Missouri City, TX TV Antenna CollapseSlide 2Slide 3Slide 4Slide 5Missouri City, TX TV Antenna Collapse•1985•Based on Texas A&M engineering ethics web siteThe Cast of CharactersAntenna Engineering, Inc. Designed and built the antenna William (Bill) Harris -- President. Harris recommended to Jordan that Antenna Engineering, Inc. not get involved with Riggers problems regarding lifting the antenna tower, due to legal liability issues. Harry Jordan -- Head of the Engineering Division. Jordan told Riggers that they could not authorize removing the microwave baskets, yet he also told Riggers that the engineering firm signed off responsibility once Riggers accepted their design plans. Riggers, Inc.: Contracted to assemble the antenna Frank Catch -- President. Randall Porter -- Vice President. Made initial call to Antenna Engineering, Inc., detailing the problems Riggers was having lifting the top antenna section with the microwave baskets on it. Bob Peters -- Lead Lift. One of the workers killed in the collapse. Kevin Chapp -- Cable Operator. Talked to Peters before the catastrophe, asking about the safety of the operation. The Problem: Riggers, Inc. could not hoist the last antenna section using the lifting lugs thatAntenna Engineering provided due to interference with microwave baskets. Antenna Engineering refused permission for Riggers to remove the basket and reassemble after hoisting.Analysis of the Antenna LiftMODEL RIGGERS THOUGHT WAS CORRECT Calculation of stress in bolts = Total Antenna Weight / (2 * Total Bolt Cross-sectional Area)MODEL RIGGERS SHOULD HAVE USED: FREE BODY DIAGRAM OF LIFTING BAR AND ANALYSIS OF RIGGERS' SOLUTION Assuming that the angle that the tower hangs is relatively small, which it was, and that the bolts were about 1 foot apart, and that the supporting channel was about 6 feet long, the load in the bolts is actually a combination of direct shear (as found previously, plus the load due to the moment caused by the length of the channel. Thus:Sum of Moments about the bolt on the left end of the channel = 0 = Weight of antenna * 6 feet - Added force in bolt * 1 foot, such thatAdditional force in bolt = 6*weight of antenna, which when added to the direct force of 1 * Weight of Antenna gives a total load on the right hand antenna bolt of 7*Antenna Weight.. The corresponding shear stress on each bolt is thus: Stress = (7*Antenna Weight)/Area of boltor, in other words, the stress (for these assumed numbers) in the bolts is seven times what the Riggers thought it would be.Ethical Issues Of The Case - Points for Discussion1) Where does the responsibility of Antenna Engineering end and Riggers begin? Should Antenna Engineering have provided adequate hoisting lugs in their original design? 2) Should Riggers have looked at the original design more carefully? 3) Should Antenna Engineering have allowed Riggers to remove the microwave baskets? 4) Should Riggers have devised their own hoisting solution without consulting an engineer? What is their responsibility for contracting a consulting engineer? 5) Should Antenna Engineering have recommended another consulting engineer to assist Riggers? Should they have notified their professional society? Was it ethical for the engineers at Antenna to wash their hands of the project without attempting to find a resolution for Riggers? What other measures could they have taken to assist Riggers without becoming legally entangled? 6) Should Antenna Engineering have refused to review the new hoisting design? 7) If social responsibility comes before legal liability, surely there were other things Antenna Engineering could have done. What would you do in a similar