# Geotech vs Transportation vs Construction?



## Jayman_PE

Hello everyone,

New to the forum here. Looks like a great resource. After delaying for 7 years I'm finally going to bite the bullet and apply for the Civil PE exam this fall (MN resident). I took the FE exam October 2004 and didn't think it was that bad, after a modest amount of study. Any bits of advice of what to prepare for on the Civil PE exam? I'm either going to do the Construction or Geotechnical or Transportation emphasis for the PM edition, haven't decided yet. My background is primarily in calculations for rigging, soil stability and road alignments, and surveying for Heavy Construction use; though I've never opened an OSHA code, done any scheduling, or read a single page of Construction code.

1. Any adivice on what emphasis I should take?

2. What are the best study references for#1?

Thanks for sharing.

Jason

Central, MN


----------



## jillhill

Jayman_10x said:


> Hello everyone,New to the forum here. Looks like a great resource. After delaying for 7 years I'm finally going to bite the bullet and apply for the Civil PE exam this fall (MN resident). I took the FE exam October 2004 and didn't think it was that bad, after a modest amount of study. Any bits of advice of what to prepare for on the Civil PE exam? I'm either going to do the Construction or Geotechnical or Transportation emphasis for the PM edition, haven't decided yet. My background is primarily in calculations for rigging, soil stability and road alignments, and surveying for Heavy Construction use; though I've never opened an OSHA code, done any scheduling, or read a single page of Construction code.
> 
> 1. Any adivice on what emphasis I should take?
> 
> 2. What are the best study references for#1?
> 
> Thanks for sharing.
> 
> Jason
> 
> Central, MN


I Think Geotech for sure, Transpo and Construction you really have to know very code related items. I used the CERM, although it's big, you dont have to read through it all. I suggest you do School of PE or Passpe.com. It's a lot of money but it will be worth it in the end. The School of PE is not as good as PassPe.com. the review class will help you learn the subjects you haven't done in years.


----------



## Rustyga13

I would take either construction or transportation. I took construction and passed on my first try. I work as a materials engineer so like you I didn't have much experience in some of the fields and I had no experience with scheduling or estimating, but I felt I knew the terminology better for construction. After working a lot of problems for both scheduling and estimating I found them to be some of the easiest problems on the exam because they are simple math and they always follow the same principles. I didn't use any books on the exam for the estimating and I think I looked one question on scheduling that dealt with theory not math. Plus you have to learn both of them for the AM section anyway.

As far as the OSHA goes, I felt I knew the manual pretty well because I used it a good bit at my previous job, but it is still a pain to look up anything in it and it is a big pain when you are under a time limit.

As far as codes go, the big thing is to know how to use the manuals they are in. I made sure I had all the required manuals the NCESS has listed and that I knew what was in them and how to use them. After the exam I felt that I wasted too much time making cheat sheets and tabbing pages instead of knowing some of books better because I ended up tabbing or copying a lot of stuff that I didn’t use but I found myself looking up things in the index. (Try to only use books with a really good index or table of contents.)

As far as prep courses go I took the School of PE and felt that it was great. I have 4 other friends who took the course and they all passed the exam following it. (2 failed once after studying on their own then took the class and passed). I felt it covered 90% of the material for the AM and about 60% for the pm. (AM is where you make your money and the PM is always up in the air for any section from what I hear.) Before I say this I want to say that I am not the smartest person, but I only studied for 2 months before the exam and my wife had a baby 1 week before the exam so I would say the School of PE did a great job of getting me ready for it and it saved me a ton of time. But remember you have to do your part and study.

But whichever section you choose to take remember to not waste time by reading books or looking over things, just work problems non-stop. Work every problem you can get your hands on. This will force you to know your study materials. Every problem I worked I made notes on it and organized to take into the exam with me.

If you do take the construction section feel free to contact me and I will fill you in with a little more detail.


----------



## Jayman_PE

Rustyga13 said:


> I would take either construction or transportation. I took construction and passed on my first try. I work as a materials engineer so like you I didn't have much experience in some of the fields and I had no experience with scheduling or estimating, but I felt I knew the terminology better for construction. After working a lot of problems for both scheduling and estimating I found them to be some of the easiest problems on the exam because they are simple math and they always follow the same principles. I didn't use any books on the exam for the estimating and I think I looked one question on scheduling that dealt with theory not math. Plus you have to learn both of them for the AM section anyway.
> As far as the OSHA goes, I felt I knew the manual pretty well because I used it a good bit at my previous job, but it is still a pain to look up anything in it and it is a big pain when you are under a time limit.
> 
> As far as codes go, the big thing is to know how to use the manuals they are in. I made sure I had all the required manuals the NCESS has listed and that I knew what was in them and how to use them. After the exam I felt that I wasted too much time making cheat sheets and tabbing pages instead of knowing some of books better because I ended up tabbing or copying a lot of stuff that I didn’t use but I found myself looking up things in the index. (Try to only use books with a really good index or table of contents.)
> 
> As far as prep courses go I took the School of PE and felt that it was great. I have 4 other friends who took the course and they all passed the exam following it. (2 failed once after studying on their own then took the class and passed). I felt it covered 90% of the material for the AM and about 60% for the pm. (AM is where you make your money and the PM is always up in the air for any section from what I hear.) Before I say this I want to say that I am not the smartest person, but I only studied for 2 months before the exam and my wife had a baby 1 week before the exam so I would say the School of PE did a great job of getting me ready for it and it saved me a ton of time. But remember you have to do your part and study.
> 
> But whichever section you choose to take remember to not waste time by reading books or looking over things, just work problems non-stop. Work every problem you can get your hands on. This will force you to know your study materials. Every problem I worked I made notes on it and organized to take into the exam with me.
> 
> If you do take the construction section feel free to contact me and I will fill you in with a little more detail.


Thanks for the great advice. I'm just getting my exam application in as we speak so once approved I'll probably be in touch.

Jason


----------



## ketanco

Hello

I am going to take PE exam in October and I am debating whether I should choose Geotech or Construction. Which one should I take as far as being able tgo stamp more broader range of items? The purpose is being able to get more work. So which one has broader scope as far as stamping drawings? Can a Geotech engineer stamp many items a construction PE can? What are the items that a construction PE can stamp but a Geotech PE can not?


----------



## ptatohed

aadams22 said:


> To clarify this a little further Passing the transportation depth doesn't make you a Transportation PE it just makes you a PE. Passing the geotechnical depth doesn't make you a Geotechnical PE it just makes you a PE. Passing the structural depth doesn't make you a Structural PE it just makes you a PE. Passing the water resources depth doesn't make you a Hydraulics PE it just makes you a PE. Passing the construction depth doesn't make you a Construction PE it just makes you a PE. No matter which one is passed you are just seen as a Professional Engineer, and as such have the exact same license as someone with a PE license regardless of what depth they took. Some states do offer depth specific licenses, like the aforementioned Structural Engineer license in Illinois, but it is a completely different test with a completely different set of pre-requisites in order to take it. It is not affiliated with the PE in any way.






I know we are in the Civil forum but, just for clarification, when it's said "A PE is a PE", we should probably say "A Civil PE is a Civil PE". Meaning, whichever depth module you choose for your Civil PE exam, you'll be a Civil PE. This does not, however, make you an Electrical, Mechanical, Chemical, etc. PE.

Also, I wouldn't say that an SE license has nothing to do with a PE license. A PE license is required to pursue an SE license, right?

ketanco, take whichever depth you feel most comfortable with and/or work most closely with. If you are 100% 50/50 on the fence between Cons and Geo, I guess go with Geo to save all the review material money. Good luck.


----------



## S28

Actually I don't think a PE license is required to pursue an SE. At the PE Exam last week I was talking to someone who was going for his SE1 license, (the exams were being given at the same time, just different rooms and our lunch break was the same... Anyway he said he hadn't gone after his PE yet, but instead was trying to get his SE1 license.

I'm no structural guy, but just to throw something else in there, I'm really glad I'm not a structural guy... evidently there's the PE, SE1, SE2 licenses that many go try to obtain. I have no idea what the differences in subject matter are, or even if many people try to get all three, but I do know that's a lot of testing, and a lot of studying. Then again, you CA guys are used to testing I suppose with the Seismic, Surveying, and PE. I'm just glad I only have one exam to worry and stress over.


----------



## ptatohed

S28 said:


> Actually I don't think a PE license is required to pursue an SE. At the PE Exam last week I was talking to someone who was going for his SE1 license, (the exams were being given at the same time, just different rooms and our lunch break was the same... Anyway he said he hadn't gone after his PE yet, but instead was trying to get his SE1 license.
> 
> I'm no structural guy, but just to throw something else in there, I'm really glad I'm not a structural guy... evidently there's the PE, SE1, SE2 licenses that many go try to obtain. I have no idea what the differences in subject matter are, or even if many people try to get all three, but I do know that's a lot of testing, and a lot of studying. Then again, you CA guys are used to testing I suppose with the Seismic, Surveying, and PE. I'm just glad I only have one exam to worry and stress over.




Well, you definitely need your PE here in CA before you can even apply for the SE. http://www.bpelsg.ca.gov/applicants/flowchart_for_se.pdf And, if I am not mistaken ,there is a CA specific portion of the SE exam which needs to be passed in addition to the NCEES parts I and II.

LOL - Yeah, CA PE has it rough. But, look at CA SE - that's murder!


----------



## S28

Wow. I just checked out NCEES's SE Exam info, and it states 43% passing rate for the SE vertical exam, and 25% passing rate for the SE lateral exam, and that's for first time takers, repeaters is even lower. That sounds just brutal. Props to all you SE guys. And all of you CA examinees as well. I found it incredibly hard to find enough time for one 8 hour exam, I can't imagine trying to find time for three. And that's assuming you pass them all on the first time. Yikes!


----------



## ketanco

ok I will take in CT. so no matter what I choose, construction or geotech, i will have the same stamp that will say "PE" correct? And again no matter what I choose, I will be able to stamp everything a civil PE can, except the high rise structural things correct? so the only difference then becomes what you are comfortable studying with and what you intend to work on more in the future I guess...


----------



## Duke of PEarl

Ketanco, I took Construction on my first try. I remember how overwhelmed I was with all the review materials and the depth I needed to study. IMO, its not as difficult but its just too much. I am also in the Construction industry and this was the main reason I took Construction for my PM exam. I was unfortunate. After failing on my first attempt, I thought about it real hard and went through the NCEES list of references etc and finally made a decision of taking Geotechnical this time around. I have no background in geotech, did a little structural design earlier in my career so I'd say I knew the basics. I took the PE exam last Fall 2012 and found the morning really difficult and the afternoon also as hard but definitely not as hard as the Cons PM in April 2012. To my amazement, I passed! That's just my two cents on your inquiry. And yes, a Civil PE is a Civil PE. Good luck!


----------



## palvarez83

aadams22 said:


> ketanco said:
> 
> 
> 
> ok I will take in CT. so no matter what I choose, construction or geotech, i will have the same stamp that will say "PE" correct? And again no matter what I choose, I will be able to stamp everything a civil PE can, except the high rise structural things correct? so the only difference then becomes what you are comfortable studying with and what you intend to work on more in the future I guess...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, your stamp will say "Professional Engineer," and like you said the only difference comes down to what you are comfortable studying. Depending on the state you live you might be able to sign structural plans. Only ten states requires an SE for structural plans: California, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Washington. Each of those ten states has their own requirements on how to obtain that structural stamp as well.
Click to expand...

Actually here in California we do not requre an SE for structural plans always. A Civil is enough for most cases. It depends on the jursidiction. The excpetions where you definately need an SE title are DSA (they oversee K-12 schools and community colleges) and OSHPD (they oversee hospital work). I think certain other jursidictions that might ask for SE for certain projects. In California to qualify for the SE, you need to have practiced structural engineering for 3 years as a Civil PE (regardless of the depth portion exam you took).

Sorrry for going off topic Kentanco. It sounds like your work is more geotechnical related, so I would probably stick with that if I were in your shoes. I on the other hand find construction to be the easiest, so that's what I'm studying for right now.


----------



## Jayman_PE

I found a lot of overlap between Geotech and Construction. To me, if you are experienced on one you will do fine in the other.


----------



## PDesigns

I too have trouble deciding on a depth module.  I have an architectural degree and I've mostly done construction related engineering work, however I was told that Transpo had less to learn for the exam.  Well, I took it and failed this past spring...  The questions didn't seem that hard and it was clear that any previous experience at all would have surely meant victory, however I had none....  I have gotten mixed reviews on construction and whether it is easier or more difficult.  I was told that construction has way more material to cover?  Is this true?  Either way I think I chose very poorly doing transportation.  I got a 48 and I know that there were 15 or more questions in the afternoon that I would have known had I had some previous experience.  

Now my issue is, since I was so close, do I stick with transportation or switch?  I think I can pick up 10 points, but you never know.  Exam changes every year in difficulty from what I've heard.  Just wanna be safe...


----------



## smahurin

PDesigns said:


> I too have trouble deciding on a depth module.  I have an architectural degree and I've mostly done construction related engineering work, however I was told that Transpo had less to learn for the exam.  Well, I took it and failed this past spring...  The questions didn't seem that hard and it was clear that any previous experience at all would have surely meant victory, however I had none....  I have gotten mixed reviews on construction and whether it is easier or more difficult.  I was told that construction has way more material to cover?  Is this true?  Either way I think I chose very poorly doing transportation.  I got a 48 and I know that there were 15 or more questions in the afternoon that I would have known had I had some previous experience.
> 
> Now my issue is, since I was so close, do I stick with transportation or switch?  I think I can pick up 10 points, but you never know.  Exam changes every year in difficulty from what I've heard.  Just wanna be safe...


Take whichever module you feel most comfortable with based on which area you have the most experience/knowledge.  Everyone will tell you differing opinions on which depth module is harder/easier/etc.  If you have more experience in a specific area, you are better off taking the test most closely relating to that area of knowledge.  Trying to game the test by figuring out which specific depth section might or might not be easier is a fools errand.


----------



## ptatohed

PDesigns said:


> I too have trouble deciding on a depth module.  I have an architectural degree and I've mostly done construction related engineering work, however I was told that Transpo had less to learn for the exam.  Well, I took it and failed this past spring...  The questions didn't seem that hard and it was clear that any previous experience at all would have surely meant victory, however I had none....  I have gotten mixed reviews on construction and whether it is easier or more difficult.  I was told that construction has way more material to cover?  Is this true?  Either way I think I chose very poorly doing transportation.  I got a 48 and I know that there were 15 or more questions in the afternoon that I would have known had I had some previous experience.
> 
> Now my issue is, since I was so close, do I stick with transportation or switch?  I think I can pick up 10 points, but you never know.  Exam changes every year in difficulty from what I've heard.  Just wanna be safe...


At this point, since you have already invested time and money into Transpo, I'd stick with it.  Study harder next time and you'll get it.


----------



## Guest

cialis and nevada pharmacy Infini buy cialis online overnight shipping evepsy Does Keflex Work For Boils clulfuct best price for generic cialis bypevemn Levitra Effets Secondaires Prix


----------



## Guest

Propecia Consumo Laurgy Cialis suigue Does Cephalexin Have Sulfa In It object buy cialis online us ribJaini Insuffisance Renale


----------

