Search results

You put in quite a bit of time studying for all that though. I'm sure it didn't come easy.

Crap the average for Lateral was 25%. That's pretty dismal.

Failed. The morning questions are more intimidating than the afternoon practical. lol. Did pretty good on the afternoon part.

I make about 85K base salary and pull in between 85K and 90K per year. I have 7 years bridge experience and am licensed.

McEngr: Are you suggesting you can get 30/40; guessing on the last 10 and do well on the afternoon practical ans still pass?

I definitely needed to do problems faster.

The big day is coming. I didn't get as much prep time in as I wanted b/c I had to switch jobs throughout September but I did take a mind-numbing review class. Doing practice problems throughout the week. Good LUCK everyone!

Ugh. I got laid off about three weeks ago and have done nothing but look for a job. The good news is it only took me 2 weeks to fund a new job. The bad news is studying for the SE has suffered a bit. I'm taking School of PE review class. I hope that and some of my own studying is enough.

Sounds to me an ME degree goes against the Canon of Ethics. That being said, if you apprentice with a CE and take the appropriate tests like everyone else I have no problem with it.

STAAD.

All I can tell you is this 'Notes on ACI' is pretty heavy duty.

Maybe I'm out of my league here. You can't use a punching shear formula for footings?

and section 10.14 of chap 6 of ACI Notes is no good?

Start at section 9.4.11.1.1 You may be able to modify this equation and do as little as 2 iterations. />http://www.pci.org/view_file.cfm?file=MNL-133-97_ch9_4.pdf

I looked for my notes and they might me at the office. I do believe if you can google the diagonal shear check in bulb tee design you can stop after one iteration.

I wonder if you can check the diagonal shear the same way you check the shear in the web of a bulb tee. I know that too is an iterative process but a professor I had used a technique (or assumption) that circumvented that interative process. I'll have to check my notes.

This is stupid. if you take ln= 27.25' or ln= 27.5' it makes a total difference of 0.15" in determing d. Total minutiae.

I guess the critical face is taken as d/2 for the slab which has h=3.5" and d=2"? d*2= 4".

They do some arcane stuff in this example. ln for the int. neg. ultimate moment is listed at 27.25' for the joists in example 7.6. They also have ln listed at 28.54' for the int. neg. ultimate moment for the continuous beams in example 7.7. I have no idea why they're doing this unless they are...

McEngr: I can't really answer your question but the cover on the 2009 SEAOC is very colorful.