Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Unacceptable
Unacceptable
Uber Acceptable
Unacceptable
Improvement required
@kevo_55, we are being civilized. Just because @Dean Agnostic disagrees with what I find acceptable, doesn't mean we can't be friends. It just means he's wrong.
In all seriousness, let's try to keep pending the conversation civilized.
I appreciate an opinion from the other side. I agree that the reality is not many people would want someone who can't say they have professional licensure to act as an EOR on their project. But to call yourself an SE all you have to do is "demonstrate competence" and pass the exam, there is no metric for passion.
I'm pretty confident that most SE's would agree, that the current SE exams are in a league of their own when it comes to testing. The difficulty is far beyond any college course I personally have taken.
I don't think watering down the content is the solution either. IMO speed is just too much of a factor on the exam. And TBH it is a competence test, fairness to past test takers either way shouldn't play a role in what should be required for competence. I've been a part of peer reviewing some pretty scary calculation sets from SE's and I'm not going to complain that in the way back when it was easier to get the SE license.
I agree, best of luck.
Kudos. That made me laugh. I can admire the wit and the fact there is at least one other agnostic trolling the boards. The fact still remains though, I KNOW I passed this time. There is no "Maybe." Basically, the entirety of my previous statements boil down to the following: There is no conceivable way for me to fail the exam with this administration short of grading incompetency. I've been frustrated in the past, but I have put forth the effort and the study to be where I needed to be. I slammed that exam around like the Rock laying the smack down. I do NOT suspect I will get any result except the Acceptable result I expect. Therefore, if I were to happen to see some result other than Acceptable, I would know shenanigans were afoot. I'm a veteran with this thing now. I want to make new fault lines in the Earth's crust just so I can use some special seismic stuff. Sadly, if I had contractors cut in dogbones in my current line of work and location, they would run me out of town.
Made me lol - im embarrased to say Ive thought the same...always good when we get paid to study!
Bonjour monsieur. To your point earlier about wanting fault lines made in your area so you can design special seismic stuff...I had a project with some accidental torsion recently and I was FAR more enthused than I should have been. I was looking for ways to use things I have ingrained in my head from this test. You've reached a new low when you're praying for overstrength.
HAHA. That's funny. I had a square two story SDC B building recently where the seismic system was moment frames on one side and an ordinary reinforced CMU shear wall on the other. The wall was so much stiffer than the moment frames that the inclusion of accidental torsion (just the minimum 5%) caused the center of rigidity to be outside the building footprint. I thought it was an interesting situation and the first time I've seen it in my career. Wind still controlled as usual. All of my clients like 5' parapets, it makes me sad.
Oddly enough, I was told the exact opposite after asking this question by my state board. I was informed that the class would count towards the CEU's but passing the test would not. Probably depends on who you talk to and what mood they are in that day.
Yes, Sir! Never, absolutely, never ask as woman if she is pregnant under any circumstances whatsoever. Also, never ask your wife why she is overreacting. It's another very bad idea. Last bit of sage advice, is never ask a police officer where to buy drugs. They don't find it funny. Maybe their uniform is too tight, who knows.
I suspect the reasons they don't line up is bc of how the factors on the other load cases (on the demand side of the equation) in that combination either exacerbate or mitagate that lateral load effect, in that particular combination. Combined with how the reductions on the strength side / allowable stress side limit the capacity in tandem with the demand side factors.
Reminds me of the old quote -
While I understand the joke and agree that it's oddly funny and somewhat true, I feel this downplays the significant amount of intellect and mathematical genius that goes into engineering theory and practice. If we were to take a relationship of physical accuracy of our models and graph it against the preciseness of material testing, I suspect you would see an asymptotic relationship between how close the calculations get with reality. Dealing with all materials, we have to use statistical averages due to manufacturing defects and inherent fluctuations of material strengths and stiffness, however, the industry balances around a profitable equilibrium in which engineers expect and design to a reasonably small material property standard deviation that manufacturers can consistently reproduce. Of course this all depends on the rigor of your analysis, while Bernoulli will get you close, Timoshenko will get you closer, and finite element analysis would be the gold standard. Maybe there will be a paper published studying FEM elements with material properties varying over expected statistical deviations throughout a system. I would guess the smaller you made your elements, the more accurately you would reflect reality (again, an asymptotic relationship). Unfortunately, my explanation won't fit on a t-shirt and even if it did, I suppose you could expect comments from the layperson along the lines of the movie "Idiocracy."
I actually had to look this up. I learned something new today. I wonder how long it will be before this is added to the olympics.
