Integrity in design
Integrity in engineering practice
Craig R. Forest
Kenneth A. Cunefare
Spring 2012
ME 4182
Revised 3/6/2012
"To educate a person in mind and not in
morals is to educate a menace to society."
~President Theodore Roosevelt
Do you have an ethical obligation?
• Society (and what is that) expects such,
and holds us accountable…
• …if not (and when not), the courts will
ASME Code of Ethics of Engineers
Fundamental Principles
• Engineers uphold and advance the
integrity, honor and dignity of the
engineering profession by:
– Using their knowledge and skill for the
enhancement of human welfare;
– Being honest and impartial, and serving with
fidelity the public, their employers and clients;
and
– Striving to increase the competence and
prestige of the engineering profession.
ASME Code of Ethics,
Fundamental Canons: Engineers Shall….
• hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of
the public in the performance of their
professional duties.
• perform services only in the areas of their
competence.
• continue their professional development
throughout their careers and shall provide
opportunities for the professional and ethical
development of those engineers under their
supervision.
ASME Code of Ethics,
Fundamental Canons: Engineers Shall….
• act in professional matters for each employer or
client as faithful agents or trustees, and shall
avoid conflicts of interest or the appearance of
conflicts of interest.
• build their professional reputation on the merit of
their services and shall not compete unfairly with
others.
• associate only with reputable persons or
organizations.
ASME Code of Ethics,
Fundamental Canons: Engineers Shall….
• issue public statements only in an objective and
truthful manner.
• consider environmental impact in the
performance of their professional duties.
Not uncommon to encounter
ethical challenges at work
•
•
•
•
•
Selection of vendors (gifts? influence“?)
Profit pressure (shortcuts?)
Cost overruns (conceal? reveal?)
Errors and omissions (conceal? reveal?)
Unethical actions by others
(whistleblower?)
• Regulatory/safety (whistleblower?)
• ….
Examples of ethical transgressions
Hwang Woo Suk
• South Korean biomedical scientist
• Became world famous in 2004 when he
claimed a series of remarkable
breakthroughs in the field of stem cell
research
• Time magazine "People Who Mattered
2004," “has already proved that human
cloning is no longer science fiction, but a
fact of life."
Data falsification
• On May 12, 2006, Hwang was “indicted on
embezzlement and bioethics law violations
linked to faked stem cell research.”
• Korea Times reported on June 10, 2007
that “The university expelled him and the
government rescinded its financial and
legal support.”
Daniel Raichel
• Mechanical engineer, expert on acoustics who
studied how sound travels in symphony halls
and across industrial workplaces
• “The Science and Applications of Acoustics”
(2000)
– Remains in wide use, as “one of the best surveys of
acoustics, written by a master teacher and an ardent
striver for improvements in noise control in an urban
environment.” Ilene J. Busch-Vishniac, Johns Hopkins
University
Plagiarism
Extensive extraction of material…from at least 4 other texts…figures…structure of
sections…phrasing…
Ford and Chrysler
• Robert Kearns, Wayne State University
professor
– patents in 1967 for his design for intermittent
wipers that paused between swipes
• Kearns shopped his invention around to various
automakers but did not reach a licensing deal with any of
them. But carmakers eventually began offering
intermittent wipers as standard or optional equipment.
• Sued Ford Motor Co. in 1978 and Chrysler in 1982 for
patent infringement.
• Ford paid $10.2 million
• Chrysler paid $18.7 million plus interest. The Supreme
Court rejected Chrysler's bid to overturn the award in
1995.
SESSIONS TANK LINERS v. JOOR MANUFACTURERS
• Complaint
– A manufacturer used his position as an NFPA
Code Committee member to defeat a proposed
revision allowing a competitor’s process.
ASME C&S Training Module C2
16
SESSIONS TANK LINERS v. JOOR
MANUFACTURERS
• Outcome: Findings of a member’s misconduct
– Misrepresented data
– Sent anonymous letters opposing the revision
– Questioned the safety of the competitor’s process
– Warned of legal implications
– Called for a vote after the competitor had left the
meeting, even though vote not on agenda
ASME C&S Training Module C2
17
And more…
• Double-dipping in research
• Falsified research
• Criminal charges for Upper Big Branch
mine manager
• Bernie Madoff, R. Allen Stanford
• Some more case studies
18
Why did they do it?
Why did they do it?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Ambition
Fame
Personal profit
Greed
Selfishness
Fear of losing face, loss of honor
Ultimately, who truly knows?
How does it happen?
How does it happen?
•
•
•
•
Little transgression at first
Builds on itself
“Normalization of deviation”
Eventually caught in a web of deception
Paths to Lost Integrity
•
•
•
•
•
•
Falsifying data - Hwang Woo Suk
Stealing money – Madoff, Stanford
Bribery – Bill Campbell
Plagiarism - Daniel Raichel
Stealing intellectual property-Ford/Chrysler
Corporate leaders turning a blind eye to safety - Upper
Big Branch Mine disaster
• Lying
• Using forbidden resources
• ….
Ultimately
• The damage done to the transgressor may be
worse than to the society (but society still
suffers, and it can be staggering… Love Canal?)
• But even if you’re not caught, can you sleep at
night?
– Is this the kind of person you want to be?
– Can you truly celebrate your achievements if they are
not won honestly?
– Moral struggle is not easy, but must be fought
continuously to lead a virtuous life
What ethical challenges will you face
in your career?
in your personal life?
Resources
• ASME code of ethics resources
• ASME Codes & Standards, NFPA anti-trust
materials
• Ken Cunefare, “Comments on ‘The Science and
Applications of Acoustics’”,
• Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.
• Wikipedia entries on Hwang Woo Suk
Do you really want to see your
name in a headline…accused of
some criminal or unethical act?
IV. A BRIEF HISTORY OF ASME AND
ANTITRUST CASES
ASME C&S Training Module C2
29
U.S. v. ASME (1972)
• Complaint
– ASME accreditation available only to companies with
plants in the U.S. and Canada
– Foreign companies effectively prohibited from selling
products in the U.S. and Canada
• Outcome
– ASME B&PV accreditation extended to
manufacturers worldwide
ASME C&S Training Module C2
30
American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Inc. v.
Hydrolevel Corporation, 456 U.S. 556 (1982)
•
Facts
– Hydrolevel was a manufacturer of low-water fuel cut-offs for boilers.
– McDonnell and Miller, Inc. (“M&M”) manufactured a competing fuel cutoff valve. The pertinent difference for purposes of the lawsuit was that
the Hydrolevel fuel cut-off included a time delay.
– An M&M vice president was vice chairman of the BPV subcommittee
that drafted, interpreted and revised the pertinent Code section.
– In early 1971 Hydrolevel secured an important customer of M&M,
Brooklyn Union Gas.
– Hydrolevel alleged that the M&M vice president and other M&M officers
met with the chairman of the BPV subcommittee and “planned a
course of action”. The “plan” was to seek an interpretation of the
Code asking whether a fuel cutoff with a time delay would satisfy code
requirements. The chairman of the committee then authored an
interpretation (under then applicable procedures the interpretation did
not have to be approved by the committee) that “condemned fuel cutoffs that incorporated a time delay”.
ASME C&S Training Module C2
31
American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Inc. v.
Hydrolevel Corporation, 456 U.S. 556 (1982)
– Hydrolevel argued that M&M salesmen used the interpretation
to discourage customers from buying Hydrolevel’s product.
– At issue in the Hydrolevel case was whether ASME could be
held liable for the acts of volunteers who acted with “apparent
authority”.
– Apparent authority is a legal doctrine which provides that if a
principal holds out an agent as having certain authority to third
persons, the principal will be responsible for the agent’s acts-whether or not the agent had actual authority to perform the act
at issue.
– The Supreme Court held that ASME could be held liable under
the anti-trust laws for the acts of volunteers committed within
their apparent authority.
ASME C&S Training Module C2
32
V. OTHER ANTITRUST CASES
ASME C&S Training Module C2
33
INDIAN HEAD v. ALLIED TUBE & CONDUIT CORP
• Complaint
– Metal conduit manufacturers packed 1980 NFPA
conference and voted down proposal to revise
Fire Code to allow plastic conduit for building
wiring
– Proposal recommended by NFPA panel of experts
ASME C&S Training Module C2
34
INDIAN HEAD v. ALLIED TUBE & CONDUIT CORP
• Outcome—Findings were
– No “balance” of interest groups was observed.
– All members of the association were allowed to
vote on a proposal.
– The recommendation of an unbiased panel of
experts was unjustifiably ignored.
– A proposal was allowed to fail without valid and
objective criteria.
– A manufacturer was precluded from selling its
product on the open market.
ASME C&S Training Module C2
35
SESSIONS TANK LINERS v. JOOR MANUFACTURERS
• Complaint
– A manufacturer used his position as an NFPA
Code Committee member to defeat a proposed
revision allowing a competitor’s process.
ASME C&S Training Module C2
36
Boston Molasses Disaster
• January 15, 1919
• North End neighborhood of
Boston, Massachusetts
• A large molasses tank burst
and a wave of molasses rushed
through the streets at an
estimated 35 mph (56 km/h),
killing 21 and injuring 150.
•
Arthur Jell, who oversaw the construction, neglected basic safety tests,
such as filling the tank with water to check for leaks. When filled with
molasses, the tank leaked so badly that it was painted brown to hide the
leaks. Local residents collected leaked molasses for their homes.
•
Carbon dioxide production from fermentation and temperature change
raised the internal pressure.
The failure occurred from a manhole cover near the base of the tank, and it
is possible that a fatigue crack grew here to criticality.
The hoop stress is greatest near the base of a filled, cylindrical tank. The
tank had only been filled to capacity eight times since it was built a few
years previously, putting the walls under an intermittent cyclical load.
•
•
•
87,000 man hours to remove the molasses from the cobblestone streets,
theaters, businesses, automobiles, and homes. The harbor was still brown
with molasses until summer.