Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Based on your interpretation of the NSPE Code of Ethics, is it ethically acceptable for you as an engineer to?
Your automotive company is expanding into off-road and all-terrain vehicles (ATVs). As a design engineer you are considering two alternative design concepts for a new vehicle, one having three wheels and another with four.
Engineering research has shown that the three-wheeled vehicles are considerably less stable and safe overall than four-wheeled vehicles. Nevertheless, both designs would satisfy the existing safety standards for sale of each class of vehicle, so either design could be chosen without any legal problems for the company.
However, there is another factor to consider. Market research has shown that a three-wheeled version would be easier to design and produce, and would sell many more vehicles at higher profit margins than would a four-wheeled version.
Based on your interpretation of the NSPE Code of Ethics, is it ethically acceptable for you as an engineer to recommend that your company should produce the three-wheeled version, in spite of its greater potential safety risks?
3 Answers
- oil field trashLv 710 years agoFavorite Answer
Under the fundamental canons, the first canon should over rule any other considerations. With that in mind you can only go with the four wheel design.
- 10 years ago
It depends on how you define "considerably" in the sentence:
"Engineering research has shown that the three-wheeled vehicles are [considerably] less stable and safe overall than four-wheeled vehicles."
..and how you define "greater" in this sentence:
"...in spite of its [greater] potential safety risks?"
For example:
Motorcycles are "considerably" more accident-prone than other motor vehicles.
As opposed to:
Cars have "considerably" more accidents than aircraft.
Because the word "considerably" and "greater" have different implications depending on the figures. As an engineer, it's your ethical duty to determine whether the figures regarding potential safety risks between 3-wheelers and 4-wheelers are:
1.) statistically significant -> such that any conclusions cannot be owed to mere chance, and
2.) significant enough -> such that the increase in potential safety risk with regards to 3-wheelers as opposed to 4-wheelers are too far apart from each other to consider it as "okay".
Financial impact is always secondary to safety; As you can see, the above two points do not consider financial impact when evaluating whether or not to produce the 3-wheeled version.
