NEC questions

[mudpuppy]

I'm not trying to start any rumors, just stating what I understand to be true.

In my opinion, in order to be a code quesiton, a problem must explicitly state the words "NATIONAL ELECTRIC CODE" in the problem statement. I do not remember any of these problems on the breadth module. My memory is not very good, though, so if someone can find a problem on the NCEES sample exam in the breadth section that explictly refers to the NEC in the problem statement, please let us know and I will recant what I've stated. Otherwise I still think all the NEC problems were only on the power depth (and the NEC is only mentioned on the power depth exam specs so it would be awfully unfair of them to throw in a problem in the breadth module that requires a copy of the NEC).

However, as I attempted to point out in my original post, there may be problems on the breadth section or the ECC (or maybe computers) depth for which the NEC would come in handy, even though the problem statement does not explictly state "NATIONAL ELECTRIC CODE". I think this is also the point benbo was making.

Again, please correct me with a reference to the sample exam if I am wrong! I'll try to remember to check the sample exam out of the library and check because I'm really worried now that I've provided misinformation.

 

[benbo]

I'm not trying to start any rumors, just stating what I understand to be true.
In my opinion, in order to be a code quesiton, a problem must explicitly state the words "NATIONAL ELECTRIC CODE" in the problem statement. I do not remember any of these problems on the breadth module. My memory is not very good, though, so if someone can find a problem on the NCEES sample exam in the breadth section that explictly refers to the NEC in the problem statement, please let us know and I will recant what I've stated. Otherwise I still think all the NEC problems were only on the power depth (and the NEC is only mentioned on the power depth exam specs so it would be awfully unfair of them to throw in a problem in the breadth module that requires a copy of the NEC).

However, as I attempted to point out in my original post, there may be problems on the breadth section or the ECC (or maybe computers) depth for which the NEC would come in handy, even though the problem statement does not explictly state "NATIONAL ELECTRIC CODE". I think this is also the point benbo was making.

Again, please correct me with a reference to the sample exam if I am wrong! I'll try to remember to check the sample exam out of the library and check because I'm really worried now that I've provided misinformation.

In the Sample test from NCEES, the only breadth questions that could be considered anywhere near code questions are 104. 105, and 137 which are generally about grounding, safety and circuit protection. None of them specificially mention the NEC code in the question or answer. I assume you might be able to find something about these things in the code, and you might just know this stuff without the book. But it can't hurt to glance through the book and bring it along. We obviously can't discuss the particulars of any actual exam.

 

[Dark Knight]

As a threepeater I feel obligated to include my thoughts about this.

I always found NEC problems in the morning, not difficult, just a matter of knowing what 252 and 3-10.16 are and how to use it.

In the afternoon it was more complicated but do-able, mostly related with motors and the FLC for three phase and single phase machines, but I took Power Module. I am darn sure the ECCs did not have to deal with this.

Take my opinion for what it may worth. That is what I can remember and have in mind that, also, I am suffering from TPPED(Traumatic Post PE Dissorder).

 

[mudpuppy]

In the Sample test from NCEES, the only breadth questions that could be considered anywhere near code questions are 104. 105, and 137 which are generally about grounding, safety and circuit protection. None of them specificially mention the NEC code in the question or answer. I assume you might be able to find something about these things in the code, and you might just know this stuff without the book.

Thanks for looking benbo. This is basically what I remember. Maybe some of us just disagree about what a code quesiton is. In my opinion the questions that specifically refer to the NEC require a copy of the code to answer the question (often to look something up in a table), while the others don't absolutely require a copy of the code book (a different reference or a practial experience might work).

But it can't hurt to glance through the book and bring it along. We obviously can't discuss the particulars of any actual exam.

I completely agree. And I would never recommend someone not study something they think would help them on the exam.

 

[benbo]

As a threepeater I feel obligated to include my thoughts about this.
I always found NEC problems in the morning, not difficult, just a matter of knowing what 252 and 3-10.16 are and how to use it.

In the afternoon it was more complicated but do-able, mostly related with motors and the FLC for three phase and single phase machines, but I took Power Module. I am darn sure the ECCs did not have to deal with this.

Take my opinion for what it may worth. That is what I can remember and have in mind that, also, I am suffering from TPPED(Traumatic Post PE Dissorder).

I don't have any idea what 252 and 3-10.16 are.

 

[Dark Knight]

I don't have any idea what 252 and 3-10.16 are.

Yes you do. You just did not remember :laugh:

 

[benbo]

Yes you do. You just did not remember :laugh:

No, I guarantee you I never knew that.

I was so horrible with the NEC that I could work a practice problem, look at the answer, and come back an hour later and not be able to find it. At least for me, to be any good at the NEC would require a lot of practice.

I took the October 2005 with ECC afternoon. And, like I said, I was horrible with NEC. I spent a total of about 4 hours studying it, and just broght it along. I wouldn't swear one way or the other if there were code questions in the AM, but if there were -

1. I got incredibly lucky and found the answers, or guessed right.

2. I did well enough on the rest of the test, and there were so few of them that I still passed.

At least that is my recollection. As far as the upcoming exam, people just have to take their chances one way or the other.

 

[Wolverine]

Another resource that might be helpful was a book loaned to me called something like "Interpreting the NEC." It had For-Dummies style sketches that show real world applications of the NEC. I specifically remember at least one grounding question on the PM Power session that could have just as well been lifted verbatim from the "Interpreting..." manual.

I approached the test with a "Percentage of Points" philosophy where I focused not on mastering every subject, but on being able to get at least n-percentage on a given topic. Enough points and you pass (3/3 on NEC + 1/3 on OpAmps = pass). Don't forget - NEC, like Engineering Econ, is easy points, IF you know how to get them.

 

[Dark Knight]

The thing about NEC is the intimidation factor. Many people feel intimidated by the darn book and I don't blame them. But, as Wolverine said, NEC points are easy points once you are familiarized(spell check please) with it. Takes a lot of work, thats for sure.

 

[jdd18vm]

I'll just throw in my 2 cents for what its worth, and that may be very little.

As someone who took the Oct 07 power depth w/o success and being very familiar with the NEC I can only tell you there werent ENOUGH questions on the NEC in the morning imho.

Benbo is exactly right 104 and 137 are right out of the NEC, yet NEC isn't stated.. I think 105 is more about knowing the how the device works, but I will say you can find that sort of explanatory info in the NEC Handbook.

I apologize for not looking back in this post and risk repeating whats been said but its worth reinforcing, if you can get the Handbook its a little more useful. Again for you ECC guys I don't know that I would recommend buying it but borrow it. For Power, well worth the investment.

Like Mud (I think) said its all about points, and these are easy ones (AM ones in particular) then again you guys think controls are easy...ugh.

Im still hoping for 6 NEC questions and only 3 on controls in April am.

I noticed the Camara practice test had a LOT of NEC in the am, I didn't see that in OCT.

There is a whole other thread on the Kaplan NEC question(s), but that question is flawed from the start (NEC doesnt allow #1s to be paralleled), but the principals and procedures are fine.

JD

 

[adr]

The NEC handbook definitely helped. The Oct 07 exam had a few safety/grounding type questions on the AM. I answered one by looking it up in the NEC handbook. Another I was able to answer because I had seen the exact same situation while troubleshooting. I don't think I would've been able to answer that one had I not seen the problem before.

I'd recommend taking the NEC handbook.