Search results

Speaking with my Structural Professor from long ago... 😕 , he says it is simply a compromise between using the top of the bottom leg or the bottom surface dimension. He explained this is a problem testing engineering intuition as there is really no set got to reference for it. That being said...

What engineering field is it? 

I worked for a short period of time with similar conditions. The learning experience in engineering was incredible and I stuck around, but after a while I could't take it. I came to the conclusion they insisted on seeing me as payroll. That's my best way of putting it. Everything I did was...

When I took FE , back when it was not computer based, I took Test Masters and it really made a difference. I'm not a fan of their course online, but attending the course in the classroom really made it happen for me. What @P-E has commented is probably the best way and sure way to go about it...

So I find myself taking too much time finding the material I need. This is an example I have for my structural depth binder, any suggestions or how do you do it? 

It is bad and sound bad how they address it, but other references dont even bother sometimes. 

The fact that the syllabus has "2016" on this standard makes me nervous. They keep updating this reference and I don't know which to take. 😞 

Yeah, this is why im never interested in their membership. A coleague of mine always has M. ASCE in his signature and i always thought, well WHO CARES?!! AISC is my favorite and only organization i really like and invest in.  

So after doing some projects with structural steel I have decided to get into it a little more and go forward with an official steel shop. So far I have done open canopies and retail buildings up to 10000 sq. ft. I figure a 30' x 30'  will be a good start. I am planning on doing the structure ...

Of course there are changes. ACI 318-14 is added and that alone is worth it. However, if you are not taking depth in Structural then yeah you may get away with using 15th edition. Also, you could go in and update every time the 318-11 is referenced. I just hope you have more than enough time to...

So i signed up for the 7 day trial of PPI Learning Hub. Its actually very nice and i subscribed to the 200/month option which includes CERM 16th edition on the web. I cancelled because i felt the questions required long solutions and are not comparative to the Exam, but i think having enough...

Im good to go. 🙂 

For anyone interested in reviewing Civil Structural P.E. Exam problems via a Facebook Group you may ask to join by requesting me at the following email.  [email protected]  Group: Civil-Structural Design This is meant to post questions on problems we are having trouble solving. It...

EET guys are awesome. For some reason i couldnt get it done with their training. Im going at it solo now. Se how that goes. 

Im not sure but i believe compression members with out reinforcement is further developed in ACI 318-14 and i found the Prestress section more detailed in it as well. Over all 318-14 is a BIG difference from 318-11  in organaziation and i would just get it. Also. For AISC the 14 th edition has...

I will give my opinion but first know i have not passed my PE. I have every PPI  reference for structural depth and the CERM 15th edition. The SDRM is not worth the money in my opinion. I would instead get the SERM. Yes it has more material NOT likely to be in the PE exam but ultimately it is...

Anyone with experience doing Post Tension Slab on Ground interested in designing a residential Slab on Ground for a fee? I don't have a lot of experience with PT SOG, only prestressed components, and I think I would take too long  to get it done and feel comfortable with the design. If so please...

A 2 day seminar in DC  $1695  for early bird non member enrollment. How do you get that back seriously at least part of it? Are they that good? I have bought some expensive webinars from ASCE before and been dissapointed, anyone a constant user of their seminars that can comment on the...

Yeah, we got the email from the architect and I was prompt to respond yes. Later my boss came to me and said “did you ask why?” , and I said not really. :-/, turned out the fabricator for canopy was requesting it because it contradicted their bid/estimate quantities. I guess they were gonna get...

The scope is an open walkway canopy. 12 ft high and varying from 10 to 14 ft wide. This all came about because i disagreed with the use of a 5/8” base plate for columns should have kept my mouth shut but a 5/8” base plate for an open structure taking 123MPH  wind speed seemed ridiculous to me. I...