IE496 Industrial Engineering Internship - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Ie496 industrial engineering internship l.jpg
Download
1 / 36

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

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.

Download Presentation

IE496 Industrial Engineering Internship

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Ie496 industrial engineering internship l.jpg

IE496Industrial Engineering Internship

Dr. Barnes

March 17, 2008

Lecture # 8


Ethics part 2 l.jpg

Ethics – Part 2


Review of ethics l.jpg

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 l.jpg

This week

How to analyze problems from an ethical viewpoint.


Analyzing ethical problems l.jpg

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 l.jpg

Two analysis techniques

  • Line Drawing

  • Flow Charting (lines must have directional arrowheads)

    Supporting narrative and


1 line drawing l.jpg

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 l.jpg

Elementary line-drawing technique

Negative paradigm Positive paradigm

(NP) (PP)


Example problem 1 l.jpg

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 l.jpg

Problem 1 continued – Hypothetical Considerations

  • Dump 5 ppm waste in lake; harmless, but unusual taste.

  • Town’s water-treatment system can effectively remove waste.

  • Town can remove waste with company-purchased equipment.

  • Town can remove waste with taxpayer-purchased 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 l.jpg

Hypotheticals on line and “problem” estimate

Negative paradigm Positive paradigm

(NP) (PP)

6 5 4 1 P 7 2,3


Flow charting l.jpg

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 l.jpg

Elementary flow chart

Operation

Decision


Example problem 2 l.jpg

Example - Problem 2

Should Union Carbide build a plant at Bhophal? Investigate –

  • Laws.

  • Safety standards.

  • Cost considerations.


Union carbide flow chart l.jpg

Union Carbide -Flow Chart


Please read l.jpg

Please read –


Info source l.jpg

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 l.jpg

Ethical Problem Solving Techniques:Addressing Airbus 330-300 Case Study

By:

Joe Mathew

IE 491

University at Buffalo

April 22, 2005


Incident summary l.jpg

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 l.jpg

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 l.jpg

Line Drawing – Causal Factor 1, 2

Negative Paradigm

Positive Paradigm

Compliance with TSM and AMM was not achieved.

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 l.jpg

Flow Charting – Causal Factor 3

Preventive fuel leak inspection needed on aircraft

Yes

Yes

Yes

Proper inspection with use of elevated platform?

High-Power Engine Run Performed?

Fuel Leak Detection Implemented?

No

No

No

Perform

High-Power Engine Run

Implement Fuel Leak

Detection

Perform inspection with use of elevated platform

Preventive Fuel Leak Inspection Performed


Dharmy bhatt ie 491 ethics presentation april 22 2005 l.jpg

Dharmy BhattIE 491: Ethics PresentationApril 22, 2005

Bell’s Amusement Park

Tulsa, Oklahoma


Accident summary l.jpg

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 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 factors25 l.jpg

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 l.jpg

The Wildcat can operate.

No

Has the chain dog been changed?

Yes

A maintenance worker must inspect the changes.

No

Has someone inspected the changes?

Yes

Fix the height of the “chain dog” and inspect again.

Is the “chain log” at the proper height?

No

Yes

The Wildcat can operate properly.

Flowchart – The “chain dog” Factor


Line drawing maintenance l.jpg

1

2

3

5

4

Line Drawing-- Maintenance

Negative Paradigm

  • 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.

Positive Paradigm

P

Proper documentation exists and the roller coaster is acceptable.

Documentation hinders the performance of each car.


Ethics problem solving l.jpg

Ethics Problem Solving:

Whiteshell Air Service Ltd. Airplane Engine Failure

Theresa J Moehle

IE 491

April 22, 2005


Accident summary29 l.jpg

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 l.jpg

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 l.jpg

Line Drawing:Incorrect Installation of Parts

NP

PP

P

2

3

1

Airplane parts are installed incorrectly causing immediate, fatal damage

Airplane parts are installed correctly

  • Parts are installed incorrectly, but corrected immediately

  • Parts are installed incorrectly, and cause minor damage overtime

  • Parts are installed incorrectly, but cause no damage overtime


Flow chart failure to properly inspect plane l.jpg

Flow Chart:Failure to Properly Inspect Plane

Should plane be inspected?

Have parts

been

replaced?

Had last

Check within

400 hrs?

Has pilot

noticed Irregular

Sounds?

No

Yes

Yes

Inspect plane

before flying

Yes

No

No

Inspect plane

before flying

Inspect plane

before flying

Inspection

is not needed


Assignment l.jpg

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 l.jpg

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 l.jpg

Groups

Group 1: Anipindi, Awad, Bednowitz

Group 2: Brown, Chandra, Chang

Group 3: Cheng, Chung, Davis

Group 4: Devendorf, Dooling, Frank

Group 5: Henchey, Hyde, Indraputra

Group 6: Jackson, Luo, Lyke

Group 7: Markin, Mohd Yusof, Myers

Group 8: Pedicone, Piecuch, Prok

Group 9: Snyder, Stange, Stovers

Group 10: Szalkowski, Willis, Worthy


The end l.jpg

The End

Questions??


  • Login