Lorn Textiles
	A horrible accident has occurred on a lap winder at a textile plant, and a man has lost three fingers. Now the case is in the courts and it is up to a jury to decide who is at fault. On the stand, helping the jury to understand the technical issues of the problem are two highly qualified engineers acting as expert witnesses, one for the plaintiff, one for the defendant. Whose technical interpretation is correct? What are the qualities found in an engineer that allows them to be expert witnesses? Could properly installed safety features have prevented this accident? How should safety be practiced in a manufacturing environment? For information about purchasing this case study click here
Key Features Learning Objectives Gives students knowledge on how professional engineers would and should apply codes and standards when faced with real world problems. Also gives an analysis of many other basic skills engineers should utilize, such as safety and communication. Shows students the role an expert witness plays in today's legal system. An expert witness must be able to utilize all of the skills needed by an engineer to prove his or her points to a judge, jury, or board of directors. Gives a first hand account of engineers playing a role in our legal system. Show how to communicate highly technical issues in a very understandable manner. To teach students how to use basic skills needed by professional engineers which include: technical accuracy, an understanding of the codes of standards, ethical design, and communication. To give students a better idea of the job of an expert witness, what role does he or she play in the problems of today. To emphasize the importance of safety in design. Included in this case: lock out/tag out procedures, limit switches, safety in theory and in practice.   Screen Shot of the Multimedia version of the Case Study

The materials developed by LITEE are based partially upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant Numbers: 9752353, 9950514, 0001454, 0089036 and 0442531.

"Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this web site are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation."