ethics

Qatar University

College of Engineering

Department of Electrical Engineering

Engineering Skills and Ethics – GENEG107, SPRING 2021

Assignment# 3

Date due: March 21 (Sunday), 2021

Objective: Describe and analyze the consequences of non-ethical or un-professional conducts (CLO 2)

ETHICS CASE 1:

Facts: Your student design team has designed a new Soap Box Derby car that allows children with physical and cognitive disabilities to race by allowing an adult to ride in a backseat and maintain full control of the car. Based on suggestions from the adults, you have added spring tension to the child’s steering wheel in front in order to simulate the feeling of driving and make the child’s experience more realistic and fun. The child will not have the ability to control the car, only the illusion of control. Before the first test run with an adult and a 14-year-old child onboard you hear the child’s parent tell the child to “be careful” and to “drive safely.” The parent turns to you, explains that because of a cognitive disability the child likely won’t understand the difference anyway, and asks you to tell the child that the front steering wheel is actually functional. The request that you lie to the child would take advantage of the child’s disability and it creates the possibility that the child would feel responsible if they were to lose the race or have an accident.

Source: Dr. Carla et al., “Utilizing an Engineering Ethical Reasoning Instrument in the Curriculum” 120th ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, American Society for Engineering Education, June 23-26, 2013, Paper ID #7607 .

Question: Would you lie to the child? ___ Yes ___ Can’t decide ___ No [footnoteRef:1] [1: 1 Your answers should be supported by clear justifications and references to the NSPE Code of Ethics. ]

ETHICS CASE 2:

Facts: The “yellow light dilemma”

Photo credit: WedlockPictures on flickr

Since the 1920s, engineers have tried to determine the ideal length of time that yellow traffic lights should be illuminated to safely allow cars to either stop or clear an intersection. Traffic engineers have developed standardized formulas that help gauge the minimum amount of time that a yellow light should be illuminated at specific intersections, taking into account factors like average driver response times, speed, rates of deceleration, vehicle length, etc. A yellow light that is too long can lead drivers to disregard the cautionary warning, while a light that is too short can lead to increased risk of accidents. In general, the standard suggestion for yellow light intervals is between 3-6 seconds.

In Chicago in 2014, the use of red light cameras proved to complicate traffic control when a whistleblower revealed an internal misuse of the laws of physics. Redflex Traffic Systems, a firm operating over 380 red light cameras in Chicago, calculated that slightly reduced yellow light intervals would lead to an increased issuance of automated tickets. An additional 77,000 tickets, worth $7.7 million in revenue, were said to be attributed to this strategically shorter interval. Science and engineering software consultant Brian Ceccarelli believes a number of municipalities have become accustomed to increased revenue from the use of automated ticketing systems. According to an article in American Scientist magazine, it appears that as a result, many city officials and traffic firms have occasionally turned a blind eye to the misapplication of carefully considered engineering formulas.

Source: Henry Petroski, “Traffic Signals, Dilemma Zones, and Red-Light Cameras,” American Scientist, May-June 2016, 150-153.

Question: What would you do in the above scenario? [footnoteRef:2] [2: 2 Your answers should be supported by clear justifications and references to the NSPE Code of Ethics.]