ENGINEERING AS

EXPERIMENTATION
 When it is decided to change a new engineering concept into its first rough
design, preliminary tests or simulation should be conducted.
 Using formal experimental methods, the materials and methods of
designing are tried out. These tests may be based on more detailed
designs.
 The test for designing should be evolved till the final product produced.
With the help of feedback of several tests, further modification can be
made if necessary.
 Beyond these tests and experiments, each engineering project has to be
viewed as an experiment
There are main three important aspects, which are of essential for
combining every type of engineering works to make it suitable to look at
engineering projects as experiments.
 Engineer’s success lies in the ability to accomplish tasks with only a
complete knowledge of scientific laws about nature and society.
 The final outcomes of engineering projects are generally uncertain like that
of experiments what we do,ie.In engineering, in most of the cases, the
possible outcomes may not be known and even small and mild projects
itself involve greater risks.
 Effective Engineering relies upon knowledge gained about products both
before and after they leave the factory- knowledge needed for improving
current products and creating better ones. That is, ongoing success in
engineering depends upon gaining new knowledge.
TO OVERCOME THESE
ASPECTS…
First Solution: Monitoring
 This monitoring is done by making periodic observations and tests by
looking at for the successful performance and the side effects of the jobs. The
tests of the product’s efficiency, safety, cost-effectiveness, environmental
impact and its value that depends upon the utility to the society should also
be monitored.
Second Solution: Learning from the past
 Engineers should learn not only from their own earlier design and operating
results, but also from other engineers
 Engineers repeat the past mistakes of others due to the following reasons. 
 Lack of established channels of communication.
 Misplaced pride in not asking for information
 Embarrassment at failure or fear of Law’s (legal problems).
 Negligence.
ENGINEERS AS RESPONSIBLE EXPERIMENTERS

 1.Conscientiousness: A primary obligation to protect the safety of human subjects and

respect their right of consent

 2.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
 3.Moral Autonomy: Autonomous, personal involvement in all steps of a project
 4.Accountability(Answerability): Accepting accountability for the results of a
project
INDUSTRIAL STANDARDS
 Industry standards are a set of criteria within an industry relating to the
standard functioning and carrying out of operations in their respective
fields of production.
 Industrial Standards are generally accepted requirements followed by
the members of an industry.
 It provides an orderly and systematic formulation, adoption, or
application of standards used in a particular industry or sector of the
economy. Industry standards vary from one industry to another.
 Industry standards facilitate global as well as domestic competitiveness. It
is a crucial tool for developing and meeting industry goals. For
Example in the automotive industry, tire sizes and durability must fall
within a standardized range..
 Standardization serves as a quality check for any industry.
ROLE OF INDUSTRY
STANDARD
 Standardization facilitates a healthy competition and designing of new concepts.
 Administration and the legislative bodies are benefited by the Industry standard.
They govern the practical as well as the technological standards as per the legal
requisites.
 Optimum standards facilitate the creation of political as well as business related
advantages. The reason being that the industry standard is worked out in
consonance with the expertise of the corporate houses and different segments of
the society.
 In a nut shell, industry standard is a crucial tool in acquiring industry goals
related to managerial, technological as well as political. Therefore, setting
standards for the industry whether in the domestic market or international
market provides assurance of transparency. The ultimate aim of setting industry
standard is to provide a platform for giving shape to new creations.
CASE STUDIES
 CASE STUDY-1
Mario, the City Engineer/Director of Public Works for a medium-sized city, is the only licensed
professional engineer (and also a civil engineer) in a position of responsibility within the city
government. This city has several large food-processing plants that discharge large amounts of
waste into the wastewater system during canning season. Mario is responsible for the wastewater
treatment plant and reports to James about its operation.
Mario tells James that the wastewater treatment plant is not capable of handling potential overflow
during the rainy season and offers several possible solutions. James replies that they will face the
problem when it happens. Engineer Mario privately notifies other city officials about the
wastewater treatment plant problem, but James removes the responsibility for the sanitation
system from Mario and gives it to Chris, a technician who is normally under Mario's supervision.
James instructs technician Chris to report directly to him and confirms this arrangement with a
memo, which is copied to engineer Mario.
Mario is also placed on probation. He is warned that if he discusses the matter further, he will be
terminated. Mario continues to work for the government as City Engineer/Director of Public
Works; he assumes no responsibility for the wastewater treatment plant, but continues to advise
technician Chris without James's knowledge. During the winter, heavy storms occur in the city. It
becomes clear to those involved that if the wastewater treatment plant's waste water is not released
into the local river, the ponds will overflow and dump all of the waste into the river. Under state
law, this condition must be reported to the State Water Pollution Control Authority.
 How would you respond to this situation? How do you assess engineer Mario's actions? What
about James's actions? What about technician Chris? What are engineer Mario's obligations1
to either James or the Public Works Department? What are Mario's responsibilities2 for the
environmental health of city residents? How might these responsibilities be fulfilled
simultaneously? Which takes precedence in case of conflict? What additional information
would you like to have, and what difference would it make to your assessment?
CASE STUDY-2
Kara has been working as an environmental engineer at a consulting firm for over
twenty-five years. Well-known for settling disputes between her corporate clients
before litigation must be pursued, Kara often analyzes technical data, particularly
distributions of solid particle pollution, presented by disputing parties to help them
reach a compromise on the cost of environmental cleanup. For example, two parties
may be separated from one another by a strip of land; however, each party must
fiscally contribute in keeping the land free from pollutants.
One day, Kara was contacted by a journalist to talk about her experiences at the
firm. Kara spoke about how she often encountered cases where companies did not
accurately depict levels of solid particle pollution occupying the companies’
respective surroundings. Instead, technical experts, who are mostly engineers,
would misrepresent data in order to make it seem that minority parties were
responsible for a greater part of the contamination. At the end of the interview, Kara
emphasized the necessity of engineers taking ownership and being honest about the
presentation of data.
At what point does an engineer’s interpretation of data move from sound technical reasoning to
misrepresentation? How should engineers deal with the pressure to come up with data that may
indicate favorable results for their employers?
CASE STUDY-3
Solomon is a principal engineer at an environmental engineering consulting firm. His main role
is to advise clients on what type of action to take when they are faced with risks and liabilities
while conducting certain projects.
In one case, Solomon had a client that wanted to expand their campus until it was within
approximately 50 meters of a marshland. After construction of this extension, however, the
client must ensure that a proper waste management plan is in place so that contamination will
have minimal effect on the surrounding habitat.
The client came up with a solution that satisfied, but did not go beyond the bare minimum of
state regulations. In other words, although Solomon’s client prioritized a cost-effective plan, the
environment would be subject to a certain percentage of contamination that would, within five
to ten years, stifle the marshland’s flourishing.
Should Solomon push for a more fiscally demanding, yet sustainable strategy--at the risk of his
client backing out of the partnership altogether?
 CASE STUDY-4
After earning a graduate degree in Engineering Management, Ashton began working for PDRC
International. This is a company based in the U.S. which offers engineering, design, and construction
services to countries all over the world.
Ashton’s work is focused on international development; her first assignment is to lead a team to develop
a bid for a highway construction project in East Africa. After the engineering proposal is submitted,
Ashton is proud of the work her team has accomplished and promises her manager she will do
everything possible to make sure that PDRC receives the contract. PDRC’s bid is well-received, and
Ashton and her team are flown to East Africa to finish negotiations. Ashton is thrilled when her
company receives the bid; the only stipulation is that they build their construction headquarters in a
specific region in the country. Ashton then begins scouting the region for a location to build their
headquarters.
In order to obtain building permits in the region, Ashton has to negotiate with the local government. As
she begins negotiations, she realizes that bribery is both a common and expected practice. If she does
not bribe the local officials, she will not be able to build PDRC’s headquarters in that region and
consequently will lose the contract; her first managerial project will be a failure.
However, it is illegal for a U.S. citizen to bribe a foreign official in order to obtain business; if she is
caught for bribery, she could face jail time and her company could be fined millions of dollars.
What should she do?
CASE STUDY-5
Holly has been working at a large construction company for three years. Although an intern, Holly
has earned the respect of her peers. Her supervisor (and project manager), along with her coworkers,
constantly support her by teaching her new materials and encouraging her to tackle new tasks. For
one specific project, her supervisor chose her to visit the jobsite for the construction of flood
retaining walls. Holly is familiar with the protocol required by her company, and her boss trusts her
to always wear protective equipment every time she goes into the field.
However, when she went to the job site for this project, she heard someone yell, “Be careful not to
break a nail!” while she was walking down a particularly steep mud slope. She dismissed the
comment at first, but throughout the remainder of the project, different construction workers would
make condescending remarks and gestures at her. They would call her ‘Princess’ or hold out their
arms as though expecting her to fall, slip, or hurt herself.
Holly feels she is being treated disrespectfully because of her gender, but never brings it up to her
supervisor as the workers were subcontracted from various companies by the General Contractor.
Holly doesn’t feel right getting other people in trouble for such little comments, and is worried long
term about how her success might be affected if she makes a complaint.
 CASE STUDY-6
You are an engineer working for a private laboratory with expertise in nuclear waste disposal
and risk assessment. The DOE (Department of Energy) has recently awarded your laboratory
with a contract to do a risk assessment of various nuclear waste disposal sites. The study was to
have been completed in six years. You are the leader of a team of engineers working on this
project.
After six years the study still is not complete. A disagreement on the reason for the delay has
arisen between your laboratory and the DOE. You are asking for more time because of the
extensive calculations required; you argue that your group must use state of the art science in
doing its risk assessment. The DOE says you are using overly high standards of risk
assessment to prolong the process, extend the contract, and get more money for your company.
They want you to use simpler calculations and finish the project; if you are unwilling to do so,
they plan to find another company that thinks differently. Your supervisor expresses to you the
concern that while good science is important in an academic setting, this is the real world and
the contract with the DOE is in jeopardy.
1. What should you do? In particular, how do you respond to the concerns of the
DOE and your own company’s management?
2. What are your responsibilities in this situation? To the DOE? To the public,
especially the citizens living near the possible waste disposal sites? To your
company? If these responsibilities conflict with one another, are there ways to
harmonize them?
3. What kind of standards should you employ in risk assessment? If employing
more strict standards requires more time and delays, what are the ethical issues
raised by these delays? If you adopt simpler standards, what kind of ethical
issues does this raise?
CASE STUDY-7
You are a civil engineer and work with the AAA (Water and Sewer Authority).
While driving through a small town you notice a large storage tank filled with
chlorine gas sitting next to an urbanization. The land on which the storage tank
is located and the storage tank itself are owned by a local manufacturing
company which uses chlorine for various business related purposes.
This is a disaster-in-the-making. Given the right conditions (a leak in the storage
tank, wind blowing in a certain direction), an accident could occur that would
endanger the lives of the people living in the urbanization. After all, chlorine gas
was used during World War I to kill soldiers hiding in trenches.
Should you do something about this given that it is not a part of your job and
that, as a civil engineer, it is not within your area of expertise?
You decide to find a way to get the company to move its tank to a safer location.
First, you approach officials from the local government; they tell you that they
do not have the authority to make the company move the tank. They suggest that
you go directly to the company and ask them to move it. But the company tells
you that this is none of your business; they point out that you work for the water
authority and have no right to tell them where they can and cannot store
materials.
1. Should you push this matter farther? What could be done given the
intransigence of the both the local government and the private company that
owns the storage tank?
2. How would you respond to the following argument? This engineer is a civil
engineer working for the AAA. The safety or risk of the location and contents of
the storage tank are beyond his job and professional qualifications. Hence it is
neither obligatory nor permissible for him to try to force the company to change
its location. This is someone else’s problem. Furthermore, such actions, while
well meaning, cost companies and consumers a great deal of trouble and money.
 CASE STUDY-8
An industrial engineer was recently hired by a printed circuit boards manufacturer to do process layout
design. The engineer was assigned to do a relayout of the lamination press room. She started by
analyzing each one of the process steps to optimize space and process time. While conducting her
study she found that the company was using a manual puncher in this area to punch alignment holes in
the inner layer material. She noticed that the room was covered with dust and a white material. When
she asked the operator what this material was, she was told that it was fiberglass that came from the
inner layer material. (The inner layer material was composed of several layers of fiberglass coated with
epoxy.)
Concerned about possible adverse health effects, the engineer visited the Environmental and Safety
Department and requested an MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheet) of the inner layer material. She was
shocked to find out that that the material dust causes respiratory complications, even cancer, when
breathed into the lungs.
She returned to the lamination press room and asked the operator how long she had worked in this
area. The operator replied that it would be ten years the next month.
1)Should the engineer tell the operator about the risk she had been running for the last ten years?
2)What other steps, if any, should she take now? What is the engineer's responsibility?
 CASE STUDY-9
A chemical engineering student has been working with a local manufacturing firm as a part of her
university's co-op program. For several years the firm has been using chemical A as a catalyst in
their manufacturing process. Chemical A is carcinogenic, although studies supporting this claim have
only recently been published. Without taking elaborate safety precautions, workers handling
chemical A would be exposed to sufficient amounts to risk cancer. Moreover, the disease takes up to
20 years to manifest itself. The company has tried to implement safety procedures and controls, but
workers routinely ignore them. The safety procedures slow down the manufacturing process, and the
workers frequently cut corners to meet quotas.
The co-op student knows of another chemical, B, which also serves as a catalyst in this
manufacturing process but is not carcinogenic. Nevertheless, chemical B is considerably more
expensive.
A meeting has been called to refine and possibly reengineer the company’s manufacturing process.
Along with the student are four other group members: a senior engineer, a manager, an industrial
engineer who supervises the manufacturing process, and a marketing specialist. You are the Coop
student. Should you suggest changing to catalyst B at this meeting? If so, how should you present
your case? (Write out this presentation and give it before the class.)
The student decides to bring the issue up at the meeting. She sites the recently discovered
dangers of chemical A and the tendency of the workers to violate safety procedures in using it.
She then discusses the research on chemical B: although B is more expensive than A, it is much
safer and is as effective a catalyst as A in the manufacturing process. Her argument meets with
stiff resistance, especially from the manager present at the meeting. He tells her that her job is
to make suggestions for streamlining the existing manufacturing process, not design a new one.
Furthermore, he argues, if there were a problem with safety he would have heard about it by
now from the Human Resources or Legal Affairs departments. The two engineers present say
very little; they are intimidated by the manager and apparently intend to follow his lead. The
manager asks the two engineers if using chemical A violates OSHA regulations; they reply that
to the best of their knowledge, it does not. The manager concludes by proposing that if there are
no further objections, the company will continue using chemical A. Nobody objects.
 What should the co-op student do now?