You are on page 1of 10

UNIT II ENGINEERING AS SOCIAL EXPERIMENTATION ENGINEERING AS EXPERIMENTATION Experimentation plays an important role in the process of designing the prod

ct! "hen it is decided to change a ne# engineering concept into its first ro gh design$ preliminary tests or sim lation sho ld %e cond cted! &sing formal experimental methods$ the materials and methods of designing are tried o t! These tests may %e %ased on more detailed designs! The test for designing sho ld %e e'ol'ed till the final prod ct prod ced! "ith the help of feed%ac( of se'eral tests$ f rther modification can %e made if necessary! )eyond these tests and experiments$ each engineering pro*ect has to %e 'ie#ed as an experiment! Similarities to Standard Experiments There are so many aspects$ #hich are of 'irt al for com%ining e'ery type of engineering #or(s to ma(e it s ita%le to loo( at engineering pro*ects as experiments! The main three important aspects are+ ,- Any engineering pro*ect or plan is p t into practice #ith partial ignorance %eca se #hile designing a model there are se'eral ncertainities occ rred! The reason to the fact that engineers don.t ha'e all the needed facts a'aila%le #ell in ad'ance %efore starting the pro*ect! At some point$ %oth the theoretical examining and the la%oratory testing m st %e %y/passed for the sa(e of completing the pro*ect! Really$ the s ccess of an engineer is %ased on the his talent #hich is exactly %eing the a%ility to s cceed in achie'ing *o%s #ith only a partial (no#ledge of scientific la#s a%o t the nat re and society! 0- The final o tcomes of engineering pro*ects are generally ncertain li(e that of experiments #hat #e do! In engineering$ in most of the cases$ the possi%le o tcomes may not %e (no#n and e'en small and mild pro*ects itself in'ol'e greater ris(s! The follo#ing ncertainities occ r in the model designs ,! Model sed for the design calc lations 0! Exact characteristics of the material p rchased! 1! 2onstancies of materials sed for processing and fa%rication! 3! A%o t the nat re of the press re the finished prod ct #ill enco nter! 4or instance$ a reser'oir may ca se damage to the s rro ndings and affect the ecosystem! If it lea(s or %rea(s$ the p rpose #ill not %e ser'ed! A special p rpose fingerprint reader may find its application in the identification and close o%ser'ation on the disagreeing persons #ith the go'ernment! A n clear reactor may ca se nexpected pro%lems to the s rro nding pop lation leading to a great loss to the o#ners! A hair dryer may gi'e damage to the n(no#ing or #rong sers from as%estos ins lation from its %arrel! 1- Good and effecti'e engineering depends pon the (no#ledge possessed a%o t the prod cts at the initial and end stages! This (no#ledge is 'ery sef l for increasing the effecti'eness of the c rrent prod cts as #ell as for prod cing %etter prod cts in f t re! This can %e achie'ed %y (eenly o%ser'ing on the engineering *o%s %y the #ay of experimentation! This monitoring is done %y ma(ing periodic o%ser'ations and tests %y loo(ing at for the s ccessf l performance and the side effects of the

*o%s! The tests of the prod ct.s efficiency$ safety$ cost/effecti'eness$ en'ironmental impact and its 'al e that depends pon the tility to the society sho ld also %e monitored! It also extends to the stage of client se! 5earning from the past It has %een expected that the engineers ha'e to learn not only form their o#n design and the prod ction system % t also the res lts of others! 6 e to lac( of comm nication$ pre* diced in not as(ing for clarification$ fear of la# and also mere negligence$ these things can happen to the contin ation of past mista(es! The follo#ing are some of the examples+ ,! The tragedy of 7Titanic. happened %eca se of the s fficient n m%er of life %oats! The same disaster too( place in the steamship 8the Arctic9 some years %efore$ %eca se ofthe same pro%lem! 0! The fall do#n of 8the S nshine S(yline )ridge9 in the %ay of Tham%a at S#eden in ,:;<$ on a mo'ing ship d e to improper matching of hori=ontal impact forces in mind! This co ld ha'e %een a'oided of the engineers had (no#n a%o t the stri(ing of the ships #ith the Maracai%o )ridge at >ene= lea in ,:?3 and the Tasman )ridge of A stralia in ,:@A! 1! The n clear reactor accident at Three Mile Island on March ,:@:$ #as d e to malf nctioning of the 'al'es! >al'es tho gh min te items$ are %eing among the least relia%le components of hydra lic systems! It #as a press re relief 'al'e and lac( of information a%o t its opening or closing state contri% ted to a n clear reactor accident at Three Mile Island! This malf nction #as already happened %eca se of the same reasons at other locations! 3! The disaster of Tettron 6am in 5os Angles #as d e to rapid flo# of #ater and s dden %rea( do#n! The % ilder didn.t consider the case of the 4ontenelle 6am$ #hich #as also collapsed d e to the same pro%lem! So$ to say that engineers sho ld not f lly depend on hand%oo(s and they sho ld ha'e some re'ie# of the past cases relating to their c rrent tas(! 2omparisons #ith standard Experiments Engineering is entirely different from standard experiments in fe# aspects! Those differences are 'ery m ch helpf l to find o t the special responsi%ilities of engineers and also help them in (no#ing a%o t the moral irresponsi%ilities #hich are in'ol'ed in engineering! ,! Experimental 2ontrol Mem%ers for t#o gro ps sho ld %e selected in a standard experimental control$ i!e Gro p A and Gro p )! The mem%ers of the gro p 7A. sho ld %e gi'en the special experimental treatment! The gro p 7). do not recei'e the same tho gh they are in the same en'ironment! This gro p is called the 7control gro p. Tho gh it is not possi%le in engineering % t for the pro*ects #hich are confirmed to la%oratory experiments! )eca se$ in engineering the experimental s %*ects are h man %eings #ho are o t of the control of the experimenters! In engineering$ the cons mers ha'e more control as they are the selecting a thority of a pro*ect! So in engineering it is impossi%le to follo# a random selection! An engineer has to #or( only #ith the past data a'aila%le #ith 'ario s gro ps #ho se the prod cts! So engineering can %e 'ie#ed as a nat ral experiment #hich ses h man s %*ects! ) t today$ most of the engineers do not care for the a%o'e said Experimental 2ontrol! 0! Informed 2onsent Engineering is closely related to

the medical testing of ne# dr gs and techniB es on h man %eings as it also concerned #ith h man %eings! "hen ne# medicines ha'e %een tested$ it sho ld %e informed to the persons #ho ndergo the test! They ha'e moral and legal rights to (no# a%o t the fact #hich is %ased on 8informed consent9 %efore ta(e part in the experiment! Engineering m st also recogni=e these rights! "hen a prod cer sells a ne# prod ct to a firm #hich has its o#n engineering staff$ generally there #ill %e an agreement regarding the ris(s and %enefits form that testing! Informed consent has t#o main principles s ch as (no#ledge and 'ol ntariness! 4irst$ the persons #ho are p t nder the experiment has to %e gi'en all the needed information to ma(e an appropriate decision! Second$ they m st enter into the experiment #itho t any force$ fra d and deception! The experimenter has also to consider the f ndamental rights of the minorities and the compensation for the harmf l effects of that experiment! In %oth medicine and engineering there may %e a large gap %et#een the experimenter and his (no#ledge on the diffic lties of an experiment! This gap can %e filled only #hen it is possi%le to gi'e all the rele'ant information needed for dra#ing a responsi%le decision on #hether to participate in the experiment or not! In medicine$ %efore prescri%ing a medicine to the patient$ a responsi%le physician m st search for rele'ant information on the side effects of the dr g! The hospital management m st allo# him to ndergo different treatments to different patients and finally the patient m st %e ready to recei'e that information from the physician! Similarly it is possi%le for an engineer to gi'e rele'ant information a%o t a prod ct only #hen there is a %etter co/operation %y the management and B ic( acceptance from the c stomers! The follo#ing conditions are essential for a 'alid informed consent a! The consent m st %e gi'en 'ol ntarily and not %y any force! %! The consent m st %e %ased on the rele'ant information needed %y a rational person and sho ld %e presented in a clear and easily nderstanda%le form! c! The consenter m st %e capa%le of processing the information and to ma(e rational decisions in a B ic( manner! d! The information needed %y a rational person m st %e stated in a form to nderstand #itho t any diffic lty and has to %e spread #idely! e! The experimenter.s consent has to %e offered in a%sentia of the experimenter %y a gro p #hich represents many experiments! Cno#ledge Gained Scientific experiments ha'e %een cond cted to acB ire ne# (no#ledge! "hereas engineering pro*ects are cond cted as experiments not for getting ne# (no#ledge! S ppose the o tcomes of the experiment is %est$ it tells s nothing ne#$ % t merely affirms that #e are right a%o t something! Mean #hile$ the nexpected o tcomes p t s search for ne# (no#ledge!

ENGINEERS AS RESPONSI)5E EXPERIMENTERS

The engineers ha'e so many responsi%ilities for ser'ing the society! ,! A primary d ty is to protect the safety of h man %eings and respect their right of consent! DA conscientio s commitment to li'e %y moral 'al esE! 0! Fa'ing a clear a#areness of the experimental nat re of any pro*ect$ tho ghtf lforecasting of its possi%le side effects$ and an effort to monitor them reasona%ly! DA comprehensi'e perspecti'e or relati'e informationE! 1! &nrestricted free personal in'ol'ement in all the steps of a pro*ect! DA tonomyE 3! )eing acco nta%le for the res lts of a pro*ect DAcco nta%ilityE A! Exhi%iting their technical competence and other characteristics of professionalism! 2onscientio sness 2onscientio sness implies conscio sness Gsense of a#areness-! As holding the responsi%le profession #ith maintaining f ll range moral ethics and 'al es #hich are rele'ant to the sit ation! In order to nderstand the gi'en sit ation$ its implications$ (no#ho#$ person #ho is in'ol'ed or affected$ Engineers sho ld ha'e open eyes$ open ears and open mind! The present #or(ing en'ironment of engineers$ narro# do#n their moral 'ision f lly #ith the o%ligations accompanied #ith the stat s of the employee! More n m%er of engineers are only salaried employees$ so$ they ha'e to #or( #ithin large % rea cracies nder great press re to #or( smoothly #ithin the company! They ha'e to gi'e importance only to the o%ligations of their employers! Grad ally$ the small negati'e d ties s ch as not altering data %y fra d$ not 'iolating patent right and not %rea(ing confidentiality$ may %e 'ie#ed as the f ll extent of moral desire! As mentioned$ engineering as social experimentation %rings into light not only to the person concerned % t also to the p %lic engineers as g ardians of the p %lic interest i!e!$ to safeg ard the #elfare and safety of those affected %y the engineering pro*ects! This 'ie# helps to ens re that this safety and #elfare #ill not %e affected %y the search for ne# (no#ledge$ the h rry to get profits$ a small and narro# follo# p of r les or a concern o'er %enefits for the many and ignoring the harm to the fe#! The social experimentation that in'ol'ed in engineering sho ld %e restricted %y the participants consent! Rele'ant Information "itho t rele'ant fact al information$ conscientio s is not possi%le! 4or sho#ing moral concern there sho ld %e an o%ligation to o%tain and assess properly all the a'aila%le information related to the f lfillment of one.s moral o%ligations! This can %e explained as+ ,- To nderstand and grasp the circ mstance of a person.s #or($ it is necessary to (no# a%o t ho# that #or( has a moral importance! 4or example$ A person is trying to design a good heat exchanger! There is nothing #rong in that! ) t at the same time$ if he forgets the fact that the heat exchanger #ill %e sed in the man fact re of an illegal prod ct$ then he is said to %e sho#ing a lac( of moral concern! So a person m st %e a#are of the #ider implication of his #or( that ma(es participation in a pro*ect! 0- )l rring the circ mstance of a person.s #or( deri'ed from his speciali=ation and di'ision of la%o r is to p t the responsi%ilities on someone else in the organi=ation! 4or example if a company prod ces items #hich are o t of fashion or the items #hich promotes nnecessary energy #astage$ then it is easy to %lame sales department! The a%o'e said means$ neglecting the

importance of a person.s #or(s also ma(es it diffic lt in acB iring a f ll perspecti'e along a second feat re of fact al information i!e!$ conseB ence of #hat one does! So$ #hile gi'ing regard to engineering as social experimentation$ points o t the importance of circ mstances of a #or( and also enco rage the engineers to 'ie# his speciali=ed acti'ities in a pro*ect as a part of a large social impact! Moral A tonomy This refers to the personal in'ol'ement in one.s acti'ities! People are morally a tonomo s only #hen their moral cond ct and principles of actions are their o#n i!e!$ gen ine in one.s commitment to moral 'al es! Moral %eliefs and attit des m st %e integrated into an indi'id al.s personality #hich leads to a committed action! They cannot %e agreed formally and adhered to merely 'er%ally! So$ the indi'id al principles are not passi'ely a%sor%ed from others! "hen he is morally a tonomo s and also his actions are not separated from himself! "hen engineering ha'e seen as a social experimentation$ it helps to (eep a sense of a tonomo s participation in a person.s #or(! An engineer$ as an experimenter$ is ndergoing training #hich helps to form his identity as a professional! It also res lts in nexpected conseB ence #hich helps to inspire a critical and B estioning attit des a%o t the c rrent economic and safety standards! This also moti'ates a greater sense of personal in'ol'ement in a person.s #or(! Acco nta%ility The people those #ho feel their responsi%ility$ al#ays accept moral responsi%ilities for their actions! It is (no#n as acco nta%le! In short$ 7acco nta%le. means %eing c lpa%le and hold responsi%le for fa lts! In general and to %e proper$ it means the general tendency of %eing #illing to consider one.s actions to moral examinations and %e open and respond to the assessment of others! It comprises a desire to present morally con'incing reasons for one.s cond ct #hen called pon in specific circ mstances! The separation of ca sal infl ence and moral acco nta%ility is more common in all % siness and professions and also in engineering! These differences arising from se'eral feat res of modern engineering practices are as follo#s+ ,! 5arge H scale engineering pro*ects al#ays in'ol'e di'ision of #or(! 4or each and e'ery piece of #or($ e'ery person contri% tes a small portion of their #or( to#ards the completion of the pro*ect! The final o tp t s transmitted from one.s immediate #or( place to another ca sing a decrease in personal acco nta%ility! 0! 6 e to the fragmentation of #or($ the acco nta%ility #ill spread #idely #ithin an organi=ation! The personal acco nta%ility #ill spread o'er on the %asis of hierarchies of a thority! 1! There is al#ays a press re to mo'e on to a different pro*ect %efore finishing the c rrent one! This al#ays leads to a sense of %eing acco nta%le only for f lfilling the sched les! 3! There is al#ays a #ea(er pre/occ pation #ith legalities! In other #ords this refers to a #ay a moral in'ol'ement %eyond the laid do#n instit tional role! To concl de$ engineers are %eing al#ays %lamed for all the harmf l side effects of their pro*ects! Engineers cannot separate themsel'es from personal responsi%ilities for their #or(! 2O6ES O4 ETFI2S

The codes of ethics ha'e to %e adopted %y engineering societies as #ell as %y engineers! These codes exhi%it the rights$ d ties$ and o%ligations of the mem%ers of a profession! 2odes are the set of la#s and standards! A code of ethics pro'ides a frame#or( for ethical * dgment for a professional! A code cannot %e said as totally comprehensi'e and co'er all ethical sit ations that an engineer has to face! It ser'es only as a starting point for ethical decision/ma(ing! A code expresses the circ mstances to ethical cond ct shared %y the mem%ers of a profession! It is also to %e noted that ethical codes do not esta%lish the ne# ethical principles! They repeat only the principles and standards that are already accepted as responsi%le engineering practice! A code defines the roles and responsi%ilities of professionals! Roles of codes and its f nctions ,! Inspiration and G idance 2odes gi'e a con'inced moti'ation for ethical cond ct and pro'ide a helpf l g idance for achie'ing the o%ligations of engineers in their #or(! 2odes contri% te mostly general g idance as they ha'e to %e %rief! Specific directions may also %e gi'en to apply the code in morally good #ays! The follo#ing engineering societies ha'e p %lished codes of ethics! AAES / American Association of Engineering Societies A)ET / Accreditation )oard for Engineering and Technology G&SANSPE / National Society of Professional Engineer G&SAIEEE / Instit te of Electrical and Electronics Engineering G&SAAI2TE / All India 2o ncil for Technical Ed cation GIndiaMost of the technological companies ha'e esta%lished their o#n codes s ch as pentagon G&SA-$ Microsoft etc! These codes are 'ery m ch helpf l to strengthen the moral iss es on the #or( of an engineer! 0! S pport 2odes al#ays s pport an engineer #ho follo#s the ethical principles! 2odes gi'e engineers a positi'e$ a possi%le good s pport for standing on moral iss es! 2odes also ser'e as a legal s pport for engineers! 1! 6eterrence and 6iscipline 2odes act as a deterrent %eca se they ne'er enco rage to act immorally! They also pro'ide discipline among the Engineers to act morally on the %asis of codes does not o'err le the rights of those %eing in'estigated! 3! Ed cation and M t al &nderstanding 2odes ha'e to %e circ lated and appro'ed officially %y the professionals$ the p %lic and go'ernment organi=ations #hich concern #ith the moral responsi%ilities of engineers and organi=ations! A! 2ontri% ting to the profession.s P %lic Image 2odes help to create a good image to the p %lic of an ethically committed profession! It helps the engineers in an effecti'e manner to ser'e the p %lic! They also gi'es self/reg lation for the profession itself! ?! Protecting the Stat s I o 2odes determine ethical con'entions #hich help to create an agreed pon minim m le'el of ethical cond ct! ) t they can also s ppress the disagreement #ithin the profession!

@! Promoting ) siness Interests 2odes help to impro'e the % siness interests! They help to morali=e the % siness dealings to %enefit those #ithin the profession! 5imitations of 2odes ,! 2odes are restricted to general and 'ag e #ordings! 6 e to this limitation they cannot %e applica%le to all sit ations directly! It is also impossi%le to analy=e f lly and predict the f ll range of moral pro%lems that arises in a complex profession! 0! Engineering codes often ha'e internal conflicts! So they can.t gi'e a sol tion or method for resol'ing the conflict! 1! They cannot %e treated as the final moral a thority for any professional cond ct! 2odes represent a compromise %et#een differing * dgments and also de'eloped among heated committee disagreements! 3! Only a fe# practicing engineers are the mem%ers of Professional Societies and so they can not %e compelled to a%ide %y their codes! A! Many engineers #ho are the mem%ers of Professional Societies are not a#are of the existence of the codes of their societies and they ne'er go thro gh it! ?! 2odes can %e reprod ced in a 'ery rapid manner! @! 2odes are said to %e coerci'e i!e!$ implemented %y threat or force! A )A5AN2E6 O&T5OOC ON 5A" A %alanced o tloo( on la#s stresses the necessity of la#s and reg lations and their limitations in directing engineering practice! In order to li'e$ #or( and play together in harmony as a society$ there m st %e a %alance %et#een indi'id al needs and desires against collecti'e needs and desires! Only ethical cond ct can pro'ide s ch a %alance! This ethical cond ct can %e applied only #ith the help of la#s! 5a#s are important as the people are not f lly responsi%le and %eca se of the competiti'e nat re of the free enterprise system #hich does not enco rage moral initiati'e! The model of engineering as social experimentation allo#s for the importance of clear la#s to %e effecti'ely enforced! Engineers o ght to play an effecti'e role in promoting or changing enforcea%le r les of engineering as #ell as in enforcing them! So the codes m st %e enforced #ith the help of la#s! The follo#ing are the t#o %est examples! ,! )a%ylon.s ) ilding 2ode+ G,@A; )!2!This code #as made %y Famm ra%i$ (ing of )a%ylon! Fe formed a code for % ilders of his time and all the % ilders #ere forced to follo# the code %y la#! Fe 8If a % ilder has % ilt a ho se for a man and has not made his #or( so nd$ and the ho se #hich he has % ilt #as fallen do#n and so ca sed the death of the ho seholder$ that % ilder shall %e p t to death! If it ca ses the death of the ho se holder.s son$ they shall p t that % ilder.s son to death! If it ca ses the death of the ho se holder.s sla'e$ he shall gi'e sla'e to the ho seholder! If it destroys property he shall replace anything it has destroyedJ and %eca se he has not made the ho se so nd #hich he has % ilt and it has fallen do#n$ he shall re% ild the ho se #hich has fallen do#n from his o#n property! If a % ilder has % ilt a ho se for a man and does not ma(e his #or( perfect and the #all % lges$

that % ilder shall p t that #all in to so nd condition at his o#n cost9! The a%o'e portion of )a%ylon.s % ilding code #as respected d ly! ) t the aspects find only little appro'al today! This code gi'es a po#erf l incenti'e for selfreg lation! 0! The &nited States Steam%oat 2ode+ D,;A0 A!6E Steam engines in the past #ere 'ery large and hea'y! Kames "att$ Oli'er E'ans and Richard Tre'ethi( modified the old steam engines %y remo'ing condensers and made them compact! )eyond caref l calc lations and g idelines$ explosions of %oiler happened on steam %oats$ %eca se of the high speed of the %oats! The safety 'al'es #ere na%le to (eep steam press re p ca sing explosion! 6 ring that period in ,;th cent ry$ more than 0A<< people #ere (illed and 0<<< people #ere in* red %eca se of the explosion of %oilers in steam %oats! 6 e to this$ the r ling congress in &SA passed a la# #hich pro'ided for inspection of the safety aspects of ships and their %oilers and engines! ) t his la# t rned o t to %e ineffecti'e d e to the corr ptions of the inspectors and also their inadeB ate training regarding the safety chec(ing! Then Alfred G thiro$ an engineer of Illinoise had inspected a%o t 0<< steam %oats on his o#n cost and fo nd o t the reasons for the %oiler explosions and made a report! Fis recommendations #ere p %lished %y a Senator Shields of Illinoise and incorporated in senate doc ments! "ith the help of this$ another la# #as passed! No# it is in the hands of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers #ho form lated the standards for prod cing steam %oats! TFE 2FA55ENGER 2ASE ST&6L The #orld has (no#n a%o t many n m%er of accidents! Among them the explosion of the space sh ttle 72hallenger. is the 'ery familiar one! In those days this case had %een re'ie#ed 'igoro sly %y media co'erage$ go'ernment reports and transcripts of hearings! This case deals #ith many ethical iss es #hich engineers faced! It poses many B estions %efore s! "hat is the exact role of the engineer #hen safety iss es are concernM "ho sho ld ha'e the ltimate a thority for decision ma(ing to order for a la nchM "hether the ordering of a la nch %e an engineering or a managerial decisionM 2hallenger space sh ttle #as designed to %e a re sa%le one! The sh ttle mainly consisted of an or%iter$ t#o solid propellant %oosters and a single liB id/ propeller %ooster! All the %oosters #as ignited and the or%iter #as lifted o t the earth! The solid roc(et %ooster #as of re sa%le type! The liB id propellant %ooster #as sed to finish the lifting of the sh ttle in to the or%it! This #as only a part of the sh ttle #hich has %een re sed! The accident too( place on 0;th Kan ary ,:;?$ d e to the fail re of one of the solid %oosters! In the design of the space sh ttle$ the main parts #hich needed caref l design of the fields *oints #here the indi'id al cylinders #ere placed together! The assem%ly mainly consists of tang and cle'is *oints #hich are sealed %y t#o O/rings made p of synthetic r %%er only$ not specifically hat resistant! The f nction of the O/rings are to pre'ent the com% stion gases of the solid propellant from escaping! The O/rings #ere eroded %y hot gases$ % t this #as not a serio s pro%lem$ as the solid roc(et %oosters #ere only for re se initially for the fe# min tes of the flight! If the erosion of the O/rings co ld %e in a controlled mannaer$ and they #o ld not completely % rnt thro gh$ then the design of the *oint #o ld %e accepta%le$ ho#e'er the design of the O/rings in this sh ttle #as not so! In the post flight experiment in ,:;A$ the Thio(ol engineers noticed %lac( soot and grease on

the o tside of the %oosters d e to lea( of hot gases %lo#n thro gh the O/rings! This raised a do %t on the resiliency of the materials sed for the O/rings! Thio(ol engineers redesigned the rings #ith steel %illets to #ithstand the hot gases! ) t nfort nately this ne# design #as not ready %y that time of flight in ,:;?! )efore la nching$ it #as necessary to disc ss the political en'ironment nder #hich NASA #as operating at that time! )eca se the % dget of NASA has decided %y 2ongress! These factors played the main ca se for na'oida%le delay in the decision to %e ta(en for the sh ttle performance$ the press res placed for rgency in la nching in ,:;? itself$ %efore the la nch of R&SSIAN pro%e to pro'e to the congress that the program #as on processing! The la nching date had already %een postponed for the a'aila%ility of 'ice president GEORGE )&SF$ the space NASA s pporter! 5ater f rther delayed d e to a pro%lem in micro s#itch in the hatch/loc(ing mechanism! The cold #eather pro%lem and long disc ssions #ent on among the engineers! The n m%er of tele/conferences f rther delayed the pre'io s testing in ,:;A itself! The lo#est temperat re #as A1o4 % t O/ring temperat re d ring the proposed la nch period happened to %e only 0: o4$ #hich #as far %elo# the en'ironment temperat re at #hich NASA had the pre'io s trail! Someho#$ the ma*or factor that made the re'ised final decision #as that pre'io s trial! Someho#$ the ma*or factor that made the re'ised final decision #as that #ith the a'aila%le data at that time there seemed to %e no correlation %et#een the temperat re and the degree at #hich O/rings had eroded %y the %lo#/%y gas in the pre'io s la nch! Ass ming a safety concern d e to cold #eather$ tho gh the data #ere not concl ded satisfactorily$ a decision #as ta(en not to delay f rther for so many reasons$ and the la nch #as finally recommended! ) t nexpectedly the o'ernight temperat re at the time of la nch #as ; o4 colder than e'er experienced! It #as estimated that the temperat re of the right hand %ooster #o ld %e only at 0;4! The camera noticed a p ff of smo(e coming o t from the field *oints as soon as the %oosters #ere ignited! ) t the O/rings #ere not positioned properly on their seats d e to extreme cold temperat re! The p tty sed as heat resistant material #as also too cold that it failed to protect the O/rings! All these effects made the hot gases to % rn past %oth the Orings$ leading to a %lo#/%y o'er an arc aro nd the O/rings! Tho gh immediately f rther sealing #as made %y the %y/prod cts of com% stion in the roc(et prop lsion$ a glassy oxide formed on the *oints! The oxides #hich #ere temporarily sealing the field *oints at high temperat re$ later #ere shattered %y the stresses ca sed %y the #ind! Again the *oints #ere opened and the hot gases escaped from the solid %oosters! ) t the %oosters #ere attached to the large liB id f el %oosters as per the design! This made the flames d e to %lo#/%y from the solid f el %oosters B ic(ly to % rn thro gh the external tan(! This led to the ignition of the liB id propellant ma(ing the sh ttle exploded! 5ater the accident #as re'ie#ed and in'estigations #ere carried o t %y the n m%er of committees in'ol'ed and %y 'ario s go'ernment %odies! President Regan appointed a commission called Rogers 2ommission #hich constit ted many disting ished scientists and engineers! The eminent scientists in the commission after thoro gh examination and in'estigations ga'e a report on the flexi%ility of the material and pro'ed that the resiliency of the material #as not s fficient and drastically red ced d ring the cold la nch! As the res lt of commission hearings$ a lot of contro'ersial arg ments #ent on among the Thio(ol engineers! Thio(ol and NASA in'estigated possi%le ca ses of the explosion! Mr!)ois*oly$ the main mem%er

in the in'estigation team$ acc sed Thio(ol and NASA of intentionally do#nplaying the pro%lems #ith the O/rings #hile loo(ing for the other ca ses of the accidents! The hot disc ssions h rted the feelings and stat s of the headed engineers li(e Mr!)ois*oly$ Mr!2 rtis and Mr!Mellicam! 4inally the management.s atmosphere also %ecame intolera%le! This e'ent sho#s the responsi%ility$ f nctions$ morality$ d ties of the engineers leading to ethical pro%lems!

You might also like