Jump to content
Engineer Boards

Lep

Members
  • Content count

    3
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Lep

  • Rank
    Intern

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    New York

Previous Fields

  • Engineering Field
    Civil
  • License
    PE
  • Calculator
    TI
  • Discipline
    Structural

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. For me, the notes I had from School of PE and the CERM was more than enough for the AM. Economics is a topic for all Civil disciplines, the problem context might be different but the procedures are all the same whether the question is about money or population growth. You should be familiar with how to use interest tables in any case. I'm not a great test taker myself but I really do believe a 32+/40 score in the AM is attainable for anyone hoping to pass this exam (if you are putting in the study time). If you did enough practice problems, there's a good chance you've seen the problem before, or at least one similar to it. Time is the currency for this exam, any time you save on one problem is time you can spend solving another one. Whatever your depth is, the morning questions in that area should be free points (and free time!) I don't think that's debatable, these questions are designed so that they are solvable by someone taking any civil discipline. If you can handle the depth section of a subject, the breadth should absolutely be painless. It's definitely worth your while to get familiar with the problems. The last thing you want to have to do is have to figure out something new during this exam. If it comes to that, you'll be glad you have all that precious time saved up from earlier. Obviously, it's paramount to solve what you know first. Do not dwell on questions that you are unsure of until you've gotten everything else out of the way. Based on what @mnguy88 said, it seems like any PE license would be the same for him. It's great how encouraging this board seems to be, but I personally could not imagine taking the structural depth without the undergrad foundation that I have. Everyone's situation is different however I think it's incredibly unrealistic to squeeze that much schooling into say ~250 hours of exam prep with no prior knowledge.
  2. I don't mean to discourage you but if all you need it for is a pay bump, there's clearly a more direct route. Just wanted to point out that you chose a tough(er) row to hoe.
  3. Considering you have no civil engineering background (let alone structural) and do not work in the profession, I think you've done pretty well for yourself so far. Structural Engineering is not an easy subject and I don't think it's the easiest available option for this exam. My undergrad had a heavy emphasis on structural analysis and design. I have been a structural engineer for the last year at my company, with the remaining time (3 years) spent designing roadways. Most of my colleagues suggested I take the Civil Transportation PE rather than the Structural. I even know some full time structural engineers who have skirted the Structural PE for an easier pass. Personally, I still took the Structural PE. In hindsight, it might not have been the smartest decision on my part. At the end of the day, a PE is a PE. There is no distinction once you've passed, at least from what I can tell; someone please correct me if I am wrong. I'm pretty sure I worked harder than I had to and there are undoubtedly more references for the Structural Depth than any of the other Civil disciplines. In the end it worked out for me but it served no purpose other than to prove a point to myself. It's great that you are interested in the subject. But on the other hand, I personally think that unless you plan on working in that field in the future, you may be doing yourself a disservice. The calculations are inherently more complicated compared to the other disciples and there are many more codes & references. You also have to recognize there are many ways you can go through a whole question thinking you are right and still wind up with a trap answer. As noted in the post above, the distinction between ASD and LRFD is a good example of this. You can spend a whole 6 minutes on a problem, then forget a reduction factor and you would have been better off guessing from the get go. If you plan on taking the structural exam again, make sure you have all the references. As you saw, the most recent PM section was very code oriented. The morning is also crucial because the type of problems that will be asked are much more predictable and less demanding. The more points you can get in the AM, the more slack you have for the PM. Good luck!
×