Search results

"lets say that slenderness is not an issue". Slenderness will be your controlling limit state by a country mile. Don't ignore it, if that's what you're getting at. It sounds like you may be dealing with architects. Don't let them convince you to ignore it, either. Those cowboys will try to...

Sorry - couldn't find the ole' double tildy! Hope that helps. ip: What Kevo said - get the versions for IBC2009 if available but watch for errors. That said, though, I studied using the versions written for IBC2006, and they were more than adequate, since a) IBC2009 still references ASCE7-05...

Note they're using a 36 ksi plate (Fu = 58ksi, not 65), but the approximation ends up nearly the same for 50 ksi plate (Fu = 65): Dmin = tp*(65/6.19) = tp*10.5 wmin = tp*(10.5/16) ~ tp*(5/8)

The calc I state is the same: 5/8*tp to develop the plate, no?

McEngr: From AISC Manual pg 9-5 for a 2-sided fillet, tmin = 6.19*D/Fu. Therfore to develop the plate, Dmin = tp*Fu/6.19 = tp*(58/6.19) = tp*9.4 Therfore weld leg size, w = tp*(9.4/16) ~ tp*(5/8) This derivation is a common unstated simplification of the manual equation used in connection...

Thought it was tough but fair. Tough especially on time, especially in the afternoons. Best advice for the afternoons that I got pre-exam, in retrospect now that I've taken it: you don't have time to "learn" anything. Need to be able to immediately know what your general path is to the...

Also Rhoadies: I agree re: the afternoon stuff. Demonstrate a sound design, and demonstrate sound judgement in getting to that design, and you're gold. That has to be the way it is, since that's the point of this madness. If not, we're all screwed.

Rhodies: be careful with leaving a copy in with your ref material, since you're not supposed to have any "loose" papers. Don't want to risk them thinking the wrong thing. I'd imagine they'd just take it from you if found, but personally I wouldn't risk having a loose sheet buried in with the...

I don't read it that they're checking compression zone in tension. They're checking compression zone in compression, and saying since the reference strength value is lower than the tension side reference strength value, compression side controls (in positive moment). Either the way NCEES does...

bmc is right. Go here: http://www.idfpr.com...E_SPEC_Exam.pdf Page 2: "The following references are not allowed in the exam room: .... Books with content directed mainly toward solution of engineering problems or preparation for professional engineering examination". That would clearly...

My confidence builder is that the exam is 1/2 mile from my home, and there are roughly 15-20 bars between here and there. So it will be reeeeeeally easy and enjoyable to blow off steam after the Saturday session is over, then stumble home and crash. That's what I'm building up for!

Where'd you find these examples, anyway? wish i would've had them.

They don't use Cs = 0.551, per your attachment. They just check it as Csmax in following ASCE7 in more of a cookbook fashion (instead of intuiting it from your logic, which I also use when I calc it, btw, so I see your confusion). Notice on page 11, 2/3 of the way down, they show Cs = 0.225...

Yeah, based on the MSJC commentary to section 2.3.5, I agree with the latter. Although shear is resisted either by masonry or by steel, not both in combination, the reminder that a wall subject to in-plane flexure assumes the tension side is cracked. So even when ignoring the horiz bars for...

Yeah, I'd contact the IL board - they're def. weird. They should also have given you a set of guidelines and rules by now. In Wisco, the company that administers the exam just goes by the NCEES standard guidelines, under which as IP noted the SERM is most certainly allowed.

Pffft - we've all been there before!

Do it if you can, WilDV. Not only does it open up more doors for jobs, but practically speaking it's good for you. Undergrad programs just can't cram enough important structural topics in these days, so pursuing the MS will give you the chance to study more advanced, yet practical topics...

First, you're comparing apples and oranges. Table B4.1 Case 6 to which you refer is for the compression element of a single angle in flexure (not of a single angle in uniform compression). See case 5 above that for single angle legs in pure compression. Second, section E7.1a (equation E7-4)...

Your effective beam is 24' wide, per discussion above (not 28'). So Vu = 0.2*24*12.54 = 60k, as SERM has it.

My reasons are pretty much the same you list, but more importantly, at least for now, just need the exam to get my PE license (in non-SE state). Since it's a general agreement among my colleagues and me that structural engineers (lower case) shouldn't be taking the Civil/structural depth 8-hr...