ERRATA - Goswami's Practice Exams (New)

[civilized_naah]

Regarding the All-in-One book, I did not have time to post the errata that I found (I bought the book new October 2011), but might also want to check the Nc, Ny, Nq values in the Terzaghi bearing capacity table. I am traveling today and do not have the book with me, but I recall some values being inconsistent with the same shown in Das and CERM 12 Ed.

thanks,

Jason

The Nc and Nq values are perfect. No issues there. There is ongoing controversy about the Ngamma values (which theory is the best predictor). This is why the CERM lists two columns of Ngamma values and says that one of them is according to Vesic's theory. There is also a note to that effect in Das' book. As far as the exams given by the NCEES is concerned, the best thing would be (if these coefficients are not embedded in the question) to use the charts on page 138 of the FE Reference Handbook, because that's THEIR publication. Those match Table 206.2 exactly, by the way. These are called out as "General Bearing Capacity Factors" in both places. Terzaghi's bearing capacity factors are slightly different.

 

[Jayman_PE]

I'm thinking NCEES would be good enough either tell you which tables to use, or give you the values for the question. No sense in unduly confusing an examinee over trivial matters. Six minutes.

Thanks for clarifying though.

Jason

 

[ptatohed]

Edit: Ok, I feel really dumb now. Sin (X) will always equal Sin (180 - X). Please ignore my suggested errata below. Still leaving this post for the suggested equations though.

I know this thread was started for the Practice Exams book but since the discussion has expanded to the All In One and since Dr. G is nice enough to personally respond - I'd like to confirm what I believe to be errata in the All In One book (1st Ed). I found this last night while helping a friend study.

On page 691, Eqn 404.17 (Topic: Compound Curves, in the Highway Curves, Chapt 404), Shouldn't the "sin /_\ " under the "t1 + t2" really be "180 - sin/_\"? Please confirm.

Also, while not errata per se, I'd like to recommend adding some (in my opinion) crucial formulas for compound curves:

T1 = (R2 - R1 cos/_\ + (R1 - R2) cos/_\2) / sin/_\

T2 = (R1 - R2 cos/_\ - (R1 - R2) cos/_\1) / sin/_\

sin/_\1 = (T1 + T2 cos/_\ - R2 sin/_\) / (R1 - R2)

sin/_\2 = (R1 sin/_\ - T1 cos/_\ - T2) / (R1 - R2)

Thanks!

 

[ptatohed]

Ok, new errata suggestion. Still helping a friend here at work study. The solution to Transpo depth problem # 504 (LOS question about a 6-lane freeway) shows a fN of 3. But, per the All In One page 713, Table 406.4, and example 406.1, fN should equal 0.0 because the problem statement states that this is a rural freeway segment and all rural segments should have an fN = 0.0. This would give a BFFS of 73.5 (use 75?) instead of 70.5 (use 70) but I don't think it changes the answer of LOS = D.

 

[civilized_naah]

Ok, new errata suggestion. Still helping a friend here at work study. The solution to Transpo depth problem # 504 (LOS question about a 6-lane freeway) shows a fN of 3. But, per the All In One page 713, Table 406.4, and example 406.1, fN should equal 0.0 because the problem statement states that this is a rural freeway segment and all rural segments should have an fN = 0.0. This would give a BFFS of 73.5 (use 75?) instead of 70.5 (use 70) but I don't think it changes the answer of LOS = D.

I am looking at the solution for #504 and it shows fN = 0 and FFS = 73.5, just as you wrote. Maybe you are looking at a previous (and maybe somewhat different) version?

 

[ptatohed]

Ok, new errata suggestion. Still helping a friend here at work study. The solution to Transpo depth problem # 504 (LOS question about a 6-lane freeway) shows a fN of 3. But, per the All In One page 713, Table 406.4, and example 406.1, fN should equal 0.0 because the problem statement states that this is a rural freeway segment and all rural segments should have an fN = 0.0. This would give a BFFS of 73.5 (use 75?) instead of 70.5 (use 70) but I don't think it changes the answer of LOS = D.

I am looking at the solution for #504 and it shows fN = 0 and FFS = 73.5, just as you wrote. Maybe you are looking at a previous (and maybe somewhat different) version?

Yes, as peviously mentioned, I have your Sample Exams back when you would e-mail them as PDFs, I do not have the published book. Sorry, I did not know the error had been corrected. Thanks for the response.