Titleistguy - Engineer Boards
Jump to content
Engineer Boards

Titleistguy

Member
  • Content Count

    229
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

117 Excellent

About Titleistguy

  • Rank
    Principal in Charge

Previous Fields

  • Engineering Field
    Structural
  • License
    PE
  • Calculator
    HP
  • Discipline
    Structural

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Detroit
  • Interests
    Golf & Structural Engineering

Recent Profile Visitors

498 profile views
  1. Binders cover about 75% of the material (which when you think about it is quite a bit). Code look ups are maybe another 15-20% and the last ten percent is going to be a bit random maybe more binder or more code or possibly a more obscure reference. Depends on how you organize. My advice if you're short on time is to just work problems since that's the actual mechanism by which you'll be tested. Mark up codes as you go and highlight and note binder and reference materials as needed.
  2. Lol... Those architects... Always worried about egress, firewalls, and whether or not my equipment platforms are actually mezzanines. So far so good by the way with the BIM 360, except it's gets weird with zip files I need to get with IT on this. We're using it quite extensively in an IPD environment so it's nice to have everyone pointing to one place. Bluebeam and MS Teams are the other project tools we're using.
  3. Ohhhh they're not that bad. I mean it's long days but it doesn't feel like 9 hours. I have conference call that may only be 2 or 3 hours that feel much longer. Lol.
  4. I wouldn't be recommending it if I didn't believe in it. His structural loads book has a free downloadable solutions manual too so pick that up once you get the book, I believe the url is inside one of the covers. Let me know what you think of it.
  5. No unfortunately not yet. Came close on lateral, not quite as close on vertical. So I'm still grinding out the study and prep like most others here. But it is nice having one attempt at each under my belt. It takes away much of the nerves. Hopefully this year I can wrap these up before any major code change lol.
  6. No one really knows this answer for sure... But if history is any indication ... NCEES started using IBC 2015 in 2018... NCEES started using IBC 2012 in 2015... I'm not saying its a 3 year cycle, and if you look at the ICC website of states with IBC 2018 as being adopted, I think you'll be able to count them all on one hand. That said, I'd speculate that this year 2020, will be the last year of the 2015 cycle, and I wouldn't be shocked if next year we see 2018 picked up. Just my two cents.
  7. I'm going out on a limb here but I understand generally more than 2 percent of the codes I read. If I read 100 code provisions I'm sure at least 3 would make sense. As far as rote memory, well everyone has a different level of if that but I'm thinking 5 percent is low. I don't necessarily think reading codes cover to, cover is the best way to study but there is something to be said for recognition and even if I only read something once then when I encounter a problem related to that topic I may not remember every nuance of code provision related but I will remember that.... Oh yeah NDS discusses unblocked shear walls... Or whatever. I think the best way to study is whatever works for you. I like working problems bc it's going to exercise your math , code look up, and problem solving skills all at once. The only code for a bldg person I'd recommend reading or at least spending a lot of time in is AAAHTO bc it's so foreign to many of us. But it's a highly personal thing. One thing I noticed after taking the SE vs studying was that the code stuff wasn't that deep (except bridges)... For me it came down in almost every case to speed and efficiency. For example in ASCE 7 for each wind procedure all 10 or whatever of them I went to the step by step procedures that code lists and hand wrote in every single page number for each step. Bc in an office you have time to dick around and find figure this or table that... But on the test going straight to a page number saves a lot of time. I call this leaving bread crumbs. I leave bread crumbs EVERYWHERE... Anything that can save me 5 seconds here 10 there 15 over there and so on..... Next thing you know you just saved 5 minutes and can finish another problem. The two areas in my opinion that needs this the most are first, like I said above the wind provisions and secondly the NDS. Having to go from the supplement to the main code to the spidwizz takes so effin long so I cross reference that hell out of those. I make a list of all the stress equations with Cfactors... Which is pretty obvious, but for each C factor write in blue pen the page number for sawn lumber and maybe in red pen the glulam page number. That's the stuff that separates the passes and fails imo. Anyone studying as hard as we all are likely can get the right answer eventually but its getting it fast. Tbe reason I dread a code cycle change isn't the money or new stuff it's having to recreate all my bread crumbs.
  8. AEI is great for bridges. Remember it's a review course covering many topics....and aaahto is a gazillion pages. AEI hits all the high percentage topics and several of the more obscure one too. No class or text covers them all. For bridges for bldg folks here is what I'd suggest : 1 AEI Course 2 Connors book 3 Caltran chapter 3 4 FHWA Example problems, especially the one for composite beams and the plate girder one All those taken together will get you 90 percent of the way. If ncees wants to ask some obscure bearing designs or random detail that's buried in the code you likely have a small chance of getting it right. However, assuming 10 bridge questions on the test... The above references get you to 70-80 percent. The other 20... Not much here you can do unless you're a bridge person.
  9. Pride ... That's one way to describe it. I like the word masochism better.
  10. Loud silence of 200 people?? Damn, I had myself and 3 others in my tests. It was too quiet. I do agree tho once the adrenaline kicks in it has a way to clarify the mind and you find yourself not needing as much of the notes you brought.
  11. See you AEI friends in class tmmrw. Looking forward to taking my new computer chair for an 8 hour test sit.
  12. PPI books and online cafe problems = harder than AM questions and not completely in scope of exam (simplified seismic design and direct masonry design are examples of ppi questions from their online database that I feel are out of scope) The PPI book that was a waste imo was the solved structural Engineering problems one and the California seismic books. Get the Hiner book instead. The PPI steel book is pretty useful for vertical practife...similar to the concrete PPI book. The examples in the steel one are close to SE level the examples in the concrete one are ok. The practice problems in the concrete one are over tuned imo. The only ppi book besides serm that is really good is their 16 hour sample exam that one felt spot on in terms of scope and difficulty. SEAOC books -- vol1 excellent for learning and similar to AM questions in some cases, vol 2,3,4 are good for afternoon references. Stephen Hiner Seismic workbook - on par with SE lateral seismic, solid resource AEI course material tuned ideally for SE David Connors bridge book - some questions felt more than 6 mins as is likely the case with its intended target audience, but his 80 questions combined with AEI plus a few Caltrans pdfs and you're set NCEES sample is tuned easy however it does provide useful insight to the distribution of questions and qualitative only type questions Not to completley dismiss the ncees practice think of it this way... you can take any of their questions and add one to two more intermediate steps and itll feel appropriate or do the opposite see if you can handle the 40 questions in 3 hours. And I'll keep waiving the flag for anything written by David Fanella.
  13. Pretty much in agreement here wrt to the wind loading book. I own both and have taken the SE once now and the AEI course and besides Dr. Ibrahims notes the best outside resource for wind is David Fanellas Structual Loads. Hands down.
×
×
  • Create New...