Engineering_Design_Process

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235959233

Engineering Design Process

Book · January 2010

CITATIONS READS

65 29,949

2 authors, including:

Yousef Haik
Hamad bin Khalifa University
214 PUBLICATIONS   2,886 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Biomagnetic Fluid Dynamics View project
Nanocidal for the Osteomyelitis management View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Yousef Haik on 19 December 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Engineering Design Process

Second Edition
Yousef Haik

University of North Carolina—Greensboro

Tamer Shahin

Kings College London, UK

Australia • Brazil • Japan • Korea • Mexico • Singapore • Spain • United Kingdom • United States

Engineering Design Process, © 2011, 2003 Cengage Learning
Second Edition
Yousef Haik and Tamer Shahin ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this work covered by the
copyright herein may be reproduced, transmitted, stored,
Publisher, Global Engineering: or used in any form or by any means graphic, electronic, or
Christopher M. Shortt mechanical, including but not limited to photocopying,
Senior Acquisitions Editor: Randall Adams recording, scanning, digitizing, taping, web distribution,
Senior Developmental Editor: Hilda Gowans information networks, or information storage and retrieval
Editorial Assistant: Tanya Altieri systems, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the
Team Assistant: Carly Rizzo 1976 United States Copyright Act, without the prior written
Marketing Manager: Lauren Betsos permission of the publisher.
Media Editor: Chris Valentine
Content Project Manager: Kelly Hillerich For product information and technology assistance,
Production Service: RPK Editorial Services, Inc. contact us at Cengage Learning Customer &
Copyeditor: Shelly Gerger-Knechtl Sales Support, 1-800-354-9706
Proofreader: Martha McMaster
Indexer: Shelly Gerger-Knechtl For permission to use material from this text or product,
Compositor: Integra submit all requests online at cengage.com/permissions.
Senior Art Director: Michelle Kunkler
Internal Designer: Carmela Pereira Further permissions questions can be emailed to
Cover Designer: Andrew Adams [email protected]
Cover Images: © YAKOBCHUK VASYL/
Shutterstock; © ArchMan/Shutterstock; Library of Congress Control Number: 2010922617
© 3DProfi/Shutterstock
Text and Image Permissions Researcher: ISBN-13: 978-0-495-66814-5
Kristiina Paul
Senior Rights Acquisitions Specialist: ISBN-10: 0-495-66814-1
Deanna Ettinger
First Print Buyer: Arethea Thomas Cengage Learning
200 First Stamford Place, Suite 400
Stamford, CT 06902
USA

Cengage Learning is a leading provider of customized
learning solutions with office locations around the globe,
including Singapore, the United Kingdom, Australia, Mexico,
Brazil, and Japan. Locate your local office at:
international.cengage.com/region.

Cengage Learning products are represented in Canada by
Nelson Education Ltd.

For your course and learning solutions, visit
www.cengage.com/engineering.

Purchase any of our products at your local college store or at
our preferred online store www.CengageBrain.com.

Printed in the United States of America
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 13 12 11 10

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

1C H A P T E R •

Introduction

One of the first steps in the engineering design process is to have design meetings. In design meet-
ings, engineers, technicians, and other staff members come up with solutions to fill specific customer
need. (Zsolt Nyulaszi/Shutterstock)

2
Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

1.2 Definition of Engineering Design 3

1.1 OBJECTIVES

By the end of this chapter, you should be able to
1. Define engineering design.
2. Appreciate the importance and challenges of engineering design.
3. Understand the need for a formalized systematic design process.
4. Name and briefly describe the steps for the design process.
5. Distinguish between different systematic design models.
6. Discuss ethical problems and professional codes of ethics.

1.2 DEFINITION OF ENGINEERING DESIGN

A formal definition of engineering design is found in the curriculum guidelines of the
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET). The ABET definition states
that engineering design is the process of devising a system, component, or process to meet
desired needs. It is a decision-making process (often iterative), in which the basic sciences,
mathematics, and engineering sciences are applied to optimally convert resources to meet a
stated objective. Among the fundamental elements of the design process is the establish-
ment of objectives and criteria, synthesis, analysis, construction, testing, and evaluation.
The engineering design component of a curriculum must include most of the following fea-
tures: development of student creativity, use of open-ended problems, development and use
of modern design theory and methodology, formulation of design problem statement and
specifications, production processes, concurrent engineering design, and detailed system
description. Furthermore, it is essential to include a variety of realistic constraints, such as
economic factors, safety, reliability, aesthetics, ethics, and social impact.

1.2.1 Design Levels

As in any field of human activity, there are different degrees of difficulty. In design, these
stages are adaptive design, developed design, and new design.

• Adaptive design: In the great majority of instances, the designer’s work will be
concerned with the adaptation of existing designs. There are branches of manufac-
turing in which development has practically ceased, so that there is hardly anything
left for the designer to do except make minor modifications, usually in the dimen-
sions of the product. Design activity of this kind demands no special knowledge or
skill, and the problems presented are easily solved by a designer with ordinary
technical training. One such example can be the elevator, which has remained the
same technically and conceptually for some time now. Another example is a wash-
ing machine. This has been based on the same conceptual design for the last

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

4 CHAPTER 1 Introduction

several years and varies in only a few parameters, such as its dimensions, materi-
als, and detailed power specifications.
• Development design: Considerably more scientific training and design ability are
needed for development design. The designer starts from an existing design, but
the final outcome may differ markedly from the initial product. Examples of this
development could be from a manual gearbox in a car to an automatic one and
from the traditional tube-based television to the modern plasma and LCD versions.
• New design: Only a small number of designs are new designs. This is possibly the most
difficult level in that generating a new concept involves mastering all the previous skills
in addition to creativity and imagination, insight, and foresight. Examples of this are the
design of the first automobile, airplane, or even the wheel (a long time ago). Try to think
of entirely new designs which have been introduced over the last decade.

1.3 IMPORTANCE AND CHALLENGES OF ENGINEERING DESIGN

From the definition in the previous section, it is evident that design is both a scientific and
a creative process. Albert Einstein asserted that imagination is more important than knowl-
edge, for knowledge is finite whereas imagination is infinite.

It is essential to realize that design does not start with an engineering drawing made on a
computer package such as Pro/Engineer™ or even AutoCAD™. Such a final engineering
drawing can be regarded in some ways as the ‘lab report’ of your final design and hence a
method of communicating your design with other people. There are many steps before this, and
these steps will be discussed throughout the course of this chapter and in more detail in the rest
of the book. Of course, as computer packages become more advanced, designers are able to
start using them earlier on in the design process to aid them with their design. However, as
design is a creative process, most of the input will have to come from the designer.

Design is widely regarded as one of the most important steps in the development of a
product. Indeed, without a design, there would be no product! Not only this, but no matter how
good the manufacturing, production, sales, etc. are, if a product is poorly designed, the end
product still will be a bad idea and will ultimately fail, as no one likes to purchase a bad idea.

Most consumers will not be aware or even interested in the detailed technical specifi-
cations of a product or how efficient the manufacturing process. The first thing that a con-
sumer will usually look at before deciding to purchase something is its design and ‘how it
looks’. This will be followed by the reliability and quality of the item, then by the price.
Think about how people choose to buy a coffee machine or even a mobile phone.

It is interesting to note here that price does not always come first. Many people are
willing to pay a bit more if they see the benefits, and this is usually reflected in the design.
In some cases, people will only purchase an item if it is expensive for reassurance of qual-
ity and possibly prestige (no one would buy a Rolls Royce or a Rolex simply because it
was cheap!). However, in most cases, part of the design process will be to design for mini
mum cost so that a product can be competitive in the marketplace.

Many sources, including the United Kingdom Department of Trade and Industry
(DTI) identified that investing money and resources at the design stage yields the biggest
return on investment of a product. One of the reasons for this is that changes can be made
easily at this early stage, whereas later on, changes in the manufacturing methods and so
on could be extremely costly—both in time and money.

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

1.3 Importance and Challenges of Engineering Design 5

Throughout history, humans have been successfully designing artifacts to satisfy the
needs of civilization. History is full of great designs and inventions. Recently, design has
been driven to meet an existing requirement, to reduce a hazard or an inconvenience, or to
develop a new approach. Not all that engineers build has become successful; occasionally,
catastrophic failures occur. A few of the well-publicized disasters associated with engi-
neering systems are as follows:

• The Chernobyl nuclear power plant disaster occurred in 1996. According to
the World Health Organization (WHO), this lead to the evacuation and resettle-
ment of over 336,000 people, 56 direct deaths, 4000 thyroid cancer cases
among children, and approximately 6.6 million people highly exposed to
radiation.

• The Challenger space shuttle exploded in 1986 after an O-ring seal in its right
solid-rocket booster failed. This caused a flame leak, which reached the external
fuel tank. The space shuttle was destroyed in 73 seconds after takeoff, and all crew
members died.

• The loss of the cabin roof during the flight of a Boeing 737 in 1988 caused one
crew member to be blown out of the airplane. Age and the design of the aircraft,
which relied on stress to be alleviated by controlled breakaway zones, were
ultimately to blame.

• A skywalk at the Kansas City Hyatt Regency Hotel collapsed just after the hotel
was opened in 1981. The skywalk rods were not designed to hold the combined
weights of the walkways and the 2000 people that had gathered on the them. 200
people were injured, and 114 were killed.

• A crack in an engine pylon caused the loss of an engine and the subsequent crash
of a DC-10 airplane in 1979, killing 273 people.

• The design layout of the fuel tanks was the cause of the Concorde crash in
2000, killing 113 people. When the aircraft struck debris on the runway, the tire
that subsequently exploded caused a tank to rupture. The Concorde’s airworthi-
ness certificate was revoked, and all Concorde airplanes remained grounded for
15 months. This eventually contributed to the demise of supersonic passenger
planes.

• The crash of Columbia Space Shuttle in 2003 was attributed to the detachment of a
piece of debris from the external tank bipod attach region and striking the underside or
leading edge of the port wing of the Columbia.

Walton lists the reason for failures in most engineering designs:

• Incorrect or overextended assumptions
• Poor understanding of the problem to be solved
• Incorrect design specifications
• Faulty manufacturing and assembly
• Error in design calculations
• Incomplete experimentation and inadequate data collection
• Errors in drawings
• Faulty reasoning from good assumptions

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

6 CHAPTER 1 Introduction

As can be seen, all of the disaster examples given and the reasons for their catastrophic
failures can be summarized and categorized within one or more of the items Walton lists.

However, even if a design is a technical success and no faults occur, many designs still
fail to achieve their desired goals, and many achieve them but are not adopted by the users.
So why do many people fail at design? One of the answers is that design is inherently diffi-
cult and a major challenge. Designers not only have to have the creative and technical skills
to develop an idea to become a reality, but they also need to predict the future in some ways.
They need to predict each step of the product’s life from visualization to realization and final-
ly to the end of its life cycle and how it will be disposed of and/or recycled. This means that
a designer needs to develop a product that sponsors will like and fund (and so on and so forth)
all the way down to the distributors, vendors, users, operators, and society as a whole.

To complicate matters further, everyone has a different opinion/desire on how a product
should be designed. A pair of identical twins brought up in the same environment easily can
walk into a shop where one can pick up a mobile phone and say it was the most beautiful thing
he has ever seen, while the other may decide that it is ghastly. This makes predicting whether
people will like and use a product developed by the designer somewhat of a challenge.

It is for these reasons that the systematic design process was introduced to help guide
the designer to achieve his/her goals without hindering creativity. The following section
discusses this in more detail.

1.4 INTRODUCTION TO SYSTEMATIC DESIGN

Engineering students during their training are presented with a vast amount of theoretical
material and information. They only realize their weakness when they are faced with the task
of logically applying what they have learned to a specific end. As long as their work is based
on familiar models or previous designs, the knowledge they possess is perfectly adequate to
enable them to find a solution along conventional lines. As soon as they are required to devel-
op something already in existence to a more advanced stage or to create something entirely
new without a previous design, they will fail miserably, unless they have reached a higher
level of understanding. Without a set of guidelines, they are at a loss for a starting point and
a clear finishing goal line. The design process was formalized to enable both students and
professional designers to follow a systematic approach to design and help them guide their
creativity and technical problem-solving skills to a satisfactory end.

There are various forms of the systematic design process, and different people list as
few as four steps to as many as nine. Essentially though, they all revolve around the same
following basic principles:

• Requirements
• Product concept
• Solution concept
• Embodiment design
• Detailed design

The most important step of the design process is identifying the needs of the customer
or the ‘Requirements’ stage. However, before this is done, it is important to establish who

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

1.4 Introduction to Systematic Design 7

the customers are. A vital concept to grasp here is that customers are not only the end
users. Customers of a product are everyone who will deal with the product at some stage
during its lifetime. For example, the person who will sell the product is also a customer. A
designer must make the product attractive for the seller to agree to advertise and market it.
Another example of a customer is the person who will service and maintain the product
during its lifetime in operation. If a product is difficult to maintain and/or service, inde-
pendent service providers will be keen to recommend other products or charge more to
service the item. And so on. Let us take a look at possible customers of an airplane. These
can include:

• Passengers
• Crew
• Pilot
• Airport
• Engineers and service crew
• Fueling companies
• Airlines
• Manufacturing and production departments
• Baggage handlers
• Cleaning and catering companies
• Sales and marketing
• Accounts and finance departments
• Military/Courier/Cargo/etc
• Authorities and official bodies
• Companies involved with the items that will be outsourced

Each of these customers has entirely different (and sometimes conflicting) needs for the
same product, and by identifying these customers first, it is then possible to identify all the
needs and arrive at a reasonable compromise according to priority and feasibility.

Most of the time the customer provides a generic statement of need, and it is up to the
engineer to identify the specific needs of the customer. For example, we are required to
design a chair that can be used by a child. Clearly, all of us know how to sit on a chair, so
in that perspective, we know how a chair works. A chair is used for sitting. Unfortunately,
this description does not say how the chair is made. What material is used? Is the chair
flexible or rigid? Does the chair rotate or is it fixed? What does it mean that the chair is to
be used by a child? Is safety the biggest concern? How much will the chair cost? How old
is the child? And so on.

Many factors in engineering design are not based on a mathematical model, but the
engineering design process is maintained to be systematic. In the previous example, we
can use Newton’s laws of equilibrium to describe the forces generated in the chair’s legs.
We can also describe the deformation of the legs when a person sits down. We can even
use finite element analysis to estimate the stresses in the legs, the seat, and the back. We
can also describe the manufacturing process and the joints used in the chair. Some of these
factors can be represented using mathematical models, but what mathematical model will
describe the color of the chair, and what mathematical model will measure if the chair is

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

8 CHAPTER 1 Introduction

safe for use by a child? The function of the chair cannot be completely presented by a
mathematical model. These functions are manipulated by reasoning. Different schemes
may be needed to describe a certain design (e.g., analytical models identify the geometric
presentation of the artifact, economic schemes describe the cost of producing the artifact,
verbal contents describe the function of the artifacts, and so on). In the designing process,
mathematical modeling, although important, is not sufficient to design the artifact.

The design engineer must learn to think independently, to draw conclusions, and
to combine solutions. Many believe that they can acquire this skill set by attending
lectures and reading textbooks. They fail to realize that they are only accumulating
one fresh item of knowledge after another. Understanding, logical deduction, and
judgment cannot be conferred from outside; on the contrary, they are acquired only by
diligent thinking and working with the knowledge already possessed. A basic precon-
dition for independent design is a lively imagination. Such imagination is required to
do original work.

1.5 DESIGN PROCESS

To design is to create a new product that turns into profit and benefits society in some way.
The design process is a sequence of events and a set of guidelines that helps define a clear
starting point that takes the designer from visualizing a product in his/her imagination to
realizing it in real life in a systematic manner—without hindering their creative process.

The ability to design requires both science and art. The science can be learned through
a systematic process (outlined in this chapter), experience, and problem-solving technique
(all of which will be mastered during your college education). The art is gained by prac-
tice and a total dedication to becoming proficient.

The design of a device or system can be done in one of two ways:

1. Evolutionary change: A product is allowed to evolve over a period of time with
only slight improvement. This is done when there is no competition. The creative
capabilities of the designer are limited.

2. Innovation: Rapid scientific growth and technological discoveries as well as
competition among companies for their slice of the market have placed a great
deal of emphasis on new products, which draw heavily on innovation. The cre-
ative skills and analytical ability of the design engineer play an important role.

The invention of the telephone was a truly innovative design. Since its invention,
many then tried to evolve and hence improve it over many decades, but very little actual-
ly changed until the next innovative and technological jump occurred, and that was the
mobile phone. This created a whole new market along with new competition, and since
then, this technology has been evolving once more—every once in a while showing signs
of new innovation, such as the inclusion of cameras and video-calling and the integration
of pda, internet access, and mp3 facilities into one device. Proficient designers control evo-
lution and innovation so they occur simultaneously. Although the emphasis is on innova-
tion, designers must test their ideas against prior design. Engineers can design for the
future but must base results on the past.

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

1.5 Design Process 9
Section 1.4 summarized the principle steps of a systematic design process and men-
tioned that various people have slightly different forms of representing such a process. This
section describes these different steps in more detail and introduces a selection of various
viewpoints from different authors. Figures 1.1 through 1.3 show some of these in chart form.

Figure 1.1 Design process map. (From MECHANICAL DESIGN SYNTHESIS, 2/e by
Ray C. Johnson. Copyright © 1978. Reprinted by permission of Krieger Publishing Company.)
Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

10 CHAPTER 1 Introduction

-
-

Figure 1.2 Design process map. (“Design Process Map” from ENGINEERING DESIGN:
A SYNTHESIS OF VIEWS by C.L. Dym. Copyright © 1994. Reprinted with the permission of
Cambridge University Press.)
Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

1.5 Design Process 11

Figure 1.3 Design process map. (From ENGINEERING DESIGN: A SYSTEMATIC
APPROACH by G. Pahl and W. Beitz, translated by Ken Wallace, Lucienne Blessing
and Frank Bauert, Edited by Ken Wallace. Copyright © Springer-Verlag London
Limited 1996. Reprinted by permission.)
Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

12 CHAPTER 1 Introduction

The difference in these charts is in sequence names. Careful examination of the charts
leads to identification of virtually the same stages. Some stages are combined in one process.
However, closer inspection of the timeline of these charts hints towards a trend to further for-
malizing the design process and leaning more towards addressing the problem and postpone
the solution to the latter stages rather than finding a solution early on and then trying to
improve it. This is most apparent between Figure 1.1, which was published in 1978, and
Figure 1.2, which was published in 1994. Figure 1.3 is widely regarded as the benchmark for
the modern systematic design process, and new representations are invariably a modified ver-
sion of this chart. This is also true of Figure 1.4, which illustrates the design steps that are
adopted in this book. It also represents a roadmap to the book on how it is structured and ref-
erence to the relevant chapters is to be found within the figure. The steps demonstrated are
iterative and require a series of decisions to move the design along. More often a design
oscillates back and forth between stages until it reaches an acceptable form and can move to
the next stage. A brief description of these stages is summarized in the following subsections.

1.5.1 Identifying Customer Needs (Requirements)

The need for a new design can be generated from several sources, including the following:

• Client request: In a design company, a client may submit a request for developing
an artifact. It is often unlikely that the need will be expressed clearly. The client
may know only the type of product that he or she wants; for example, “I need a
safe ladder.”

• Modification of an existing design: Often a client asks for a modification of an
existing artifact to make it simpler and easy to use. In addition, companies may want
to provide customers with new, easy-to-use products. For example, in a market
search you may notice many brand names for coffee makers and the differences
among them, such as shape, material used, cost, or special features. As another
example, Figures 1.5 through 1.8 demonstrate design developments for paperclips.
Each of these designs has its own advantages over the other clips. For example, the
endless filament paperclip can be used from either side of the clip. One may argue
that the different designs are based on the human evolution of designs and birth of
new ideas; however, the major driving force for the renovation of designs is to keep
companies in business. The first patent for a paperclip was filed in 1899, and the
latest was filed in 1994—a hundred years of paperclip development and innovations.

• Generation of a new product: In all profit-oriented industries, the attention, talent,
and abilities of management, engineering, production, inspection, advertising,
marketing, sales, and servicing are focused on causing the product to return profit
for the company and in turn for company stockholders. Unfortunately, sooner or
later, every product is preempted by another or degenerates into profitless price
competition. For an industry to survive in today’s world, it must continue to grow;
it cannot afford to remain static. This growth, throughout history, has been built on
new products. New products have a characteristic lifecycle pattern in sales volume
and profit margins, as shown in Figure 1.9. A product will peak out when it has
saturated the market and then begin to decline. It is obvious that an industry must
seek out and promote a flow of new product ideas.These new products are usually
protected by applying for patents.

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

1.5 Design Process 13

Requirements Chapter 3 Needs &
Market Analysis

Chapter 4 Requirements

Product concept Chapter 5 Functions

Chapter 6 Specifications

Solution concept Chapter 7 Conceptualization

Chapter 8 Evaluating
Alternatives

Embodiment Chapter 9 Embodiment
Design

Detailed design Chapter 10 Detailed Analysis
& Simulation

Experiment

Marketing $$$

Figure 1.4 Design process.
Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

14 CHAPTER 1 Introduction

Figure 1.5 William Middelbrook patent for a machine
for making paperclips (1899).

1.5.2 Market Analysis (Requirements)

Designers must locate what is already available in the market and what they have to offer.
Information gathering is a vital task. Some companies hire design engineers so they can
get away from paying royalties to patent holders. Design engineers may consult the fol-
lowing sources to determine market availability:

• Technical and trade journals
• Abstracts
• Research reports
• Technical libraries
• Catalog of component suppliers
• U.S. Patent Office
• The Internet
Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

1.5 Design Process 15

Figure 1.6 Patent for Gothic-style paperclip, issued in 1934.
The information gathered may reveal an available design solution and the hardware to
accomplish the goal. Sometimes, the goal may be altered to produce a requested product
or abandoned if the product already exists. Knowledge of existing products will save the
designer and client time and money. Once the designer determines what is in the market,
creativity should be directed towards generating alternatives. Chapter 3 discusses Market
analysis and the gathering of information in more detail.

1.5.3 Defining Goals (Requirements)

In this stage of the design process, the designer defines what must be done to resolve the
need(s). The definition is a general statement of the desired end product. Many of the dif-
ficulties encountered in design may be traced to poorly stated goals, or goals that were
hastily written and resulted in confusion or too much flexibility.

In almost all cases, the client request comes in a vague verbal statement such as, “I
need an aluminum can crusher.” or “I need a safe ladder.” Designers must recognize that
Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

16 CHAPTER 1 Introduction

Figure 1.7 Patent for an endless filament paper clip,
issued to Charles T. Link (1991).
customer needs are not the same as product specifications. Needs should be expressed in
functional terms. Customers will offer solutions; designers must determine the real needs,
define the problem, and act accordingly. During the customer interview, the designer must
listen carefully to what the customer has to say. The designer’s function is to clarify the
client’s design requirements. An objective tree may be constructed for clarification.
Often the need statement and goals are combined into one process. An objective tree
is a tool used by designers to organize the customer’s wants into categories; Chapter 4 dis-
cusses both needs and goals in more detail.

1.5.4 Establishing Functions (Product Concept)

Recognizing the generality of the need statement and where the problem/need stands in
the whole system is a fundamental element in the design process. There is a big differ-
ence between being asked to design a car suspension system and designing a car. It is
useful to consider the level at which the designer is asked to work. It is also useful to
identify the functions instead of the potential solutions. This is sometimes referred to as
Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

1.5 Design Process 17

Figure 1.8 Patent for a large paperclip made of spring
wire, issued to Linda and Richard Froehlich (1994).

remaining ‘solution neutral’ (i.e., no solution is referred to at this stage). In reality, the
designer is trying to assess what actions the product should perform during its lifetime
and operation. This technique allows for alternatives to be explored that can address the
needs and goals rather than fixating on a solution that the customer provides uninten-
tionally early on. For example, a client may ask for a traffic light system to be placed on
a particular junction, where in fact, an underpass may be a more viable solution to
achieve the real goals of the task, which may be to alleviate traffic congestion. This stage
of the design process demonstrates one of the advantages of systematic design in that it
guides the designer to a problem-focused design rather than a solution-focused one.
Another example: A blood bank approached a designer to find a solution for its fre-
quently broken centrifuge. When the centrifuge breaks down, the blood separation unit
shuts down. The blood bank has tried replacing the centrifuge, but after a few months,
it breaks down. The need statement is to fix the centrifuge in such a way that it will
Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

18 CHAPTER 1 Introduction Percentage of cost Cost committed
Specification stage Product design
100 Conceptualization Cost incurred
75
50
25

Time

Figure 1.9 Basic lifecycle of new product.

reduce the break-down time. A designer who recognizes the design process will not
jump on fixing the centrifuge; he will ask the following question: “What is the function
we try to accomplish with the centrifuge?” The answer is to separate blood by enhanc-
ing the gravitational pull. Then the function is to separate blood cells from the whole
blood. This clear statement enables the designer to find alternative solutions other than
the centrifuge. Often the functions will be divided into subfunctions, and they will define
the requirements of the artifact.

A further example: If you were required to design a lawn mower, the function should
be defined as a method for shortening the grass. The difference between two definitions of
a lawn mower (designing a lawn mower or method to shorten grass) is that one may limit
your imagination and creativity while the other may give you free reign for creativity.
Chapter 5 discusses establishing functional structure in more detail.

1.5.5 Task Specifications (Product Concept)

This stage requires the designer to list all pertinent data and parameters that tend to control
the design and guide it towards the desired goal; it also sets limits on the acceptable solu-
tions. It should not be defined too narrowly, because the designer will eliminate acceptable
solutions. However, it cannot be too broad or vague, because this will leave the designer
with no direction to satisfy the design goal. Let’s reconsider the lawn mower example and
set some task specifications.

1. It should be safe to operate, especially when used near children.
2. It should be easy to operate by an average person.
3. The device should be powered (either manually or by other means).
4. The device should be easily stored in a garage.

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

1.5 Design Process 19

5. The device should allow combinations of lawn tasks:
a. Collecting leaves and mowing the lawn.
b. Chopping the leaves and fertilizing.
c. Chopping branches for mulch.

6. The device should use available hardware and require sheet metal, fiber glass, or
plastic.

7. Material should be selected based on cost, manufacturability, strength,
appearance, and ability to withstand varying weather conditions.

8. The device must be reliable and not require frequent maintenance.
9. The selling price should be lower than that in the market.

1.5.6 Conceptualization (Solution Concept)

The process of generating alternative solutions to the stated goal in the form of concepts
requires creative ability. The conceptualization starts with generating new ideas. In this
stage, the designer must review the market analysis and the task specifications as he or she
engages in the process of innovation and creativity. This activity usually requires free-hand
sketches for producing a series of alternative solutions. The alternatives do not need to be
worked out in detail but are recorded as possibilities to be tested. Alternatives to perform
the functions should be listed in an organized fashion. For example, to design a novel
transportation system, a designer may list the methods as follows.

1. Natural way
a. Human
i. Walk
ii. Swim
b. Animal
i. Ride
ii. Pulled in a cart

2. With aids
a. Land
i. Bike
ii. Skate
b. Water
i. Canoe
ii. Tube
c. Air
i. Kite
d. Mechanical
i. Land
• Car
• Train
• Tube
ii. Water
• Ship
• Sled

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

20 CHAPTER 1 Introduction

iii. Air
• Plane
• Rocket

Chapter 7 covers this stage of the design process in more detail

1.5.7 Evaluating Alternatives (Solution Concept)

Once a number of concepts have been generated in sufficient detail, a decision must be made
about which one or ones will enter the next, most expensive, stages of the design process. An
excellent technique to guide the designer in making the best decision regarding these alter-
natives is a scoring matrix, which forces a more penetrating study of each alternative against
specified criteria. Chapter 8 covers this stage of the design process in more detail.

1.5.8 Embodiment Design

Once the concept has been finalized, the next stage is known as the embodiment design,
and this is where the product that is being designed begins to take shape. This stage does
not include any details yet (no dimensions or tolerances, etc.) but will begin to illustrate
a clear definition of a part, how it will look, and how it interfaces with the rest of the
parts in the product assembly. This stage is separated from both the conceptual design
and the detailed design in that new technologies can replace old ones based on the exact
same concept. For example, The concept of a traffic light system will remain the same
(three lights: red, amber, and green), perform the same functions and specifications, and
work conceptually the same way, but as technologies advance, the lights themselves can
change from bulb to LEDs or the way the lights change can be from using a timer to
cycle through the lights to using a system that is connected to a modern traffic network.
Possibly, the future may hold a system where the traffic light is able to sense the most
efficient light for the junction to alleviate congestion and change the lights accordingly.
The concept still remains the same, but the execution and parts or the ‘embodiment’ of
the design can change. Chapter 9 discusses embodiment design in more detail.

1.5.9 Analysis and Optimization

Once a possible solution for the stated goal has been chosen, the synthesis phase of the
design has been completed and the analysis phase begins. This is also known as ‘Detailed
Design’ and is what most of the engineering courses in an undergraduate degree program
cover. In essence, the solution must be tested against the physical laws. The manufactura-
bility of the chosen product also must be checked to ensure its usefulness. A product may
satisfy the physical laws, but if it cannot be manufactured, it is a useless product. This
stage is put in iterative sequencing with the original synthesis phase. Often, analysis
requires a concept to be altered or redefined then reanalyzed, so that the design is con-
stantly shifted between analysis and synthesis. Analysis starts with estimation and is fol-
lowed by order of magnitude calculation.

Estimation is an educated guess based on experience. Order of magnitude analysis is
a rough calculation of the specified problem. The order of magnitude does not provide an
exact solution, but it gives the order in which the solution should be expected. Chapter 10

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

1.5 Design Process 21

covers some of the aspects you will need to perform. However, as detailed design covers
the majority of an undergraduate engineering program and differs from product to prod-
uct, details of this stage are beyond the scope of this book.

1.5.10 Experiment

The experiment stage in engineering design requires that a piece of hardware is
constructed and tested to verify the concept and analysis of the design as to its work ability,
durability, and performance characteristics. Here the design on paper is transformed into a
physical reality. Three techniques of construction are available to the designer:

1. Mock-up: The mock-up is generally constructed to scale from plastics, wood,
cardboard, and so forth. The mock-up is often used to check clearance, assembly
technique, manufacturing considerations, and appearance. It is the least expensive
technique, provides the least amount of information, and is quick and relatively
easy to build.

2. Model: This is a representation of the physical system through a mathematical
similitude. Four types of models are used to predict behavior of the real
system:
a. A true model is an exact geometric reproduction of the real system, built to
scale, and satisfying all restrictions imposed in the design parameters.
b. An adequate model is so constructed to test specific characteristics of the design.
c. A distorted model purposely violates one or more design conditions. This
violation is often required when it is difficult to satisfy the specified conditions.
d. Dissimilar models bear no apparent resemblance to the real system, but
through appropriate analogies, they give accurate information on behavioral
characteristics.

3. Prototype: This is the most expensive experimental technique and the one
producing the greatest amount of useful information. The prototype is the
constructed, full-scale working physical system. Here the designer sees his or her
idea come to life and learns about such things as appropriate construction
techniques, assembly procedures, work ability, durability, and performance under
actual environmental conditions.

As a general rule, when entering the experimental stage of the design process, one should
first deal with the mock-up, then the model, and finally the prototype (after the mock-up
and model have proven the real worth of the design), to allow beneficial interaction with
concept and analysis. Chapter 10 covers this section in more detail.

1.5.11 Marketing

This stage requires specific information that defines the device, system, or process. Here
the designer is required to put his or her thoughts regarding the design on paper for the
purpose of communication with others. Communication is involved in selling the idea to
management or the client, directing the shop on how to construct the design, and serving
management in the initial stages of commercialization.

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

22 CHAPTER 1 Introduction

The description should take the form of one of the following:

1. A report containing: a detailed description of the device, how it satisfies the need
and how it works, a detailed assembly drawing, specifications for construction, a
list of standard parts, a cost breakdown, and any other information that will ensure
that the design will be understood and constructed exactly as the designer intended.

2. A flyer containing a list of the special features that the design can provide, adver-
tisements, promotional literature, market testing, and so forth.

Although this section is predominantly beyond the scope of this book, it is possible to refer
to Chapters 2 and 3, which cover some of the essential skills needed to succeed here.

1.6 PROFESSIONALISM AND ETHICS

Before you delve into the rest of this book, it is important to understand how you, as a stu-
dent, will develop into a professional engineer. This will dictate the way in which you deal
with all your professional issues. Understanding the concept of being a professional engi-
neer may sound easy, but adopting it and living by it involves far more depth and effort.

Professionalism is a way of life. A professional person is one who engages in an activity
that requires a specialized and comprehensive education and is motivated by a strong desire
to serve humanity. The work of engineers generally affects the day-to-day life of all humans.
Developing a professional frame of mind begins with your engineering education. Being a
professional should imply that in addition to providing the specialized work that is expected
of him/her, the professional engineer should provide such services with honesty, integrity, and
morality. In this spirit, many have tried to be more explicit and have developed rules and
guidelines with which to adhere to. Providing a set of rules to be followed in all circumstances
is not as straightforward as it might seem as some of the rules will be problem-, profession-,
and situation-dependent. Inevitably, others have discussed the ethical implications of the pro-
fession as a set of moral values that are associated with culture and religion. With a subject
like this, debates will continue, and there will possibly never be a definitive set of rules that
the entire world can agree on. However, several engineering societies have developed a code
of ethics that must be followed by its member engineers. This serves as an acceptable com-
promise, and from time to time, these codes get reviewed and updated when necessary.

In such a small introduction, it is immediately apparent that ethics is a complex and
still emerging subject. Because of its importance, the authors have designed a lab that deals
with ethics (Lab 1: Ethics) and presents several case studies for examination, discussion,
and debate. Students should do this lab immediately after covering this section. For addi-
tional reading, several online resources deal with ethics, including.

• http://web.mit.edu/ethics/www/essays/probcase.html
• http://onlineethics.org

1.6.1 NSPE Code of Ethics

As mentioned in the previous section, many engineering societies now include their version
of a code of ethics by which their members must adhere to. This book refers to the code of

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

1.6 Professionalism and Ethics 23

ethics by the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE).1 It is updated from time
to time, and this section refers to the January 2006 Code of Ethics. Other engineering soci-
eties have a very similar code of ethics, which will vary in style or wording, but they all
invariably require that engineers uphold and advance the integrity, honor, and dignity of the
engineering profession by

• Using their knowledge and skill for the enhancement of human welfare.
• Being honest and impartial, and serving with fidelity the public, their employers

and clients.
• Striving to increase the competence and prestige of the engineering profession.

The NSPE Code of Ethics is divided into three main sections:

1. The Fundamental Canons: These are the main issues that govern a professional
engineer from an ethical and professional standing.

2. Rules of Practice: This section discusses the first five points of the fundamental
canons in more detail.

3. Professional Obligations: This section discusses the last point of the fundamen-
tal canons in more detail and is focused towards professional conduct from a
legal, ethical and societical viewpoint.

The remaining part of this chapter lists excerpts from the NSPE Code of Ethics. Students
should read and discuss the points raised and try to think of examples whereby they could
be applied in the workplace.

The Fundamental Canons

While fulfilling their professional duties, engineers shall

1. Hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public.
2. Perform services only in areas of their competence.
3. Issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner.
4. Act for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees.
5. Avoid deceptive acts.
6. Conduct themselves honorably, responsibly, ethically, and lawfully so as to

enhance the honor, reputation, and usefulness of the profession.

Rules of Practice

1. Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public.
a. If engineers’ judgment is overruled under circumstances that endanger life or
property, they shall notify their employer or client and such other authority as
may be appropriate.

1Reprinted by Permission of the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) www.nspe.org.

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

24 CHAPTER 1 Introduction

b. Engineers shall approve only those engineering documents that are in
conformity with applicable standards.

c. Engineers shall not reveal facts, data, or information without the prior consent
of the client or employer except as authorized or required by law or this Code.

d. Engineers shall not permit the use of their name or associate in business
ventures with any person or firm that they believe is engaged in fraudulent or
dishonest enterprise.

e. Engineers shall not aid or abet the unlawful practice of engineering by a
person or firm.

f. Engineers having knowledge of any alleged violation of this Code shall report
thereon to appropriate professional bodies and, when relevant, also to public
authorities, and cooperate with the proper authorities in furnishing such
information or assistance as may be required.

2. Engineers shall perform services only in the areas of their competence.
a. Engineers shall undertake assignments only when qualified by education or
experience in the specific technical fields involved.
b. Engineers shall not affix their signatures to any plans or documents dealing
with subject matter in which they lack competence, nor to any plan or
document not prepared under their direction and control.
c. Engineers may accept assignments and assume responsibility for coordination
of an entire project and sign and seal the engineering documents for the entire
project, provided that each technical segment is signed and sealed only by the
qualified engineers who prepared the segment.

3. Engineers shall issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner.
a. Engineers shall be objective and truthful in professional reports, statements, or
testimony. They shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such
reports, statements, or testimony, which should bear the date indicating when it
was current.
b. Engineers may express publicly technical opinions that are founded upon
knowledge of the facts and competence in the subject matter.
c. Engineers shall issue no statements, criticisms, or arguments on technical
matters that are inspired or paid for by interested parties, unless they have
prefaced their comments by explicitly identifying the interested parties on
whose behalf they are speaking, and by revealing the existence of any interest
the engineers may have in the matters.

4. Engineers shall act for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees.
a. Engineers shall disclose all known or potential conflicts of interest that could
influence or appear to influence their judgment or the quality of their
services.
b. Engineers shall not accept compensation, financial or otherwise, from more
than one party for services on the same project, or for services pertaining to the
same project, unless the circumstances are fully disclosed and agreed to by all
interested parties.
c. Engineers shall not solicit or accept financial or other valuable consideration,
directly or indirectly, from outside agents in connection with the work for
which they are responsible.

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

1.6 Professionalism and Ethics 25

d. Engineers in public service as members, advisors, or employees of a
governmental or quasi-governmental body or department shall not participate
in decisions with respect to services solicited or provided by them or their
organizations in private or public engineering practice.

e. Engineers shall not solicit or accept a contract from a governmental body on
which a principal or officer of their organization serves as a member.

5. Engineers shall avoid deceptive acts.
a. Engineers shall not falsify their qualifications or permit misrepresentation
of their or their associates’ qualifications. They shall not misrepresent or
exaggerate their responsibility in or for the subject matter of prior
assignments. Brochures or other presentations incident to the solicitation of
employment shall not misrepresent pertinent facts concerning employers,
employees, associates, joint venturers, or past accomplishments.
b. Engineers shall not offer, give, solicit, or receive, either directly or indirectly, any
contribution to influence the award of a contract by public authority, or which may
be reasonably construed by the public as having the effect or intent of influencing
the awarding of a contract. They shall not offer any gift or other valuable
consideration in order to secure work. They shall not pay a commission, percentage,
or brokerage fee in order to secure work, except to a bona fide employee or bona
fide established commercial or marketing agencies retained by them.

Professional Obligations

1. Engineers shall be guided in all their relations by the highest standards of hon-
esty and integrity.
a. Engineers shall acknowledge their errors and shall not distort or alter the facts.
b. Engineers shall advise their clients or employers when they believe a project
will not be successful.
c. Engineers shall not accept outside employment to the detriment of their regular
work or interest. Before accepting any outside engineering employment, they
will notify their employers.
d. Engineers shall not attempt to attract an engineer from another employer by
false or misleading pretenses.
e. Engineers shall not promote their own interest at the expense of the dignity and
integrity of the profession.

2. Engineers shall at all times strive to serve the public interest.
a. Engineers shall seek opportunities to participate in civic affairs; career
guidance for youths; and work for the advancement of the safety, health, and
well-being of their community.
b. Engineers shall not complete, sign, or seal plans and/or specifications that are
not in conformity with applicable engineering standards. If the client or
employer insists on such unprofessional conduct, they shall notify the proper
authorities and withdraw from further service on the project.
c. Engineers shall endeavor to extend public knowledge and appreciation of
engineering and its achievements.
d. Engineers shall strive to adhere to the principles of sustainable development in
order to protect the environment for future generations.

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

26 CHAPTER 1 Introduction

3. Engineers shall avoid all conduct or practice that deceives the public.
a. Engineers shall avoid the use of statements containing a material
misrepresentation of fact or omitting a material fact.
b. Consistent with the foregoing, engineers may advertise for recruitment of personnel.
c. Consistent with the foregoing, engineers may prepare articles for the lay or
technical press, but such articles shall not imply credit to the author for work
performed by others.

4. Engineers shall not disclose, without consent, confidential information concern-
ing the business affairs or technical processes of any present or former client,
employer, or public body on which they serve.
a. Engineers shall not, without the consent of all interested parties, promote or
arrange for new employment or practice in connection with a specific project
for which the engineer has gained particular and specialized knowledge.
b. Engineers shall not, without the consent of all interested parties, participate in
or represent an adversary interest in connection with a specific project or
proceeding in which the engineer has gained particular specialized knowledge
on behalf of a former client or employer.

5. Engineers shall not be influenced in their professional duties by conflicting interests.
a. Engineers shall not accept financial or other considerations, including free
engineering designs, from material or equipment suppliers for specifying their
product.
b. Engineers shall not accept commissions or allowances, directly or indirectly,
from contractors or other parties dealing with clients or employers of the
engineer in connection with work for which the engineer is responsible.

6. Engineers shall not attempt to obtain employment or advancement or professional
engagements by untruthfully criticizing other engineers, or by other improper or
questionable methods.
a. Engineers shall not request, propose, or accept a commission on a contingent
basis under circumstances in which their judgment may be compromised.
b. Engineers in salaried positions shall accept part-time engineering work only to
the extent consistent with policies of the employer and in accordance with
ethical considerations.
c. Engineers shall not, without consent, use equipment, supplies, laboratory, or
office facilities of an employer to carry on outside private practice.

7. Engineers shall not attempt to injure, maliciously or falsely, directly or indirectly,
the professional reputation, prospects, practice, or employment of other
engineers. Engineers who believe others are guilty of unethical or illegal practice
shall present such information to the proper authority for action.
a. Engineers in private practice shall not review the work of another engineer for
the same client, except with the knowledge of such engineer or unless the
connection of such engineer with the work has been terminated.
b. Engineers in governmental, industrial, or educational employ are entitled to
review and evaluate the work of other engineers when so required by their
employment duties.
c. Engineers in sales or industrial employ are entitled to make engineering
comparisons of represented products with products of other suppliers.

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

1.6 Professionalism and Ethics 27

8. Engineers shall accept personal responsibility for their professional activities,
provided, however, that engineers may seek indemnification for services arising
out of their practice for other than gross negligence, where the engineer’s inter-
ests cannot otherwise be protected.
a. Engineers shall conform with state registration laws in the practice of
engineering.
b. Engineers shall not use association with a nonengineer, a corporation, or
partnership as a “cloak” for unethical acts.

9. Engineers shall give credit for engineering work to those to whom credit is due
and will recognize the proprietary interests of others.
a. Engineers shall, whenever possible, name the person or persons who may be
individually responsible for designs, inventions, writings, or other
accomplishments.
b. Engineers using designs supplied by a client recognize that the designs remain
the property of the client and may not be duplicated by the engineer for others
without express permission.
c. Engineers—before undertaking work for others in connection with which the
engineer may make improvements, plans, designs, inventions, or other records
that may justify copyrights or patents—should enter into a positive agreement
regarding ownership.
d. Engineers’ designs, data, records, and notes referring exclusively to an employer’s
work are the employer’s property. The employer should indemnify the engineer
for use of the information for any purpose other than the original purpose.
e. Engineers shall continue their professional development throughout
their careers and should keep current in their specialty fields by engaging in
professional practice, participating in continuing education courses, reading
in the technical literature, and attending professional meetings and seminars.

LAB 1: Ethics

Ethics is a part of all professional careers, but play an extremely important role in engineering. In this
lab, we will discuss the importance of engineering ethics using two case studies.

Purpose

Ethics is a part of all professional careers. This lab introduces case scenarios that deal with professional
ethics. Before you start this lab you will need to visit the following Web pages and familiarize yourself
with their content:

1. http://web.mit.edu/ethics/www/essays/probcase.html by Caroline Whitebeck.
2. http://www.cwru.edu/affil/wwwethics/. After you review the content of this page, click on

Problems. This will lead you to different case studies in engineering and science ethics.
3. http://www.onlinethics.org.

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

Kheng Guan Toh/Shutterstock

Procedure

You will need to submit two reports in the course of this lab.

1. Report I assignment: In this report you should (as a group)
a. List the major points that were discussed by the Caroline Whitebeck paper.
b. Discuss the paper and point out where you agree or disagree.
c. Discuss your scenario and report your findings and arguments (The instructor will assign
an ethical scenario to your team.)

28

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

1.6 Professionalism and Ethics 29

2. Report II assignment
a. Identify experts from the university and local community.
b. Interview at least three experts and report your interview discussion.
c. Analyze the three interviews.
d. Make a recommendation/final argument based on your opinion and the interviews.
e. Create a Web page for your report.

The following are the different scenarios that were obtained from the Internet. The discussion at end
of each scenario will help you get started; do not limit your scope to those questions and discussion
points when you report.

Scenario I2

You are an engineer charged with performing safety testing and obtaining appropriate regulatory agency
or outside testing laboratory (“agency”) approvals of your company’s product. The Gee-Whiz Mark 2
(GWM2) has been tested and found compliant with both voluntary and mandatory safety standards in
North America and Europe. Because of a purchase-order error and subsequent oversights in manufacture,
25,000 units of GWM2 (“bad units”) were built that are not compliant with any of the North American or
European safety standards. A user would be much more vulnerable to electric shock from a bad unit than
from a compliant unit. Under some plausible combinations of events, users of the bad unit could be
electrocuted.

Retrofitting these products to make them compliant is not feasible, because the rework costs
would exceed the profit margin by far. All agree that, because of this defect, the agency safety labels
will not be attached to the bad units, as per the requirements of the several agencies. Only two
options exist:

1. Scrap the units and take the loss.
2. Sell the units.

An employee of the company notes that many countries have no safety standards of any kind for this
type of product. It is suggested that the bad units be marketed in these countries. It is pointed out that
many of these nations have no electrical wiring codes; if codes exist, they are not enforced. The argument
is thus advanced that the bad GWM2 units are no worse than the modus operandi of the electrical prac-
tice of these countries. Assume that no treaties or export regulations would be violated in marketing the
bad units to these countries.

Discussion

1. What is your recommendation?
2. Suppose one of the countries under consideration was the country of origin for you or your

recent ancestors. Would this affect your recommendation?
3. Now suppose you are not asked for a recommendation, only an opinion. What is your

response?
4. Suppose it is suggested that the bad units be sold to a third party, who would very likely sell

the units to these countries. What is your comment?

2Scenarios in Business and Engineering Settings by Joseph H. Wujek and Deborah G. Johnson, from
http://www.onlineethics.org/cms/7335.aspx. Used by permission.

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

30 CHAPTER 1 Introduction

5. You are offered gratis one of the bad units for your use at home, provided that you sign a
release indicating your awareness of the condition of the unit and that it is given to you as a
test unit. (Assume that you can’t retrofit it, and that the product could be very useful to you.)
Would you accept the offer?

6. Suppose it is suggested that the offer in item 5 be made to all employees of the company.
Your comment?

Scenario II3

The United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Rule Part 15J applies to virtually every
digital device (with a few exceptions) manufactured in the United States. The manufacturer must test
and certify that the equipment does not exceed FCC-mandated limits for the generation of communica-
tions interference caused by conducted and radiated emissions. The certification consists of a report sent
to the FCC for review. It is largely an honor system, because the FCC has only a small staff to review
an enormous number of applications. The FCC then issues a label ID to be attached to each unit that
authorizes marketing of the product. Prior to receiving the label the manufacturer cannot offer for sale
or advertise the product. An EMC (electromagnetic compatibility) consultant operating a test site
installs a new antenna system and finds that it results in E-field measurements consistently higher than
those obtained with the old antennas. Both track within the site-calibration limits, and both antenna ven-
dors claim National Institute of Standards and Technology (formerly National Bureau of Standards)
traceability. Which system is the better in absolute calibration is thus unknown. There is not enough
time to resolve this discrepancy before a client’s new product must be tested for FCC Rules Part 15J
compliance.

Discussion

1. Which antenna system should be used to test the product?
2. Is averaging the results ethical, assuming that engineering judgment indicates that this proce-

dure is valid?
3. Suppose the site was never properly (scientifically or statistically) calibrated. Should this fact

be made known voluntarily to the FCC?

Scenario III4

You are an engineer working in a manufacturing facility that uses toxic chemicals in processing. Your
job has nothing to do with the use and control of these materials.

The chemical MegaX is used at the site. Recent stories in the news have reported alleged immediate
and long-term human genetic hazards from inhalation or other contact with the chemical. The news items
are based on findings from laboratory experiments, done on mice, by a graduate student at a well-respect-
ed university physiology department. Other scientists have neither confirmed nor refuted the experimen-
tal findings. Federal and local governments have not made official pronouncements on the subject.
Several employee friends have approached you on the subject and asked you to do something to elimi-
nate the use of MegaX at your factory. You mention this concern to your manager, who tells you, “Don’t
worry, we have an industrial safety specialist who handles that.” Two months pass, and MegaX is still

3,4Scenarios in Business and Engineering Settings by Joseph H. Wujek and Deborah G. Johnson, from
http://www.onlineethics.org/cms/7335.aspx. Used by permission.

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

1.6 Professionalism and Ethics 31

used in the factory. The controversy in the press continues, but there is no further scientific evidence (pro
or con) in the matter. The use of the chemical in your plant has increased, and now more workers are
exposed daily to the substance than was the case two months ago.

Discussion

1. What, if anything, do you do?
2. Suppose you again mention the matter to your manager and are told, “Forget it, it’s not your

job.” What should you do now?
3. Your sister works with the chemical. What is your advice to her?
4. Your pregnant sister works with the chemical. What is your advice to her?
5. The company announces a voluntary phasing out of the chemical over the next two years.

What is your reaction to this?
6. A person representing a local political activist group approaches you and asks you to make

available to them company information regarding the amounts of MegaX in use at the factory
and the conditions of use. Do you comply? Why or why not?

Scenario IV5

The Zilch Materials Corporation employs you as a test engineer. The company recently introduced
a new two-component composition-resin casting material, Megazilch, which is believed to have
been well tested by the company and a few selected potential customers. All test results prior to
committing to production indicated that the material meets all published specifications and is supe-
rior in performance and lower in estimated cost than competitors’ materials used in the same kinds
of applications.

Potential and committed applications for Megazilch include such diverse products as infants’ toys,
office equipment parts, interior furnishings of commercial aircraft, and the case material for many elec-
tronic products. Marketing estimates predict a 25% increase in the corporation’s revenues in the first year
after the product is shipped in production quantities.

The product is already in production and many shipments have been made when you discov-
er, to your horror, that under some conditions of storage temperature and other (as yet) unknown
factors, the shelf life of the product is seriously degraded. In particular, it will no longer meet spec-
ifications for flame retardation if stored for more than 60 days before mixing, instead of the
24 months stated in the published specifications. Its tensile and compressive strengths are reduced
significantly as well.

Substantial quantities have been shipped, and the age and temperature history of the lots shipped
are not traceable. To recall these would involve great financial loss and embarrassment to the com-
pany, and at this point, it is not clear that the shelf life can be improved. Only you and a subordinate,
a competent test technician, know of the problem.

Assume that no quick fixes by chemical or physical means are possible, and that the problem is
real. That is, there are no mistakes in the scientific findings.

5Scenarios in Business and Engineering Settings by Joseph H. Wujek and Deborah G. Johnson, from
http://www.onlineethics.org/cms/7335.aspx. Used by permission.

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

32 CHAPTER 1 Introduction

Discussion

1. What is the first action you would take relevant to this matter?
2. Suppose you express concern to your immediate supervisor, who tells you, “Forget it! It’s no

big deal, and we can correct it later. Let me handle this.”
3. Suppose further that you detect no action after several weeks have passed since you told your

supervisor. What now?
4. In item 3, assume you speak to your supervisor, who then tells you, “I spoke to the execu-

tive staff about it and they concur. We’ll keep shipping product and work hard to fix it.
We’ve already taken out all the stops, people are working very hard to correct the prob-
lem.” What, if anything, do you do?
5. It is now three months since you told your supervisor, and in a test of product sampled from
current shipments, you see that no fix has been incorporated. What now?

Scenario V6

Marsha is employed as the City Engineer by the city of Oz, which has requested bids for equipment
to be installed in a public facility. Oz is bound by law to purchase the lowest bid that meets the pro-
curement specifications except “for cause.” The low bidder, by a very narrow margin, is Diogenes
Industries, a local company. The Diogenes proposal meets the specifications. Marsha recommends
purchase of the equipment from Diogenes.

After the equipment is installed, it is discovered that John, the Chief Engineer for Diogenes, is the
spouse of Marsha. John was the engineer who had charge of the proposal to Oz, including the final
authority on setting the price. As a result of this, Marsha is requested to resign her position for breach
of the public trust.

Discussion

1. Was the city justified in seeking Marsha’s termination of employment?
2. Suppose Marsha had never been asked to sign a conflict of interest statement. Would this

affect your response to question 1?
3. Given the conditions of question 2, suppose Marsha had mentioned, before going to bid, in

casual conversation with other persons involved in the procurement that she was married to the
Chief Engineer at Diogenes. Does this affect your response?
4. Suppose Marsha and John were not married but shared a household. Does this affect your
response?
5. Now suppose Marsha had made known officially her relation to John and the potential for
conflict of interest before soliciting bids. Then suppose Marsha rejects the Diogenes bid
because she is concerned about the appearance of conflict of interest. She then recommends
purchase of the next lowest bid, which meets the specifications. Comment on Marsha’s

action. n

6Scenarios in Business and Engineering Settings by Joseph H. Wujek and Deborah G. Johnson, from
http://www.onlineethics.org/cms/7335.aspx. Used by permission.

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

1.6 Professionalism and Ethics 33

LAB 2: Ethics and Moral Frameworks

This lab will take you through the process needed to approach and resolve ethical dilemmas that can
and will present themselves many times during a design project and your professional career as an
engineer. It is important to note that, although there are certain scenarios that are clear cut ‘ethical’ or
‘unethical’, there are other times when this line is not so clear. It is beyond the scope of this book to
delve into too much depth, and there are other books that cover this vast area sufficiently. Nevertheless,
the aim of this lab is to give you a foundation and a feel in order to enable you to identify, discuss, and
provide an ethical resolution for ethical issues.

Theory—Code of Ethics and Moral Frameworks

Although strongly related to each other, there is a distinct difference between the terms ‘ethics’ and
‘morals.’ In most cases, both are needed together to make a well-balanced judgment. Ethics relates to
the philosophy behind a moral outcome and determines the working of a social system. These are usu-
ally presented as a set of rules that dictate right or wrong behavior. The NSPE Code of Ethics is one
such example and is presented in the main body of Chapter 1. The Code of Ethics alone, though, does
not cover everything and at times individual canons can conflict with each other. For example, funda-
mental canon 4 in the NSPE code of ethics states: “Act for each employer or client as faithful agents
or trustees.” This dictates that you should remain faithful to your employer. However, for example, in
some cases, your employer may be deceiving the public and informing them that the product they are
selling performs a certain function, whereas in actual fact it does not. This will be in direct conflict
with fundamental canon 5: “Avoid Deceptive Acts.” In this case, what do you do?

Morals, on the other hand, define our character and usually address ‘appropriate’ and ‘expected’
behavior. Morals deal with adopted codes of conduct or frameworks within a given environment, con-
ception, and/or time. Such codes can deal with controversial behavior, prohibitions, standards of
belief systems, and social conformity. Moral frameworks can be abstract and the same outcome can be
deemed ‘appropriate’ or ‘inappropriate’, depending on the situation. For example, people can argue
that “murder is immoral” but during war and on the battlefield that “murder is acceptable.”

In some cases, moral frameworks are too abstract to point to a conclusive ethical resolution.
Parallel to this, ethics can be regarded as an application of morality. This is why both are usually need-
ed together to form a balanced opinion. There are five main moral frameworks or approaches and they
are briefly introduced here.

The Utilitarian Approach (Utilitarianism)

Some ethicists emphasize that ethical action is the one that provides the most good, does the least harm,
or (put another way) produces the greatest balance of good over harm. The ethical corporate action then
is the one that produces the greatest good and does the least harm for all who are affected—customers,
employees, shareholders, the community, and the environment. The utilitarian approach deals with
consequences; it tries both to increase the good done and to reduce the harm done. A typical example
usually discussed with this approach is given here.

You are hiking alone in a forest and you come up to a village where there is a terrorist hold-
ing 20 people hostage. The terrorist is about to kill all 20 people, but somehow you convince
him not to kill anyone. He agrees as long as you take the gun and kill one of them to prove

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

34 CHAPTER 1 Introduction

his point (whatever that may be). If you choose not to kill one person, then he will proceed to
kill all 20. There are no other options in this situation. What would you do? Discuss this with-
in your group.

The Rights Approach

This approach aims to make decisions based on actions that best protect and respect the moral rights
of those affected. It begins with the belief that humans have a dignity based on their human nature as
well as the ability to choose freely what they do with their lives. On the basis of such dignity, they have
a right to be treated as ends and not merely as means to other ends. The list of moral rights includes
the rights to make one’s own choices about what kind of life to lead, to be told the truth, not to be
injured, to have a degree of privacy, and so on is widely debated. Recently, moral development has
progressed towards providing rights for non-humans as well.

The Fairness or Justice Approach

This approach is based on contributions from Aristotle and other Greek philosophers and revolves
around the idea that all equals should be treated equally. This also suggests that it may be fair to treat
all that are unequal unequally. We pay people more based on their harder work or the greater amount
that they contribute to an organization and say that is fair. But what about CEO salaries that are
hundreds of times larger than the pay of others? Many ask whether the huge disparity is based on a
defensible standard or whether it is the result of an imbalance of power and hence is unfair.

The Common Good Approach

Greek philosophers also have contributed the notion that life in a community is good in itself, and our
actions should contribute to that life. This approach suggests that the interlocking relationships of soci-
ety are the basis of ethical reasoning and that respect and compassion for all others—especially the
vulnerable—are requirements of such reasoning. This approach also calls attention to the common
conditions that are important to the welfare of everyone. This may be a system of laws, effective police
and fire departments, health care, a public educational system, or even public recreational areas.

The Virtue Approach

A very ancient approach to ethics is that ethical actions ought to be consistent with certain ideal virtues
that provide for the full development of our humanity. These virtues are dispositions and habits that
enable us to act according to the highest potential of our character and on behalf of values like truth
and beauty. Honesty, courage, compassion, generosity, tolerance, love, fidelity, integrity, fairness, self-
control, and prudence are all examples of virtues. Virtues ask of any action, “What kind of person will
I become if I do this?” or “Is this action consistent with my acting at my best?”

Putting the Approaches Together

Each of these approaches helps us determine what standards of behavior can be considered ethical.
Although seemingly straightforward, it unfortunately is not so simple. The first problem is that we may
not agree on the content of some of these specific approaches. We may not all agree to the same set of
human and civil rights. We may not agree on what constitutes the common good. We may not even
agree on what is good and what is harmful.

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

1.6 Professionalism and Ethics 35

The second problem is that the different approaches may not all answer the question “What is eth-
ical?” in the same way. Nonetheless, each approach gives us important information with which to
determine what is ethical in a particular circumstance. More often than not, the different approaches
do lead to similar answers.

Moral Reasoning and Approaching Ethical Dilemmas

Now that you are aware of both the Code of Ethics and moral frameworks, you can try to tackle some
ethical problems. To do that, you will need to follow a process such as the one listed here. The more
you practice, the more natural this process will become, and ultimately, this should become an integral
and habitual aspect of your profession.

Step 1. Identify the Ethical Dilemma
• Will any of your options be damaging to someone, some group, or some particular thing?
Do the potential decisions involve a choice between a good and bad alternative, or
between two ‘goods’ or even two ‘bads?’
• What are the relevant facts of the case? What facts are not known? Try to establish a
timeline if relevant. Can you learn more about the situation? Do you know enough to
make a decision?
• Who are the involved parties? What individuals and groups have an important stake in the
outcome? Are some concerns more important? Why?

Step 2. Identify the Relevant Codes of Ethics
• List all of the relevant codes of ethics that affect both the problems identified in step 1 as
well as the codes relevant to any potential decisions you may make.
• List the possible solutions that you may take based on the codes of ethics alone.

Step 3. Establish any Possible Potential Conflicts within the Identified Relevant Codes of Ethics
• Do any of the identified codes conflict with each other? Group them together.
• Is there one which is more important to address over the other? Why?

Step 4. Evaluate the Moral Frameworks to Resolve any Conflicting Codes of Ethics
• Which option will produce the most good and do the least harm? (The Utilitarian
Approach)
• Which option best respects the rights of all who have a stake? (The Rights Approach)
• Which option treats people equally or proportionately? (The Justice Approach)
• Which option best serves the community as a whole, not just some members? (The
Common Good Approach)
• Which option leads you to act as the sort of person you want to be? (The Virtue
Approach)

Step 5. Make a Recommendation/Decision
• Considering the Code of Ethics and the given moral frameworks, which option best
addresses the situation? You should structure your recommendation as a well thought out
argument based on a model such as the one provided by Toulmin [1] (explained next).
• Ask yourself: If you told someone you respect or announced to the public the recommen-
dation you have chosen, what would they say?
• How can your decision be implemented with the greatest care and attention to the con-
cerns of all stakeholders?

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

36 CHAPTER 1 Introduction

Toulmin’s Model for Argumentation and Moral Reasoning

Delving further into these problem solving steps, you need to be able to reason and argue (both to your-
self and to others) the decision you will make and justify your choices. Stephen Toulmin [1] broke
down the structure of an argument into a logical model that includes all of the elements necessary to
complete an argument from start to finish. These points should be addressed each time you make a
‘claim’ (as described next) at any stage of the five steps described previously. The model also should
be used to present your final argument and decision.

Essential Elements of an Argument:

1. Claim This is as the word suggests. This is your claim or statement that has no merit yet.
Most arguments will begin with a claim. (E.g., You should buy an aluminum can crusher for
your home.)

2. Data These are the facts that one uses as a foundation in order to later establish validity
to the claim. (E.g., Environmentally, recycling aluminum cans produces 95% less air
pollution.)

3. Warrant This is the link made from the data to the claim in order to authorize or validate it.
(E.g., Buying an aluminum can crusher for your home will be better for the environment by
causing less air pollution.)

Optional Elements of An Argument:

4. Backing These are facts that can be used to give credit to the warrant. This can be
done by providing evidence to the statement made or by making another statement that
adds credibility to the warrant. (E.g., You told me last week that you wanted to be
more responsible to the environment after reading about the new environmental
legislation.)

5. Rebuttal These are statements that recognize restrictions or limitations to the claim.
(E.g., Unless of course you have changed your mind about being more responsible to the
environment)

6. Qualifier These are words that qualify how certain you are about your claim. Words
such as ‘certain’, ‘probable’, and ‘presumably’, etc. are typical examples. (E.g., I am cer-
tain that the can crusher will be more friendly to the environment, which is what I pre-
sume you want.)

Data

Claim

Warrant

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

1.6 Professionalism and Ethics 37

Discussion Discuss the following statements or claims in class. Some are true statements; some are
false, while others may be either. What is your opinion and why? Try to remember Toulmin’s model
when putting your argument forward.

• Ethics is not the same as feelings.
• Ethics is following the law.
• Ethics is not a science.
• Ethics is following culturally accepted norms.
• In some cases, it may be ethical to make and act on an unethical decision.
• Designing and/or selling a gun is unethical.

Ethical and Moral Case

Discuss the following scenario that is divided into two parts. Follow the steps described previously for
approaching ethical dilemmas, moral reasoning, and presenting an argument. Refer to the NSPE Code
of Ethics as well as the appropriate moral frameworks. Justify your reasoning and be prepared to
debate your viewpoint to those that disagree with you in the class!

1. High Concept Manufacturing (HCM) has an engineering plant in a small town that employs
12.4% of the community. It provides approximately $10 million dollars of salaries to its com-
munity workers and pays $2 million in taxes to the local government. As a consequence of
some of its manufacturing procedures, the HCM plant releases bad smelling fumes. These
fumes annoy HCM’s residential neighbors, hurt the local tourism trade, and have been linked
(although not conclusively) to a rise in asthma in the area. The financial impact of this to the
town is estimated to be around $3 million as a result of a decrease in tourism and lower
house prices. The town is considering issuing an ultimatum (final warning) to HCM; “Clean
up your plant, or we will fine you $1 million.” HCM had previously made it known that the
business will close down and go somewhere else if it is fined by the town. What should the
town do?

2. There will a town meeting where all concerned parties have agreed to attend and discuss the
matters given. You are an engineer and a respected member of the town who has been recent-
ly offered an excellent job opportunity at HCM. You have signed a contract with HCM, and
you are officially one of their new employees. However, this is as of yet not public knowl-
edge. HCM asks you to try to convince the town to drop the case and that the town is better
off with HCM’s presence. What are you going to do?

References

The following articles/websites were used in preparing this lab:
1. Toulmin, S., The Uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press, 1958.
2. http://www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/decision/framework.html
3. http://www.ethicsandbusiness.org/pdf/strategy.pdf

4. http://ocw.usu.edu/English/intermediate-writing/english-2010/2010/toulmins-sohema n

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

38 CHAPTER 1 Introduction

1.7 PROBLEMS
1.7.1 Team Activities

1. List the steps in the design process.
2. Define each step in the design process.
3. What is the difference between customer statement and problem definition?
4. What is the difference between the specification step and defining the problem

step in the design process?
5. What is function analysis and how is it different from the definition of the

problem?
6. List three factors that market analysis achieves.
7. Why does function analysis precede the conceptualization step?
8. Give examples of a mock-up.
9. Why is scheduling important?

1.7.2 Individual Activities

1. Figure 1.10 shows the percent of cost committed and incurred as a function of
time during the design of a product. The committed cost is the amount of money
allocated for the manufacturing of the product, while the incurred cost is the
amount of money spent on the design.
a. Explain your findings from the figure.
b. Discuss why it is more important to spend time and money on the early stages
of design than on the late stages of design.

Figure 1.10 Manufacturing cost.

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

1.7 Problems 39

2. Describe in detail the various types of design.
3. List several common sources of engineering failures.
4. Explain the difference between engineering design and the engineering design

process.
5. Identify several commonalities and differences among Figures 1.1

through 1.4.
6. List four factors that may be used to determine quality, and discuss the following

statement in light of your listing: “Quality cannot be built into a product unless it
is designed into it.”
7. Consider the following two statements:
• What size SAE grade 5 bolt should be used to fasten together two pieces of

1045 sheet steel, each 4 mm thick and 6 cm wide, which are lapped over each
other and loaded with 100 N?
• Design a joint to fasten together two pieces of 1045 sheet steel, each 4 mm
thick and 6 cm wide, which are lapped over each other and loaded with 100 N.
(a) Explain the difference between the two statements.
(b) Change a problem from one of your engineering science/physics classes

into a design problem.

8. Explain the engineering design process to a high school student.
9. Define professionalism.
10. Read through the ASME code of ethics and list three findings.
11. The following ethical scenario was obtained from http://www.cwru.edu/wwwethics.

You are an engineer charged with performing safety testing and obtaining
appropriate regulatory agency or outside testing laboratory approvals of your
company’s product. The Gee Whiz Mark2 (GWM2) has been tested and found
compliant with both voluntary and mandatory safety standards in North America
and Europe. Because of a purchase-order error and subsequent oversights in
manufacture, 25,000 units of GWM2 were built that are not compliant with any
of the North American or European safety standards. A user would be more
vulnerable to electric shock than from a compliant unit. Under some plausible
combinations of events, the user of the bad unit could be electrocuted. Retrofitting
these products to make them compliant is not feasible because the rework costs
would exceed the profit margin by far. The company agrees that because of this
defect the agency safety labels will not be attached to the bad units, as per the
requirements of the several agencies. Only two options exist: (a) Scrap the units
and take the loss, or (b) sell the units. An employee of the company notes that
many countries have no safety standards of any kind for this type of product. It is
suggested that the bad units be marketed in these countries. It is pointed out that
many of these nations have no electrical wiring code; or if codes exist they are not
enforced. The argument is thus advanced that the bad GWM2 units are no worse
than the modus operandi of the electrical practice of these countries and their
cultural values. Assume that no treaties or export regulations would be violated.
a. What would be your recommendation?
b. Suppose one of the countries under consideration was the country of origin

for you or your recent ancestors. Would this affect your recommendations?

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

40 CHAPTER 1 Introduction

c. Now suppose you are not asked for a recommendation, only an opinion. What
is your response?

d. Suppose it is suggested that the bad units be sold to a third party, who would
very likely sell the units to these countries. Your comments?

e. You are offered gratis one of the bad units for your use at home, provided that
you sign a release indicating your awareness of the condition of the unit and
that it is given to you as a test unit. Assume you cannot retrofit it and that the
product could be very useful to you. Would you accept the offer?

f. Suppose it is suggested that the offer stated in part (e) be made to all
employees of the company. Your comments?

1.8 Selected Bibliography

AMBROSE, S. A. and AMON, C. H. “Systematic Design of a First-Year Mechanical Engineering
Course at Carnegie Mellon University.” Journal of Engineering Education, pp. 173–181, 1997.

BUCCIARELLI, L. L. Designing Engineers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996.
BURGER, C. P. “Excellence in Product Development through Innovative Engineering Design.”

Engineering Productivity and Valve Technology, pp. 1–4, 1995.
BURGHARDT, M. D. Introduction to Engineering Design and Problem Solving. New York:

McGraw-Hill, 1999.
CROSS, N. Engineering Design Methods: Strategies for Product Design. New York: Wiley, 1994.
CROSS, N., CHRISTIAN, H., and DORST, K. Analysing Design Activity. New York: Wiley, 1996.
DHILLON, B. S. Engineering Design: A Modern Approach. Toronto: Irwin, 1995.
DIETER, G. Engineering Design. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1983.
DYM, C. L. Engineering Design: A Synthesis of Views. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
EEKELS, J., and ROOZNBURG, N. F. M. “A Methodological Comparison of Structures of Scientific

Research and Engineering Design: Their Similarities and Differences.” Design Studies, Vol. 12,
No. 4, pp. 197–203, 1991.
FLEDDERMANN, C. B. Engineering Ethics. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1999.
HENSEL, E. “A Multi-Faceted Design Process for Multi-Disciplinary Capstone Design Projects.”
Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and
Exposition, Albuquerque, NM, 2001.
HILL, P. H. The Science of Engineering Design. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1983.
HORENSTEIN, M. N. Design Concepts for Engineers. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1999.
JOHNSON, R. C. Mechanical Design Synthesis. Huntington, NY: Krieger, 1978.
WATSON, S. R. “Civil Engineering History Gives Valuable Lessons.” Civil Engineering, pp. 48–51, 1975.
JANSSON, D. G., CONDOOR, S. S., and BROCK, H. R. “Cognition in Design:Viewing the Hidden Side of the
Design Process.” Environment and Planning B, Planning and Design, Vol. 19, pp. 257–271, 1993.
KARUPPOOR, S. S., BURGER, C. P., and CHONA, R. “A Way of Doing Design.” Proceedings of the 2001
American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition, Albuquerque,
NM, 2001.
KELLEY D. S., NEWCOMER, J. L., and MCKELL, E. K. “The Design Process, Ideation and Computer-
Aided Design.” Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual
Conference and Exposition, Albuquerque, NM, 2001.
PAHL, G., and BEITZ, W. Engineering Design: A Systematic Approach. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1996.
PUGH, S. Total Design. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1990.
RAY, M. S. Elements of Engineering Design. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1985.
RADCLIFFE, D. F., and LEE, T. Y. “Design Methods used by Undergraduate Students,” Design Studies,
Vol. 10, No. 4, pp. 199–207, 1989.

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.

1.8 Selected Bibliography 41
ROSS, S. S. Construction Disasters: Design Failures, Causes and Preventions. New York:

McGraw-Hill, 1984, pp. 303–329.
SICKAFUS, E. N. Unified Structured Inventive Thinking. New York: Ntelleck, 1997.
SIDDALL, J. N. “Mechanical Design.” ASME Transactions: Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 101,

pp. 674–681, 1979.
SUH, N. P. The Principles of Design. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1990.
ULMAN, D. G. The Mechanical Design Process. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1992.
ULRICH, K.T. and EPPINGER, S. D. Product Design and Development. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1995.
VIDOSIC, J. P. Elements of Engineering Design. New York: The Ronald Press Co., 1969.
WALTON, J. Engineering Design: From Art to Practice. New York: West Publishing Company, 1991.
WHITEBECK, C. http://web.mit.edu/ethics/www/essays/probcase.html

Copyright 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part.