Jump to content
Engineer Boards


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About skc005

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    San Diego, CA

Previous Fields

  • Engineering Field
  • License
  • Calculator
  • Discipline
  1. Yup I spoke too soon, I just got mine as well. I'm spreading them out since I didn't start studying until my application was approved last week, so between now and the exams there's only about a month and a half to two months. I am stronger in seismic having taken a course in college that basically was taught from the Hiner workbook, but I have never studied or worked in surveying in my life.
  2. I was technically approved to take the exams for this cycle. With the test dates about a month to a month and a half out, has anyone gotten the follow-up email with the Prometric sign-up procedures?
  3. Ca seismic and survey notification

    I received my authorization to take the exams, but the email from the Board said a separate email will come 4-6 weeks before the tests dates to sign up with Prometric. It's cutting it pretty close to 9/18; surely I should be expecting this email soon?
  4. Thanks for the input. If that's the case, if they deem reference 1 is appropriate for 29 months but deem that the experience from other references don't qualify, will they still approve my application?
  5. Hi there, I passed the 8 hour this past April, and the CA board has made a one time exemption to allow new applicants to submit their applications for October to the re-file deadline of July 10th. Great news for me, cause I thought I'd have to wait until next April to take the Seismic and Surveying exams. Anyhow, I'm filling out the reference forms and I want to make sure I'm understanding what the instructions are referring to as "engagements" and "date overlaps". I have worked for one company for the last 2.5 years. As I understand it, an "engagement" is simply my company. So for all four of my references, they will be listed as "engagement 1" since it's my present company. Additionally, there is instruction to "explain overlaps in dates". If I understand correctly, this only applies to engagements that overlap in dates, i.e you were somehow working for two companies at once? As far as filling out the "from and to" for qualifying experience, those dates can overlap with my other references, correct? Right now, I have listed: - Ref 1: 1/5/15 to 6/30/17 - 29 months - Ref 2: 1/5/15 to 6/30/17 - 29 months - Ref 3: 10/5/16 to 6/30/17 - 8 months - Ref 4: 12/5/15 to 6/30/17 - 18 months Is this the appropriate way to fill this out? Thanks.
  6. CA IS OUT

    So excited right now!
  7. According to CA application new system

    As far as I understand, the deadline to apply for licensure and subsequently the 2 CA exams was May 1st to be able to take them in October. So it looks like you'll have to wait until the next filing period to take it next April.
  8. April 2017 Exam

    Yup, I felt similarly about some of the breadth questions particularly the conceptual ones. I definitely overcomplicated/overthought a few "gimmies" and I already know I answered those incorrectly. And I have a feeling that those will come back and bite me since I didn't feel particularly confident on the structural depth. Gonna be borderline on the cut off if I pass, and if I don't I'll be particularly upset knowing I missed out on those gimmies.
  9. April 2017 Exam

    Haha yup, but unfortunately I knew I'd struggle with conceptual questions in the morning and those gimmies that I know the answer for certain now, I know I didn't answer on the exam. But yeah, I'm feeling pretty confident as well on what I need to do to be better prepared if I have to take it in October.
  10. April 2017 Exam

    This would be me, and I'm still beating myself right now on 3-4 gimmies I know I absolutely butchered. And with the nature of how I did on the structural depth, I think those 4 or so questions will definitely cost me.
  11. I completely agree with this view of the process. The debates and issues that arise with decoupling the requirements is the marginalization of the test itself. I'm of the mindset that the national test is merely a step and not an accurate assessment of one's professional experience. Does this make the test seem like the FE, part 2 and has no real meaning to it? Yeah, I would agree with that. Unless it's possible to come up with a test that more accurately represents the "practice" portion of the exam, I think most people would agree that the test as it is now isn't any kind of representation of real world experience. I'm taking the test in CA without having applied for licensure. I certainly won't feel like a PE just having passed some test that I study specifically for, and will forget 90% of the stuff after I pass. And that's okay, since passing doesn't automatically make you a PE. Now is the board's examination of one's professional experience enough to deem someone appropriate for licensure? That could be a bit trickier since they're basing it largely off recommendations of PE's with no real way to test or tell how accurate those recommendations and job experiences might be. The problem is, it just doesn't seem possible to be able to come up with any kind of standardized test that you could test for engineering practice.
  12. I am taking it without having applied for licensure here in CA after they recently changed the rules last December. And honestly, as I've studied for it for the last 3 months and depending on how I do, I'd recommend to future graduates to take the national exam as soon as possible. I've been working for 2 years so I would have reached the experience requirement anyway, but I would be feeling a lot better about the exam, particularly the depth portion (structural) if I could've taken it it right after college.
  13. 29 Days to Go. How do you feel?

    I feel about 90% confident on the breadth and roughly 70% on the depth. I still get nervous when I analyzing structural member design prompts which is a large portion of the test. I feel confident that I'll be able to find the relevant code sections to answer, but I tend to overthink or get overwhelmed by various checks, exceptions, and requirements for choosing the correct equation.
  14. 29 Days to Go. How do you feel?

    I too am taking Civil/Structural. I took the NCEES practice test and scored 55/80... I scored 36 on the breadth, missing some of the qualitative but absolutely need to get a better understanding on structures. I too misread some questions and wasted some time (looking at you, moment distribution problem). I feel pretty good that the CERM will guide me to breezing through the breadth, but the structural depth will be tough. I haven't worked in structural engineering, but I have a B.S in structural. I feel pretty good about using ASCE and AISC, and while I haven't ever studied timber, at least the process for wood and the layout of NDS is pretty easy to follow. However, I absolutely hate how the ACI codes are laid out. I think I've gotten a decent grasp of all the codes to be able to answer all the "look up in the code" questions, and most basic structural analysis and mechanics of materials questions are easier for me, but I still struggle with the design analysis problems.