Engineering As Social Experimentation: Lecture # 6

LECTURE # 6
ENGINEERING AS SOCIAL
EXPERIMENTATION
WHAT IS AN EXPERIMENT?
To undertake a work of novel type, means carrying out an
experiment.
History reminds us of the experiment of

April 1912, a ship of three football field size
having a capacity of 3547 passengers which
was proclaimed the greatest engineering
achievement ever, it was advertised as the first
fully safe ship.
Adorned with such confidence, the captain allowed the ship to sail
full speed at night in an area frequented by icebergs. No extra
precautions had seemed necessary for an unsinkable ship. The
result: 1522 died (drowned or frozen) out of 2227 for the first Titanic
Trip.
Engineering is viewed as an experimental process, the experiment
which is not performed in a laboratory under controlled conditions,
Rather an experiment on a social scale involving human subjects.
ENGINEERING AS EXPERIMENTATIONS:
When it is decided to convert a new engineering concept into its first

rough design, materials and processes are tried out employing
formal experimental techniques. These tests serve as basis for more
detailed design. At the production stage further tests are run, until a
finished product is developed.
The normal design process is thus iterative, modifications are made
on the basis of feedback. Each engineering project taken as a whole is
thus an experiment.
SIMILARITIES TO STANDARD EXPERIMENTS :
Any project is carried out in partial ignorance, there are

uncertainties: in the abstract model used for design calculations, in
precise characteristics of materials purchased, in material processing
and fabrication, about nature of the stresses the finished product
encounter.
It is not possible to wait until all relevant facts are up before
commencing work. Engineer’s success lie in his ability to accomplish
tasks safely with only a partial knowledge of scientific laws about
nature and society.
Sometimes the projects which are seemingly benign, pose great risks.
A reservoir for example can damage to a region’s social fabric or to its
ecosystem. And if dams leak breaks the reservoir may not serve its
intended purpose.
Effective engineering relies upon the knowledge gained about
products both before and after they leave the factory, knowledge
needed for current products improvement.
Ongoing success in engineering depends upon gaining new knowledge
as does ongoing success in experimentation.
Periodic Monitoring is as essential in engineering as it is to
experimentation for successful performance and unintended side
effects.
LEARNING FROM PAST
Engineers learn from their own earlier designs, as well
as from others. But sometimes the problem arise like
the lack of established channels of
communication
Misplaced pride in not asking for information
Embarrassment at failure or fear of litigation
Plain neglect can be a hurdle in flow of
information
Thus leading to repetition of past mistake and the
examples are:
Lack of sufficient lifeboats in Titanic, same was
repeated on the steamship Arctic decades after.
Lack of protection against impact by shipping caused
Sweden’s worst ever bridge collapse on January 24,1980.
Same happened on May 15 at Tampa Bay, Florida.
In June 1966 a section of the Milford Haven Bridge in
Wales collapsed during construction, a bridge of
similar design was being erected by the same bridge
builder in Australia, when it too partially collapsed
killing 33 and injuring 19, this happened the same year.
Valves are notorious for being among the least
reliable components of hydraulic system, on March 28,
1979 the lack of information related to its open and
shut state caused nuclear reactor accident at Three
Mile Island. With similar valve the same happened
again at other locations too.
CONTRASTS WITH STANDARD EXPERIMENTS
To be sure, engineering differ from standard experimentation. Some of the
differences help to highlight engineer’s special responsibilities. Exploring
the differences can also aid our thinking about the moral responsibilities of
all these engaged in engineering.
EXPERIMENTAL CONTROL:
An experimental control involves the selection, at random, of
members for two different groups. The members of one group receive
special treatment. Members of the other group, called the control
group, do not receive that special treatment, although they are
subjected to the same environment as the first group.
In engineering, this is not usual practice unless the project is
confined to laboratory. Because the experimental subjects are human
beings or finished and sold products out of the experimenter’s
control. And the control like usual experiments cannot be
established as end user is different.
INFORMED CONSENT:
Viewing Engineering as experiment on societal scale places the focus

where it should be: on human beings affected by technology, for the
experiment is performed on persons.
As medical practice has increasingly tended to accept as
fundamental the subject’s moral and legal rights to give informed
consent before participating in an experiment, contemporary
engineering is only beginning to recognize those rights. We believe
that the problem of informed consent, which is so vital to the
concept of a properly conducted experiment involving human
subjects, should be the keystone in the interaction between the
public and the engineers. The public which do not have any idea
about the product matters more, if a manufacturer is going to sell a
product to a knowledgeable firm that has its own engineering staff,
there is usually an agreement regarding the shared risks and benefit
of trying out the technological innovations.
Informed consent is understood as including two main elements
knowledge and voluntariness.
Subject should be given not only the information they request, but all
the information needed to make a reasonable decision.
Subjects must enter into the experiment without being subjected to
force , fraud or deception.
The mere purchase of a product does not constitute informed consent,
the public and client must be given the relevant information about
practical risks and benefits in terms they can understand. Supplying
complete information is neither possible nor necessary in most of the
cases.
In medical and engineering there is a
substantial gap between the
experimenter’s and subject’s understanding
of the complexities. Many times it happens
that management is reluctant to disclose many
of the features of a product or project because of
potential competitors.
A consent is valid if it is defined by the following conditions :
The consent was given voluntarily.

The consent was based on the information that a rational person
would want, together with any other information needed, presented
to them in understandable form.
The consenter was competent to process the information and make
rational decisions.
What to do?? In a situation when intended user is not obvious!!
Information that a rational person would need, stated in
understandable form, should be widely propagated.
The subject’s consent was offered in proxy by a group that
collectively represents many subjects of like interests, concerns and
exposure to risk.

Engineering As Social Experimentation: Lecture # 6

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Engineering As Social Experimentation: Lecture # 6

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Engineering As Social Experimentation: Lecture # 6

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

LECTURE # 6

History reminds us of the experiment of

When it is decided to convert a new engineering concept into its first

SIMILARITIES TO STANDARD EXPERIMENTS :

Any project is carried out in partial ignorance, there are

Viewing Engineering as experiment on societal scale places the focus

The consent was given voluntarily.

You might also like