Recent content by ItzmeJ0e

Yep, I agree. I'll get it fixed. Thanks for your thorough review.

Thanks for your comments, @bassist. I agree regarding Q60. This has been recorded in PPI's errata and will be fixed in the next printing. For Q76 (not Q77), AASHTO Sec. 5.11.4.1.4 says you need to meet EITHER spiral reinforcement ratio, so it is ok to use the lower value of 0.00572. I believe...

Anyone who purchased the 5th edition in the last couple of months should have received a PDF showing all the code updates. If you purchased the 5th edition but don't have the Code Update PDF, please reach out to [email protected]

Not sure yet. I'm about half way through making edits and expect to be done in about four weeks. But then PPI will need some time to incorporate the edits and print the book. I'll let you know when I have a firm date. So far, there have not been many substantial changes (not like last round of...

Thanks for the suggestion. I'll try to add a seismic irregularity question to one of the PM example problems. I'll also add that the "2018 IBC SEAOC Structural/Seismic Design Manual Volume 1" is a good reference for these types of problems. I believe they have a worked example for each type of...

Thank you! This was already corrected in the 5th Edition. The correct answer to question #72 is (B) 96 kips.

Thanks for the feedback. In general my goal was to make the practice exam similar in difficulty or slightly more difficult than the actual test. Based on your response, I will try to tweak the lateral PM to be more difficult.

I'm working on making updates to PPI's "SE Structural Engineering Buildings Practice Exam" for the new code list. For those of you that took the exam recently and used my book as part of your preparation, I'd appreciate any feedback you might have so I can make improvements for the next edition...

The question has been revised in the third edition of the PPI practice exam to reflect the changes to the Seismic Design Manual. Vp is calculated in the solution and not looked up in a table. Alw is taken as (d-2tf)tw , but the value is now given in the problem statement to avoid any ambiguity.

Thanks for the feedback. Good catch on the lateral steel depth question. The illustration has been updated for the next edition (due out in about a month) to show d=18” as the depth to the rebar and not the full footing thickness. You are correct that the punching shear strength would be the...

Thanks for the feedback. Agostage, I have tried to incorporate your suggested into the revision for the next edition. Unfortunately, PPI is telling me that the new edition won't be published until around May, so not in time for the April exam. I think the current edition should still be...

Author of PPI’s 16-hour SE Practice Exam for Buildings here. I’m working on writing an update to the book. I’d love to get feedback from those that have taken the exam and used the book as part of their preparation. Primarily I’m updating the questions and solutions for the new reference design...

I think it’s probably fair to imply from this that NCEES is at least tentatively planning to update the design standards beginning with the April 2015 exam. Of course nothing is official until NCEES makes the announcement. But if I were studying to take the SE exam in April 2015 or later, I...

Deepali, Unfortunately NCEES is not very forthcoming when it comes to scheduled code updates. They claim that they do not want to cause confusion by having more than one published list of design standards, so they never announce code changes more than six months in advance. This is a big...

The NCMA publishes a document titled "Section Properties of Concrete Masonry Walls" TEK 14-1B. You can find it online for free with a quick google search. The document provides net and average cross-sectional properties for grouted and partially grouted CMU walls. I believe that this is where...