HOME  |  NEWS  |  BLOGS  |  MESSAGES  |  FEATURES  |  VIDEOS  |  WEBINARS  |  INDUSTRIES  |  FOCUS ON FUNDAMENTALS
  |  REGISTER  |  LOGIN  |  HELP
Comments
View Comments: Newest First|Oldest First|Threaded View
<<  <  Page 6/6
apresher
User Rank
Blogger
Safe Enough?
apresher   5/6/2013 11:03:32 AM
NO RATINGS
Excellent, thought provoking post.  It's clear that safety is a critical issue for all of us but how are our expectations set?  Many times, there are additional factors that also come into play. Not alot of easy answers.

Rob Spiegel
User Rank
Blogger
Auto deaths
Rob Spiegel   5/6/2013 10:32:44 AM
At 30,000 deaths per year, we're at about the same raw number of auto deaths in the late 1960s. With a larger population, that shows progress. Even so, if the airline industry experienced one tenth of the number in a year, all planes would be grounded until a solution was found. I'd love to see some pressure on the auto industry to create safer cars.

bob from maine
User Rank
Platinum
Who decides how safe is safe enough?
bob from maine   5/6/2013 9:52:54 AM
Every aspect of power generation has numerous failure mechanisms and each of those has a statistical number of deaths associated with it. The total number of predicted deaths per million from a 9.0 vs an 8.2 earthquake involves more calculations than there are engineers to make them. A trash-to-energy plant I'm familiar with requsted a permit to build and was denied because the predicted number of deaths per million of one of the stack gasses (out of 30 or 40 analyzed)was 4 per million (calculation showed one death wtih a margin of error of +/- 3). The applicant hired a world respected engineering firm to re-evaluate the formula and was able to reduce the margin of error from 3 to 2 (for several hundred thousand dollars) which reduced the prediction to 3 per million which was considered acceptable. It is difficult to separate a statistical model from the individual human lives those models represent.

naperlou
User Rank
Blogger
Makes you wonder...
naperlou   5/6/2013 8:57:04 AM
Chuck, this is an interesting and important question.  We do not design things to be failsafe.  As you point out, that would cost too much.  On the other hand, our whole attitude to risk and human safety is completely bizaire on a societal level.  We get all upset by things like a school shooting, while we drive our cars in a very dangerous fashion.  Go figure. 

Automobiles, on the other hand, are MUCH safer today.  The number you quote is far less than it was when the population was much lower than it is.  There are a number of factors at work here, but the most important is the design of the vehicle. 

Finally, I am reminded of the old Tank McNamara cartoon.  When fans were asked how long they would watch cars go round and round a track (we're talking NASCAR), they answered a few minutes.  When told that there was a possibility someone would die they answered as long as it takes.

<<  <  Page 6/6


Partner Zone
Latest Analysis
Do you long for the days of retro video gaming? Here's how you can turn an old PC into an old-school arcade cabinet with only $100 and a bit of woodwork.
A Vienna, Austria-based startup called Heliofloat has designed a platform of solar panels that can be deployed in lakes or oceans to generate solar-based electricity.
Electrical engineers from the University of Washington and Delft University of Technology have developed a new type of sensor-based platform that harvests energy from radio waves for electricity.
A simple new chemical method for repairing and recycling notoriously difficult carbon fiber composites has been developed by the Fraunhofer Institute for Applied Polymer Research. An entire component can be completely recycled, including reclaiming its expensive carbon fibers for reuse.
In today’s connected world we are seeing the beginning of connected homes, smart grids, self-driving automobiles, drones, and many other amazing devices. Out of all the soon-to-be connected devices, which device poses the greatest dangerous to its users and society?
More:Blogs|News
Quick Poll
The Continuing Education Center offers engineers an entirely new way to get the education they need to formulate next-generation solutions.
May 2 - 6, Embedded System Design Techniques™ - Rapid Prototyping Embedded Systems using Micro Python
SEMESTERS: 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6 |  7 | 8 | 9


Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.
Learn More   |   Login   |   Archived Classes
Twitter Feed
Design News Twitter Feed
Like Us on Facebook

Technology Marketplace

Copyright © 2016 UBM Canon, A UBM company, All rights reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service