Maybe this thread can have a slightly more philosophical focus, that still can provide something of value in the end?
Since English is not my first language, I looked at the meaning of the word engineering.
The first meaning.
The profession of applying scientific principles to the design, construction, and maintain.
The second meaning.
The application of science to practical uses such as the design of structures, machines, and systems.
So what is scientific principles and science.
Well today I would say that it can be allmost anything, not only physical or material but also studie of human behavior.
So a engineering failure, could be both
A failure in professional practice of the siences which are available at the time or
a design fauilure because of it.
Since I have my experience in maintenance and also in reviewing machine safety, the word function stuck a bit.
The way a see it, is that all engineering comes down to one thing only, namely to provide functions for people.
But if the functions are not safe for people, from a none material point of veiw I think the function is not really achieved, especially when the function to begin with is personal safety.
In all machine building in Europe it's a requirement to do a risk analysis, which also includes looking at predictable misuse.
If a risk is found, then it is evaluated based on how serious the consequences will be for the human.
If the damage is irreversible or leads to death, no matter how unlikely it is that it may occur it must be addressed and remedied.
All risks must of course be addressed, but to start with the most serious will be emedied, because whether we like it or not, money will always be a factor here.
This is done in 3 steps.
Redesign, to get rid of the risk.
If it is not possible to redesign the risk away,
you need to install protective devices that prevents the risk.
If this is not possible, you can put up signs and write instructions.
It would be very easy and cheap to just put up signs to remove all risks.
But to construct away the risk from the beginning is not really that much more expensive.
Before you used a eraser and a pen and redrawn a few lines, today you do it in a cad program.
The big cost is usually the material, not the working hours.
Changing something after it has been built is usually very costly, as it is to introduce protective equipment, which means even more material costs and working hours.
After each reconstruction, a new risk analysis must be performed so that no new risks have been created.
I might add that in Sweden it is unheard of, that you would be sacked or prosecuted for engineering failures.
It is often regulated in the contracts, which are often so poorly written that the buyer has to bear the entire cost, unless it is regulated by the insurance companies.
Going to court as a private person can be very costly if you lose the case, then you have to pay both your own and the other party's costs.
Those who are usually the ones who bring charges in environment court is The Swedish Work Environment Authority , but it can take years before it is fully investigated and if someone is convicted, it is rarely about a lot of money and almost never about imprisonment.
We are more or less morally obligated, in this country, to point out shortcomings and errors, and it is seldom or never a matter of blaming anyone, more for avoiding the repetition of errors, as zeusfaber pointed out.
Best regards A
“Logic will get you from A to Z; imagination will get you everywhere.“
Albert Einstein
