vice president for engineering
 Jerald Mason: General manager

38. Engineering Investigation Before Launch
 Boisjoly and Johnson recommend the launch to be
postponed.
 Bob Lund, the VP for engineering agrees and makes
a similar recommendation.

39. Investigation Before Launch
 Larry Mulloy, the NASA manager of SRB asks
Joe Kilminister, the SRB manager at Thiokol,
for his opinion.
 Kilminister agrees with other Thiokol engineers
and recommends a launch delay.

40. The Launch in January 1986
 The overnight temperatures drop to 8 F
 The temperature of SRB at launch is 28 F
 There is an immediate blow-by of hot gas at launch.
The seal fails quickly over an arc of 70 degrees.

41. The Launch in January 1986
 The by-products of combustion forms a glassy oxide
that reseals the joint.
 The brittle oxide is shattered .
 Hot gases quickly burn through the liquid rocket
booster.

42. The Aftermath
 Causes of the accident are attributed to
 Inability of the O-rings to expand and seal at low
temperatures.
 Heat shield putty did not perform at low temperatures
 Fits and seating of the O-ring was affected by low temperature.

43. The Aftermath
 After all the testimonials
 Biosjoly is taken off the project and subtly harassed by Thiokol
management.