Budny 4:00
R07
ETHICS IN ENGINEERING
Matthew Pendolino (mmp70@pitt.edu)
UNETHICAL SITUATION
For the past seven years, my team of mechanical
engineers and I have been working on the design, build, and
tests of an electronic solar wind sail (E-sail) satellite for an
inner solar system mission. This E-sail is being constructed
for one of the most prestigious space exploration companies
today and my firm is taking a huge amount of pride and effort
into constructing this satellite. As the head mechanical
engineer in this project, I have overseen all of the initial
design plans as well as ensuring that all of the physical tests
of the satellite have been conducted properly. Now we are
merely 4 months away from the satellites launch and we are
trying to finalize the final few tests and prepare the rocket for
launch.
As the deadline approaches, I approach the CEO and
COO about the vibration test and how I still need to run a few
more scenarios. They both try to ensure me that the satellite
will be fine according to other tests run earlier in the year and
that I do not need to worry about the vibrational test. If this
part of the testing is not completed and corrected, the rocket
will not suffer any huge setbacks and will remain fully
functional, although there may be some nonessential debris
that will fall from the satellite. Also, along the lines of
untested parts, the company officers mention that the E-sail
has been experiencing some problems with the slip ring,
which has not been fully corrected yet by the team working
on it. This too has the potential to cause some minor debris in
space, yet not affecting any of the satellite’s primary
functions.
The CEO and COO also seem extremely nervous about
the approaching deadline. They fear the satellite will not be
finished in time and that the finial processes need to move
faster. They suggest to me that in order to save time, the
tethers should not be sent to the University of Helsinki, which
is currently the only place that tethers can be packed to full
specifications. They suggest, however, for the tethers to
simply be packed by the employees conducting the tests under
my supervision. Although my team knows the process of
packing the tethers, this is not a practiced service that my team
and I do for final inspections and in preparations for
launchings. They tell me that my team and I will be paid extra
for these additional services.
I insist that we take a few extra months to ensure that
everything is tested and working properly. Both the CEO and
COO of the company tell me that it is crucial that the satellite
be launched on schedule or the entire project will cost much
more than originally planned. They tell me that if the satellite
is not launched on schedule, there will be a good chance that
it will never launch at all. They ask me to consider their
University of Pittsburgh, Swanson School of Engineering 1
2015-11-03
suggestions about speeding up the launch preparations and
persist that my efforts will be greatly rewarded.
UNETHICAL ASPECTS OF PROJECT
TESTING PROPERLY
As the deadline approaches, my clients become anxious
and want to finish any testing that is currently being
conducted. When I tell them I need to run more vibrational
studies on the E-sail satellite, they are not very accepting.
Much like in the case of Ian and the XMed product, both the
Marketing Product Manager from the case and my clients
think that more testing is unnecessary and that the products
are ready [1]. Both Ian, the lead development engineer in the
case, and I know that it is very unlikely that something bad
will happen with our products, however, it is still very likely
that something can go wrong and that something that was
overlooked may cause a problem [1].
According to section 1.3 of the ASME Fundamental
Canons, it is important for an engineer to consider all
possibilities “where the safety, health, and welfare of the
public are endangered” [2]. This applies directly to the
vibrational tests. I believe that the structure is suitable for
some conditions. However, I have not yet tested all scenarios
to which I can say that the E-sail are safe enough to be
launched into space. As evident in the testing of the EPS
module, satellites must be tested to endure vibrations of 2002000 Hz for a minimum of 15 minutes to ensure that the
satellite can be deemed safe during space travel [3]. In order
to ensure the satellite will not be damaged by vibrations, I
must conduct the full tests necessary. This is the only way to
fully ensure that the satellite will be safe.
Another problem with not preforming the vibration tests
is that the possible debris that could come off of the E-sail
satellite violates international space ethics. The Inter-Agency
Space Debris Coordination Committee (IADC) has laid out a
set of guidelines for the emission of space debris. According
to the second guideline, space crafts “should be designed to
avoid failure modes which may lead to accidental break-ups”
[4]. The guidelines also go on to explore the idea that the
probability of space debris can be reduced by the
incorporation of break-ups scenarios [4]. These break-ups
scenarios refer to tests similar to the vibrational tests that my
clients want me to simply pass over. If I were to pass over
these tests, I would violate the ethics of the IADC. And the
violation of these ethics would cause me to violate the
National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) Code of
Ethics for Engineers which states in section II.1 that I would
be required to report the endangerment of “life or property”
Matthew Pendolino
[5]. In this case, both life and property would be endangered.
The lives of other astronauts would be endangered by the
space debris from the E-sail. The E-sail satellite (the property
in this situation) would be damaged by the vibrations that
were not tested for and that could have been prevented.
Therefore, by not conducting the vibration tests to their
entirety, I would be violating many ethical standards upon
which my career is based.
only in charge of the vibration testing at this point in the
process. My team and I are not qualified to do any other work
on the E-sail. The ASME Fundamental Canons state in
section 2 “Engineers shall perform services only in areas of
heir competence” [2]. Similarly the NSPE codes have a
similar code in section II.2.a. It declares “Engineers shall
undertake assignment only when qualified by education or
experience in the specific technical fields involved” [5]. If my
team and I were to take on the task of packing the E-sail
ourselves, we would be violating both codes of ethics that our
professions are based on.
Another huge problem with performing this task
ourselves is that we would not be able to ensure that it is done
to the specific specifications that the UH has. This means that
it could be packed wrong and possibly cause the entire
satellite to malfunction while in space. This is unethical
according to the IADC specifications. Their guidelines state
that the possibility for failure should be minimized [7]. If my
team were to pack the tethers ourselves, we would be doing
the complete opposite of this. We would be packing the
tethers and not knowing if we did it correctly, which would
mean that there would be a much larger chance that the
deployment of the tethers would fail and the entire satellite
would be lost in space. This is a completely unethical situation
that should be avoided and can be easily avoided by simply
shipping the satellite to UH in order to be packed correctly.
KNOWLEDGE OF ERRORS
Although my role in this project is to oversee the testing
of vibrations on the E-sail, I am still required to notify the
proper professional bodies if I have any knowledge of an
unsafe part or operation. As stated in the NSPE Code of
Ethics, I am required to notify the appropriate professionals
on any violation to the codes [5]. This applies to my
knowledge of the slip ring. Because the slip ring has not been
completely fixed and could cause some damage, I am required
to notify the proper authority.
In the case study of knowledge of faulty equipment,
Engineer A was faced with a difficult situation. Engineer A
obtained knowledge from his client that parts of the building
were not up to code [6]. Similar to my situation, I obtained
knowledge of a faulty part, the slip ring, on the satellite from
my clients. It is now my responsibility to advise the proper
authority that there is a defective part on the satellite. In
section II.1.a of the NSPE Codes of Ethics it states that if an
engineer obtains knowledge of a possibly dangerous situation
or part, they “shall notify their employer or client and such
other authority as may be required” [5]. This obligates me to
notify my clients and whoever else is necessary that the slip
ring must be repaired before the satellite can be launched.
The other huge problem with the dysfunctional slip ring
is that it can cause debris to be emitted during flight. This is a
violation of space ethics just as skipping the vibration test
was. Although the slip ring would only emit small pieces from
the satellite, much of the debris in space is comprised of small
objects such as screws, foil scraps, cover, etc. [7]. Also, the
IADC requires that space crafts limit the objects given off
during normal procedures as well and malfunctions [7]. The
Guidelines of the IADC also state that while still in testing,
satellites should be designed to minimize “the potential for
on-orbit break-ups” [7]. This mandates that the slip ring be
tested and ensured that it will not malfunction in orbit and
cause parts to become unattached.
UNDESERVING REWARDS
My clients want me undertake the task of packing the
tethers, which would help to save them time. In return for
doing this task, they would pay me more money than
originally agreed upon. Aside from the situation being
unethical in the previous section, Jobs Outside of Profession,
this deal is unethical because I would be bribed with money
to perform a job that I am not qualified to do. This is
completely against my morals. I do not enjoy receiving
compensation for something that I do not want to do or that I
was not supposed to do. It would be on my conscience that I
have broken my code of ethics upon which which my entire
career is based. The NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers in
section III.5 states “Engineers shall not be influenced in their
professional duties by confliction interests” [5]. Section
III.5.a. of the code of ethics goes into the fact that these
interests can include financial considerations [5]. This is
exactly what my clients are offering me, which directly
violates the rule.
During the process of applying for a college and trying to
figure out what sort of a profession I wanted, my father,
Michael Pendolino, told me that it was important that I not
become caught up in the amount of money earned [9]. I have
learned to accept this advice and use it in my life. If I were to
accept the financial compensation from my clients, I would
be completely ignoring my father’s advice. My father is a man
whom I have much respect for and I would not want to ignore
his advice for something as small as money. This is another
JOBS OUTSIDE OF PROFESSION
The tethers on the E-sail are a crucial component to the
satellite and are currently only able to be properly packed by
the tether factory at the UH [8]. This process would take a
large amount of time to have the tether shipped to the factory,
packed and shipped back. My clients do not want to waste this
precious time and therefore ask me and my team to handle this
task. As the lead mechanical engineer on this project, I am
2
Matthew Pendolino
[1] “To Release, or Not to Release: An Engineer’s.” Stanford
University.
(Online
article).
Perspectivehttp://biodesign.stanford.edu/bdn/ethicscases/21r
eleasequestion.jsp
[2] Council on Member Affairs/Board on Professional
Practice and Ethics. (1998). “Code of Ethics.” American
Society of Mechanical Engineers. (Online article).
https://community.asme.org/colorado_section/w/wiki/8080.c
ode-of-ethics.aspx
[3] M. Pajusalu, E. Ilbis, T. Ilves, M. Veske, J. Kalde, H.
Lillmaa, R. Rantsus, M. Pelakauskas, A. Leitu, K.
Voormansik, V. Allik, S. Lätt, J. Envall, M. Noorma. (2014).
“Design and pre-flight testing of the electrical power system
for the ESTCube-1 nanosatellite.” Proceedings of the
Estonian Academy of Sciences. (Online article).
http://web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=
7&sid=3bd4bac1-77c6-4ee3-862fc82437275cda%40sessionmgr113&hid=123
[4] Office for Outer Space Affairs. (2010). “Space Debris
Mitigation Guidelines of the Committee on the Peaceful Use
of Outer Space.” United Nations. (Online article).
http://orbitaldebris.jsc.nasa.gov/library/Space%20Debris%2
0Mitigation%20Guidelines_COPUOS.pdf
[5] “Code of Ethics for Engineers.” (2007). National Society
of
Professional
Engineers.
(Online
article).
http://www.nspe.org/resources/ethics/code-ethics
[6] “To Release, or Not to Release: An Engineer’s
Perspective.” (2013). National Society of Professional
Engineers.
(Online
article).
http://www.nspe.org/sites/default/files/BER%20Case%20No
%2013-11-FINAL.pdf
[7] P. McCormick. (2013). “Space Debris: Conjunction
Opportunities and Opportunities for International
Cooperation.” Wayne State University. (Online article).
http://spp.oxfordjournals.org/content/40/6/801.full.pdf+html
[8] J. Envall, P. Janhunen , P. Toivanen, M. Pajusalu, E. Ilbis,
J. Kalde, M Averin, H. Kuuste, K. Laizans, V. Allik, T.
Rauhala, H. Seppanen, S. Kiprich, J. Ukkonen, E.
Haeggstrom, T. Kalvas, O. Tarvainen, J. Kauppinen, A.
Nuottajarvi, H Koivisto. (2014). “E-sail test payload of the
ESTCube-1 nanosatellite.” Proceedings of the Estonian
Academy
of
Sciences.
(Online
article).
http://web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=
5&sid=2c2bd461-269b-4c3d-9b122425e96de43f%40sessionmgr115&hid=105
[9] M. Pendolino. (2015, October 19). Phone interview
reason why accepting the financial compensation from my
clients would be unethical to me.
MISSION STATUS AS A WHOLE
Because of the amount of tests and jobs that still need to
be completed for this project, I have advised my clients that I
believe we should take more time to ensure everything is done
correctly. However, my clients do not have much time to
spare. This conflict with time leaves my clients and me with
two situations. The first one being that we take more time on
the project and ensure that everything is done properly.
However, my clients tell me that it is highly unlikely that they
will be able to launch the satellite after the deadline. The other
situation is that we speed up and shorten processes such as
packing the tethers, fixing the slip ring, and holding off on the
vibrational test. However, this situation causes the satellite to
have a low probability of functioning properly and also
violates multiple codes of ethics as previously discussed.
With these two situations to consider, I feel as though this
satellite will not be completely successful without some sort
of compromise.
The NSPE declares in section III.1.b of its code of ethics
“Engineers shall advise their clients or employers when they
believe a project will not be successful” [5]. The ASME
Canons state a very similar code in section 9. It also states that
engineers must advise their clients if they believe the project
will not be successful [2]. These codes are important because
they mean that I am obligated to tell my clients that the E-sail
project is not going to be successful unless something is done.
I have to insist to my clients that we simply take more time on
the project or else this project will likely fail.
CONCLUSION
Because of all of the ethical violations that my clients
want me to commit in order to complete this project on time,
I must decline their suggestions. I must insist that we conduct
the vibration test in order to be completely sure that there will
not be any debris emitted when conditions become rough
during the journey. Concerning the slip ring that they
mentioned, I have to alert both my clients and the person
heading that aspect of the project. I will also have to reject
their monetary offer for packing the tethers and tell them that
we should have the satellite shipped to UH for proper packing.
Finally, under all of the conditions, I must inform my clients
that this project does not appear likely for complete success at
the rate we are going. In order to remain ethical during this
project, short cuts cannot be taken and the project will have to
take some sort of a loss. However, being ethical will ensure
that the E-sail satellite will be fully functional while in orbit
which is the ultimate goal of the project.
ADDITIONAL SOURCES
“Case 12 - An Invitation to Dinner.” Stanford University.
(Online
article).
http://biodesign.stanford.edu/bdn/ethicscases/12invitationtod
inner.jsp
REFERENCES
ACKNOWEDGEMENTS
3
Matthew Pendolino
I would like thank my RA Teddy Younker for forcing me
to go to Hillman Library in order to write my paper. I would
also like acknowledge Hillman Library for providing a quiet,
distraction free area for me to write this paper.
4
Matthew Pendolino
5