April PE - What did you think?

[MyBeardAndMe]

I left thinking it was pretty challenging, but I thought I did okay. Today I am thinking I may have to take it in October.

I got home and looked up a number of questions that I remembered struggling on. I already know I missed 8 questions.

I felt that the practice exams weren't very similar to the actual exam. The NCEES practice exam was similar in difficulty. In terms of material covered, there were huge chunks of what I studied that didn't even appear on the exam, while other areas that I barely touched on appeared more than I expected.

I used Wildi to help answer one question that I wouldn't have know otherwise. Graffeo was kind of a let down. Camara I used as I expected.

On the plus side, I do have a number of new resources to add to my binder if I do have to take it again. Does NCEES carry over even a small percentage of the same questions between exams, or are they completely new each time?

 

[PEoct]

i felt the same way , i think i did ok , it though the exam was much better than october, but ya some topics were very unexpected, and question i would have never imagines, i was so angry that they really give me new sample paper nothing came closer to the sample exam, with every exam the style is changing ,,,,,,,,,,,, very very unexpected question,,,,,,

lets see i did neither tooo great not tooooo tooo bad,,,,,,, really on margin.

hope u all pass.......

 

[PEoct]

and yes this was my third time and every time they focus on new topic

 

[kduff70]

I felt the same way too what I studied was not entirely the areas cover on the test or at least in the way most material is cover is the different books . but what they did have I knew but there has to be a better way to prepare for this test if I have to take it again I would have to take a problem and figure all the ways possible of solving it and if there a theory type problem you have to try everyway to work all possible theory scenario

 

[knight1fox3]

I've posted this before for previous exam results because it is one of the more funny synopses I've read. Still makes me laugh after reading it again. Not sure if this will help any in terms of how you think you did on the exam but it is certainly worth a good laugh. Here were the poster's thoughts about the April 2011 exam:

EE - Power. "You sunk my battleship."

Preparation Time/Materials: 250 total hours. 5 textbooks, prep coursework notebook, 2 notebooks of graduate class material, calculators, snacks, rolling suitcase.

Money: ~$1,550.

General Observations: Arrived at my site 30 minutes prior to report time. Noticed that many others had literally libraries and libraries of books. Someone had a giant wagon with bungie cords holding all of the books together. Others just had a single piece of paper. Wild. I randomly started thinking of a national geographic special with narration by Morgan Freeman on PE test taking habits. I needed that laugh to clear my head.

AM Session: Felt the AM session was great. Only ended up with 6-7 that I didn't have a single solid answer or couldn't find it in my reference. I finished slightly early and checked only some of my work.

PM Session: Total unadulterated bloodbath. Couldn't seem to concentrate enough to find the equations I needed. Calculator was spitting out answers that were out of this world. Saw stuff that I barely covered in droves. About 2-3 hours into the afternoon, my brain felt like it had been through a dishwasher and I started hopping around from question to question. Not good. I will be lucky if I got a quarter to half right. I might as well have taken another discipline in the afternoon or gone to work. A monkey may have been able to do better.

Final Thoughts: As I left the exam area, I felt numb, dumb, and a little crushed. I felt like I blew the morning session out of the water. Then the PE got off a torpedo as I was heading to collect my stamp, promotion, and better life. I'm not very good at guessing and doing the math in my head all weekend I kept envisioning a percentage score in the upper 60s with an afternoon diagnostic that simply says "monkey". 6 months of neglecting my wife and family might be for nothing in the end except doing it all over again. I know the pass rate for repeaters is low, but what is the divorce rate?

Oh well. If I recall from a coworker, last years results were released in around 45-50 days following the exam. I think he got his in late May. We shall see. I guess the ultimate decision is now do I crack open another book....or another beer?

:lmao:

 

[zm83]

I can't say I passed and can't say I failed for sure. Definitely feel better as I saw 3 people with just Camaras book and an untabbed soft copy of the NEC. I couldn't imagine that. I put the time into it and I felt Graffeos book was a handy tool to have it covered a lot of topics if you were familiar with it.

There were a few questions I couldn't believe was on there but for the most part it was a fair exam.

 

[PEoct]

ya true, this exam was very very fair except for few quesiton but cnt blame this time on exam,

 

[Kovz]

I felt it was very challenging as well. I feel like I got a lot of answers correct, but I also know I missed several after reviewing them after the exam. I don't feel confident that I passed at this point, but I don't know if I failed either. I'm thinking I am right around the pass/fail mark... either slightly above or below it. I guess we'll find out in June.

I found it frustrating that I studied so many power factor correction and autotransformer questions, yet there was not one of either on the exam. (I don't think that's giving away too much detail to specific questions).

Of course there were also problems that I had no similar practice problems for. For example, there were problems dealing with filters and I didn't have any practice problems covering those.

I just question how is one supposed to study for such a broad exam when there really isn't any practice problem sets out there that cover everything. Sure CI and Spin-Up teach you the fundamentals needed, but when it comes down to it, they are also missing a lot of stuff that show up on the exam.

I did find 2 problems on the real exam that were almost word for word copies from the NCEES practice exam. Slightly different on one of them, but same general idea.

I felt the actual exam was slightly harder than the NCEES practice exam, but maybe because I had worked through those problems so many times that I felt they were easy because I knew how to do 78/80 of them. I'm sure if I could work through the real exam again with the same questions, I would at least get another 6 or so correct.

A note to future test takers, you definitely need the full copy of the NESC, not just the table of contents and scope. I'd highly recommend the NFPA 70E as well; needed it for one problem.

 

[dayrongarcia]

I am in the same boat as you guys, the test was challenging but not as bad as the October test. I was glad to see so many code questions and not too thrilled about the filter questions.

 

[JB66money]

I felt last year like you all feel currently, the only thing that I could remember about the exam were the 8-9 problems that I was certain that I missed and the more days passed by the more I felt that I would have to re-take the exam. However, when the results were released, I passed and then I started to remember all the problems that I got correct. I pray and hope that each and everyone of you passed this exam. One thing to take away from this is when preparing for this exam, try to learn and under the fundamental priinciples and concepts and don't get up caught with particular problem types, because passing the exam is not about looking up problem types to match correct answers. It is about reading the problem and understanding what is being asked and being able to connect the correct principles and concepts to obtain the solution. The purpose of the reference guides such as Grafeo and Camara is to provide basic principles and concepts which will assist you in answering questions, not provide problems that match actual exam questions. That is why I constantly stress understanding of concepts and principles as oppose to only solving numerical problems.

 

[PEoct]

EXACTLY we all on the same boat, but it was much much better than October, but still very tricky and realistic questions..... i wish all hard work pays off for all

 

[PEoct]

I felt it was very challenging as well. I feel like I got a lot of answers correct, but I also know I missed several after reviewing them after the exam. I don't feel confident that I passed at this point, but I don't know if I failed either. I'm thinking I am right around the pass/fail mark... either slightly above or below it. I guess we'll find out in June.

I found it frustrating that I studied so many power factor correction and autotransformer questions, yet there was not one of either on the exam. (I don't think that's giving away too much detail to specific questions).

Of course there were also problems that I had no similar practice problems for. For example, there were problems dealing with filters and I didn't have any practice problems covering those.

I just question how is one supposed to study for such a broad exam when there really isn't any practice problem sets out there that cover everything. Sure CI and Spin-Up teach you the fundamentals needed, but when it comes down to it, they are also missing a lot of stuff that show up on the exam.

I did find 2 problems on the real exam that were almost word for word copies from the NCEES practice exam. Slightly different on one of them, but same general idea.

I felt the actual exam was slightly harder than the NCEES practice exam, but maybe because I had worked through those problems so many times that I felt they were easy because I knew how to do 78/80 of them. I'm sure if I could work through the real exam again with the same questions, I would at least get another 6 or so correct.

A note to future test takers, you definitely need the full copy of the NESC, not just the table of contents and scope. I'd highly recommend the NFPA 70E as well; needed it for one problem.

and yes thank you so so much i am so so glad i got them printed i owe u 3 marks

 

[seandapaul24]

I felt it was very challenging as well. I feel like I got a lot of answers correct, but I also know I missed several after reviewing them after the exam. I don't feel confident that I passed at this point, but I don't know if I failed either. I'm thinking I am right around the pass/fail mark... either slightly above or below it. I guess we'll find out in June.

I found it frustrating that I studied so many power factor correction and autotransformer questions, yet there was not one of either on the exam. (I don't think that's giving away too much detail to specific questions).

Of course there were also problems that I had no similar practice problems for. For example, there were problems dealing with filters and I didn't have any practice problems covering those.

I just question how is one supposed to study for such a broad exam when there really isn't any practice problem sets out there that cover everything. Sure CI and Spin-Up teach you the fundamentals needed, but when it comes down to it, they are also missing a lot of stuff that show up on the exam.

I did find 2 problems on the real exam that were almost word for word copies from the NCEES practice exam. Slightly different on one of them, but same general idea.

I felt the actual exam was slightly harder than the NCEES practice exam, but maybe because I had worked through those problems so many times that I felt they were easy because I knew how to do 78/80 of them. I'm sure if I could work through the real exam again with the same questions, I would at least get another 6 or so correct.

A note to future test takers, you definitely need the full copy of the NESC, not just the table of contents and scope. I'd highly recommend the NFPA 70E as well; needed it for one problem.

Do we really have to talk about the specific topics that were on the exam? By the way filters are fair game they are part of power quality.

 

[Kovz]

Do we really have to talk about the specific topics that were on the exam? By the way filters are fair game they are part of power quality.

Why wouldn't you want to discuss? That's what this board is for... to help others. I'm not discussing specific problems. I'm being just as vague about the topics as the exam specifications are. I can say there was transformer problems, there was grounding problems, there was lightning problems. That's pretty broad topics if you ask me...

 

[knight1fox3]

I just question how is one supposed to study for such a broad exam when there really isn't any practice problem sets out there that cover everything. Sure CI and Spin-Up teach you the fundamentals needed, but when it comes down to it, they are also missing a lot of stuff that show up on the exam.

But then it really wouldn't be an exam, would it? The exam covers Principles and Practice. Some of the exam material are fundamentals where you can use study guides as a reference. But some of it is also supposed to come from your real world engineering experience. Something that isn't necessarily covered in a study guide.

The purpose of the reference guides such as Grafeo and Camara is to provide basic principles and concepts which will assist you in answering questions, not provide problems that match actual exam questions. That is why I constantly stress understanding of concepts and principles as oppose to only solving numerical problems.

lusone:

 

[PEoct]

I just question how is one supposed to study for such a broad exam when there really isn't any practice problem sets out there that cover everything. Sure CI and Spin-Up teach you the fundamentals needed, but when it comes down to it, they are also missing a lot of stuff that show up on the exam.

But then it really wouldn't be an exam, would it? The exam covers Principles and Practice. Some of the exam material are fundamentals where you can use study guides as a reference. But some of it is also supposed to come from your real world engineering experience. Something that isn't necessarily covered in a study guide.

The purpose of the reference guides such as Grafeo and Camara is to provide basic principles and concepts which will assist you in answering questions, not provide problems that match actual exam questions. That is why I constantly stress understanding of concepts and principles as oppose to only solving numerical problems.

lusone:

totally agree esp after my 3rd attempt ! if u know fundamentals u can easily nail the exam ! but at the same it time it require real hands on experience which i doubt i have yet....

 

[KatyLied P.E.]

I just question how is one supposed to study for such a broad exam when there really isn't any practice problem sets out there that cover everything. Sure CI and Spin-Up teach you the fundamentals needed, but when it comes down to it, they are also missing a lot of stuff that show up on the exam.

But then it really wouldn't be an exam, would it? The exam covers Principles and Practice. Some of the exam material are fundamentals where you can use study guides as a reference. But some of it is also supposed to come from your real world engineering experience. Something that isn't necessarily covered in a study guide.

The purpose of the reference guides such as Grafeo and Camara is to provide basic principles and concepts which will assist you in answering questions, not provide problems that match actual exam questions. That is why I constantly stress understanding of concepts and principles as oppose to only solving numerical problems.

lusone:

totally agree esp after my 3rd attempt ! if u know fundamentals u can easily nail the exam ! but at the same it time it require real hands on experience which i doubt i have yet....

Good point about the experience. On my first attempts, back in the 90's, I had my 5 years of EE experience but after not passing I realized that my experience did not match up as well they needed to be. My field experience had more to do with mechanical and civil than it did with electrical. Plus, at that time, the exam was more broad based and covered power, electronics, etc. Flash forward to the 21st century. I had actually worked in field jobs that dealt directly with the construction and maintenance of the electric grid. That knowledge - in conjunction with the sample exams, Google, discipline specific test, etc. - helped make the difference. My point is only the individual knows whether their experience truly matches up. Mine happened to match up lot better in my career. i hope everything works out for everybody.

 

[eksor_PE]

I just question how is one supposed to study for such a broad exam when there really isn't any practice problem sets out there that cover everything. Sure CI and Spin-Up teach you the fundamentals needed, but when it comes down to it, they are also missing a lot of stuff that show up on the exam.

But then it really wouldn't be an exam, would it? The exam covers Principles and Practice. Some of the exam material are fundamentals where you can use study guides as a reference. But some of it is also supposed to come from your real world engineering experience. Something that isn't necessarily covered in a study guide.

The purpose of the reference guides such as Grafeo and Camara is to provide basic principles and concepts which will assist you in answering questions, not provide problems that match actual exam questions. That is why I constantly stress understanding of concepts and principles as oppose to only solving numerical problems.

lusone:

totally agree esp after my 3rd attempt ! if u know fundamentals u can easily nail the exam ! but at the same it time it require real hands on experience which i doubt i have yet....

Totally agree with this! Understanding the fundamentals and concepts are the only way to pass this exam in addition with the depth of the examinee's professional work experience. I took my PE with only 2.5 years of work experience in a design firm.

 

[btcs31]

Overall my feelings post-exam are about the same as others. There was a specific topic on the exam on 2 questions which was not covered in my practice exams or in my references that I got stuck on (already mentioned above). I also wish I had a copy of NESC. Two questions nearly word for word from the NCEES practice exam. I brought NEC 2011 and the exam referenced the 2014 version, but from what I can tell the questions weren't focused on portions of code prone to heavy revisions. Seemed to be a lot of questions on motors, and I thought Wildi would've bailed me out of more of them but that wasn't really the case.

I really only studied 40-50 hours, so I had room for improvement and will not be surprised if I'm back in October. But as a whole there wasn't too much that caught me completely off guard. I actually thought it was easier than the practice exam. My approach to references was that too many books would just bog me down, especially if I wasn't intimately familiar with all of them. In hindsight the pace of the exam for me was such that I could have afforded to page through additional references if need be on the questions I was stuck on.

 

[MyBeardAndMe]

Do we really have to talk about the specific topics that were on the exam? By the way filters are fair game they are part of power quality.

I don't think Kovz is saying they weren't fair game. I think the practice exams really stress certain topics, and it is frustrating when those topics don't show up on the actual exam at all.