Risk and Safety in Engineering

Required reading:
Harris, Pritchard and Rabins, Engineering Ethics: Concepts and Cases, 2nd ed. Chapter 7, Risk, Safety and Liability in Engineering

ENGR 482 Ethics and Engineering

An Engineering Responsibility
Codes of ethics require the engineer to prevent exposure of the public to unacceptable risks.

NSPE Code
Hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public design to accepted engineering standards Do not complete, sign, or seal plans and/or specifications that are not of a design safe to the public health and welfare in conformity with accepted engineering standards In circumstances where the safety, health, property or welfare of the public are endangered engineers must notify their employer or client and such other authority as may be appropriate

Understanding and Managing Risks

What is risk? How do we operate engineering systems to reduce risks? How do we design engineering systems to reduce risks? What are acceptable risks?

What is risk?
One definition of risk is:
Exposure to the chance of injury or loss; a hazardous or dangerous chance *

This definition involves both:

the probability of an event occurring the consequences of the event
* Websters Dictionary

An Engineering Definition of Risk:

Risk
Each of us in our daily life must live with risk . You as students must contend withPhysical and mental health risks Accident risks Academic performance-future career risks Love life risks

Risk = (probability of event) (consequences)

Risk
We assess these risks intuitively or by formal assessment, and We deal with these risks in a multitude of ways
We avoid certain foods We drive when the roads are safer We avoid places or activities of known danger We determine determine whether to use tobacco, alcohol or drugs

Personal risk
We practice safe sex We travel in groups where danger is high We carry insurance or maintain reserve funds to help us when bad things happen

Dealing with these risks is Risk Management

Risk Assessment & Risk Management

You will spend much much of your time and much of your income dealing with risk assessment and risk management
A. In your personal life B. In your family life C. In organizations e.g Church, Fratenities, Sororities, Civic clubs, etc. D. In your business organizations E. In your professional engineering work

Risk and Engineering

All engineering disciplines have their risks some are common to all
Health and safety risks Travel risks Liability risks

Some are unique to individual disciplines

Discipline risk examples

Electrical Hazards to EEs Pressure vessels and mechanical risks to ME Computer software glitches to computer engineers Tax example Process eruptions to ChEs Structural collapse to Structural engineers Oil well blowouts to PetEs

Risk Assessment
Step 1 - Risk or hazard identification Step 2 What can happen under given circumstances, e.g dose response for a chemical pollutant Step 3 How likely is the event to happen, e.g. Exposure assessment for a chemical pollutant Step 4 Risk Characterization Health, family, career, financial ---Estimate magnitude

Risk management
All the things we can do to prevent the risk event from happeningFor example all the actions we could do to prevent an oil spill

Voluntary Acceptance of Risk

Chauncy Starrs risk evaluation Based on risk of death by disease or automobile travel He found individuals would voluntarity accept risk up to three orders of magnitude (1000 times) routinely for sport, love, money, thrill , loyalty, glory and duty. He found that some would voluntarily accept risk up to six orders of magnitude for these reasons

All the things we can do to remedy the impact of the risk event when it occurs
Contingency plans Response capability and cleanup Restoration,mitigation and compensation of those damaged Insurance

Involuntary Acceptance of Risk

Chauncy Starr found that people wanted much lower levels of risk when the risk was imposed upon them from others Known risks generally desired to be three orders or magnitude below the base Unknown or greatly feared risks should be six orders of magnitude below the base
Cancer Radiation exposure

Risk Perception Lower Elevate

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Voluntary Familiar Controllable Controlled by self Accept Chronic natural 1. In-voluntary 2. Exotic-uncommon 3. Controlled by others 4. Not able to accept 5. Acute 6. Catastrophic

Risk Perception Lower

8. Equitable 9. Temporary effect 10. Visible benefit 11. Known 12. Certainty 13. Trusted source

Elevate
8. Inequitable 9. Permanent effect 10. No apparent benefit 11. Unknown 12. Uncertainty 13. Untrusted source

Risk is inherent in engineering

All engineering involves risk. Innovation in design generally increases risk. More generally, any change (from proven practice) will often increase risk. Examples:
Tacoma Narrows Bridge--1940 collapse Three Mile Island Power Plant--1979 radiation release Concorde airliner--2000 crash in Paris

Probability of failure

A nuclear reactor will meltdown if the control rods fail and the cooling pump fails. What is the probability of this occurring?

Event tree analysis of failure probability

Engineering Risk Assessment

Risk = (probability of failure) (consequences)

Bridge foundation depths are often governed by the depth of scour, which is related to the size of the flood, defined in terms of its probability.
A 100-year flood is a flood chance of occurring in any A 500-year flood is a flood chance of occurring in any which has a 0.01 given year. which has a 0.002 given year.

Engineering risk assessment...

Consider a bridge footing designed to have a 0.002 annual probability of being undercut by scour in any given year. If collapse occurs during a rush hour (1/24 probability), 10 lives will likely be lost. If collapse occurs during non rush hours (23/24 probability) 1 life will likely be lost. One way to measure this risk is (210-3)(1/24)(10) = 83310-6 (risk of death) (210-3)(23/24)(1) =191710-6 (risk of death) Total risk is 83310-6 + 191710-6 =275010-6 (risk of death)

Problems With Event-tree Analysis:

The assigned probabilities are sometimes conjectural. We cant anticipate all failure modes:
pipe rupture, pipe corrosion, terrorist attack, human error, etc...

Safety: Operation of Engineering Systems to Reduce Risk

Many engineering failures involve, at least in part, an operations failureconsider the reactor failure at Three Mile Island:
The main feedwater pumps failed; a pressure relief valve automatically opened, but stuck open. Signals failed to show that the valve was stuck open. Because of either administrative or human error, a critical valve in the emergency feedwater system was left closed, delaying the operation of that system for 8 minutes.

Safety: Operation of engineering systems to reduce risk

The loss of the Space Shuttle Challenger is another example of an engineering system failure due to operations failure. The practice of normalizing deviance, that is the acceptance of anomalies (unexplained leakages of the O-ring seals) in previous flights led to continued operation of a system that was dangerously close to its safe limit of operation. Also, operational limits (launch temperature) were increased without appropriate study.

Systems are said to be tightly coupled when a failure in one system can adversely and rapidly affect operations in another system. Tightly coupled systems make failures more difficult to predict and control.

Safety: Design of Engineering Systems to Reduce Risk to Acceptable Levels

Develop inherently low-risk designs Incorporate redundancy in design Design for failure modes that give warning before catastrophic failure (ductile structures) Design for appropriate Factor of Safety Structural design philosophies...
Allowable Stress Design (ASD or WSD) Load Factor Design (LFD) Probabilistic design methods (ex. LRFD)

Post Exxon Valdez shipping of oil from Port Valdez

Structural-Double hulled ships Redundancy
Dual propulsion Dual steering/rudders Dual navigation & communication

Post Exxon Valdez shipping of oil from Port Valdez

Operational changes
Departure during daylight Weather departure limitations Accompanying tug boat with attached towline Better vessel and ice-burg surveillance

Post Exxon Valdez shipping of oil from Port Valdez

Remedial capability
More effective contingency plans Extensive response drills Vastly increased response equipment capability Accompanying oil spill response vessel

Factors of Safety:

Failure load FS Design load To accommodate uncertainties in...

applied loads, material properties, simplified methods of analysis, construction quality, maintenance, ...

and, to reflect different consequences for different failure modes.

Factors of Safety in Design (Contd)

Factors of Safety in Design

An engineer working for Otis Elevators determines that a fully loaded passenger elevator will weigh 6450 lb. The elevator is supported by a double-sheaved cable so that the cable tension is 1/4 of the elevator weight. The elevator is expected to experience dynamic load factors of approximately 1.35. Suppose the design code requires a factor of safety of 6.5. What cable diameter should the engineer specify?

Compute tension T... W 1 . 35 T = = 2176 lb 4 Use s pecified FS = 6 . 5 Design tension = 2176 lb 6 . 5 = 14 ,150 lb = 7 . 07 ton

Breaking Strength for 6x19 Wire Rope...

Rope Diam. (in.) 3/8 1/2 5/8 3/4 7/8 1 Approx. Breaking Wt. Strength (lb/ft) (tons) 0.236 6.71 0.42 11.8 0.66 18.3 0.95 26.2 1.29 35.4 1.68 46.0

Factors of Safety in design (contd)

Choosing 1/2-in. cable...

(118 . ton)(2000 lb / ton) 2176 lb FS = 10.8 > 6.5 ok. FS =

Allowable (or Working) Stress Design Philosophy ASD design philosophy limits the stress to a certain allowable value, which is usually some fraction of the yield or ultimate stress.

Allowable Stress Design Example

Julio is designing a portable cylindrical compressed air tank for use by motorists with flat tires, based on the calculated hoop stress

H =

pr t

He plans to specify steel with a minimum yield strength of 36 ksi, and will design for an allowable stress of 20 ksi.

Allowable Stress Design Example--(contd)

He calculates that the design pressure (125 psi) will cause the allowable stress (20 ksi) in the 12 in. diameter steel tank if the wall thickness is 0.0375 in. He then increases the calculated wall thickness by 0.060 in. to allow for corrosion, and chooses the next larger available thickness 0.105 in (12 ga).

Allowable Stress Design Example--(contd)

The Factor of Safety of a new tank against exceeding yield stress is then

FS =

[ (36, 000 psi)(0.105in.) /(6in.)] = 5.04

(125 psi )

oThe Fact or ofSaf et y ofa cor r oded ( 0. 045 i n. wal l t hi ckness)t ank agai nst yi el di ng i s. . .

FS =

[(36,000psi)(0.045in.) / (6in.)] = 2.16

(125psi)

Design Difficulties...

Different loadings may have different uncertainties Different failure modes have different risk (uncertainty consequence), Also the resistance (strength) of some modes may be affected more by construction quality, maintenance inspection interval, etc ...so different Factors of Safety may be appropriate for different loadings and failure modes.

Acceptable Risk...
What is an acceptable risk?

Some Acceptable Risks...

Note that the average American could, if he/she chose, reduce his/her annual risk of death by 17310-6 by avoiding travel in automobiles or on highways. Since the average American chooses to accept this risk (because of the advantages of automobile transportation), the risk of death associated with automobile travel could be considered an acceptable risk, that is one assumed by a reasonable person. Similarly, the 810-6 annual risk of death in commercial aviation is accepted by most persons.

Cost-benefit Risk Assessment Example

The government is proposing legislation to limit formaldehyde emissions to 3 ppm. Industry estimates that to install and operate the necessary scrubbers will cost $300 million annually. Toxicologists estimate that this new standard will save 30 lives annually. Using cost/benefit analysis, should the new standard be implemented? Cost = $300 million/yr Benefit = (30 lives/yr)($ ??? / life) What is the dollar value of human life?

What is the value of human life ?

Some methods to place a value on human life
purchasing decisions involving safety (e.g. car purchase) future earnings extra pay needed for risky jobs (e.g. house painter vs. smokestack painter)

Problems with using studies of purchasing decisions to determine the value of life...
wealthy people are willing to pay more people will pay 7 times more to reduce risk of cancer than to reduce risk of death in an automobile decisions are based on perceptions (values) women value their lives more than men, i.e., men are more willing to engage in risky behavior A 1984 study by Shualmit Kahn indicates that people typically valued their lives at $8 million (Note: this figure is higher than is typically used in public policy analysis. Also note that Ford used $0.2 million in the 1970s Pinto case study.)

Public Policy Experts Approach to Risk

His/her first priority is to protect the public. Consider the consequences of an error in a study to determine whether a chemical is carcinogenic
False Positive The chemical is banned as being carcinogenic, when in reality it is not. The producer loses potential profits from the sale of this chemical. False Negative A dangerous chemical is approved as safe and sold to the general public. The death rate from cancer increases.
A public policy expert will choose to err on the side of public safety, when the facts are not clear

Public Policy Expert Approach (contd)

In a democracy, the government policy makers respond to the publics wishes. The public tends to react to different risks in different, and sometimes irrational ways. As a result, we tend to allocate differing amounts of money to save lives by different measures...

Allocation of Money

Laymans Approach to Risk

Respect for Persons Approach Key Issues:
is the risk distributed equitably? are those assuming the risk compensated? is the risk voluntary? does the person assuming the risk understand it? does the person assuming the risk have control?

Laymans approach to risk...

Laymen often overestimate low probability risks Willing to accept higher voluntary risks than involuntary risks (by factor of 103) Laymen dont compare a risk to already accepted risks Laymen overestimate risks of human origin compared to risks of natural origin Laymens approach more closely follows Respect-for-Persons approach than the Utilitarian approaches used by many experts

An Acceptable Risk is one that is...

freely assumed with informed consent equitably distributed properly compensated

Informed Consent
RP says we should treat people as moral agents (autonomous, self-governing individuals)thus we should seek informed consent before assigning risk Criteria for informed consent
consent must not be coerced* person must be accurately informed* person must be competent* to assess information

Problems With Informed Consent

Difficulty getting informed consent
Consent must be obtained before the risk is assumed Consent requires negotiation Holdouts or unreasonable preferences

Parties must be well informed and reasonable

People are often hysterical regarding dramatic or Catastrophic risk People underestimate the consequences of risks that Have never happened before

*there are possible conceptual and applications

issues to be resolved

When it isnt possible to get informed consent...

Only expose people to risks they would consent to, if they were informed of all known risks.

Or, ...
As an alternative to gaining consent from everyone affected by the risk, the group leaders can decide to accept the risk for the group.

10

11