Everything you wanted to know about the CA-Survey/Seismic Civil PE Exams

[ptatohed]

Hello All,

quick question. From Amazon.com, I had bought a brand new book by Hiner: Seismic Review Design workbook 3rd edition, which is based on IBC 2012/CBC 2013. 

Hiner just released a new workbook which is based on IBC 2015/CBC 2016. Should I buy the new version too, or can I read only from the previous version? 

Thanks.

It's always best to have the latest resource, especially with Seismic.  But, since both the 2012 IBC and the 2015 IBC make reference to the ASCE 7-10 (and not yet the ASCE 7-16), I think the changes might be minor and you'd likely still do fine on the exam.  However, the best option would be to sell your older edition and buy the latest edition if you can. 

Hey ptatohed, It looks pretty up to date as far as BPELSG-related information goes.  I will say that the CA Civil Engineer results are generally available 30-45 days after the "last day of the 3-week administration" but held up to coincide with the NCEES PE-Civil results so the letter is more informative.  Expect that process will transition pretty quickly to only pertain to state results, maybe even with this next administration, since BPELSG is expecting potential licensing candidates to register with NCEES without BPELSG intervention.

(introduce yourself sometime when I'm in your area)

Thanks for the info CAP.  We met once several years ago when I went to your offices as an "expert consultant" to take some Surv and Seis exams. 

 

[CAPLS]

It's always best to have the latest resource, especially with Seismic.  But, since both the 2012 IBC and the 2015 IBC make reference to the ASCE 7-10 (and not yet the ASCE 7-16), I think the changes might be minor and you'd likely still do fine on the exam.  However, the best option would be to sell your older edition and buy the latest edition if you can. 

Thanks for the info CAP.  We met once several years ago when I went to your offices as an "expert consultant" to take some Surv and Seis exams. 

Ah...sounds like you need to visit again at these meetings   Watch for the occupational analysis coming out soon for the civil exams.

 

[ptatohed]

Okay, I just updated post #1.  The previous update was June 2016 so it had been a half dozen months.  I listed the year-round testing is planned for 2018.  I mentioned that it is planned for the surv/seis results wait to go from the current 6-8 weeks to 4-6 weeks.   I listed a general section for review material.  I added that EET now offers Survey review, with a link.  I updated the "last updated" date.     

If anyone else sees any room for improvement to post #1, please advise. 

 

[houkah26]

I stumbled upon this post when I started studying for the Seismic/Surveying exams so I thought I'd post regarding my experience to give back.

I'm a structural engineer in Arizona who already passed the PE a year ago and just took the Seismic Exam earlier this month, and am taking the Surveying next week.

Per Civil Dawg's recommendation I bought Hiner's Seismic book.  I didn't bother reading it, and just did all the 20 or so long questions and all ~430 of the shorter questions.  Not sure how long I studied in total, but I felt very prepared going into the exam having done so many practice problems.  As others have noted, time really is the biggest issue and you have basically no time to try and look anything up.  One question asked .............<deleted>............. and I definitely spent wayyyy too long finding it in the ACI because I was too stubborn to skip it.  

Anyways, I  still think I did well and would definitely recommend Hiner's book and cranking out all the problems if you have time, I can't imagine a better way to study.

I'd also like to add, as others have said, I think it's ridiculous how much of a time crunch these tests are.  Doesn't reflect the real world at all and only tests you on your test taking ability.  Sure, the percent you need to get correct is low, but why not allow another hour and half and increase the number of questions required to pass.  I really think that would better reflect ones knowledge over just their test taking abilities.  Why does the PE exam offer 4 hours for 40 questions while seismic/surveying is 2.5 hours for 55?  Doesn't seem right, and part of me thinks it's just a money grab by the California board.

Anyways, good luck to anyone else taking it this April or in the future, I'll update my post after I finish up with the Surveying exam.

 

[ptatohed]

I stumbled upon this post when I started studying for the Seismic/Surveying exams so I thought I'd post regarding my experience to give back.

I'm a structural engineer in Arizona who already passed the PE a year ago and just took the Seismic Exam earlier this month, and am taking the Surveying next week.

Per Civil Dawg's recommendation I bought Hiner's Seismic book.  I didn't bother reading it, and just did all the 20 or so long questions and all ~430 of the shorter questions.  Not sure how long I studied in total, but I felt very prepared going into the exam having done so many practice problems.  As others have noted, time really is the biggest issue and you have basically no time to try and look anything up.  One question asked .............<deleted>............. and I definitely spent wayyyy too long finding it in the ACI because I was too stubborn to skip it.  

Anyways, I  still think I did well and would definitely recommend Hiner's book and cranking out all the problems if you have time, I can't imagine a better way to study.

I'd also like to add, as others have said, I think it's ridiculous how much of a time crunch these tests are.  Doesn't reflect the real world at all and only tests you on your test taking ability.  Sure, the percent you need to get correct is low, but why not allow another hour and half and increase the number of questions required to pass.  I really think that would better reflect ones knowledge over just their test taking abilities.  Why does the PE exam offer 4 hours for 40 questions while seismic/surveying is 2.5 hours for 55?  Doesn't seem right, and part of me thinks it's just a money grab by the California board.

Anyways, good luck to anyone else taking it this April or in the future, I'll update my post after I finish up with the Surveying exam.

Dude, you know not to post exam questions, what is wrong with you?  I deleted it.  You're welcome. 

 

[houkah26]

Thank you! It me right after I posted it but couldn't figure out how to edit my post. Is that not an option?

 

[ptatohed]

Thank you! It me right after I posted it but couldn't figure out how to edit my post. Is that not an option?

You'll get the ability to edit after you reach a certain post count.

 

[CAPLS]

Dude, you know not to post exam questions, what is wrong with you?  I deleted it.  You're welcome. 

Thanks ptatohed

 

[CAPLS]

I stumbled upon this post when I started studying for the Seismic/Surveying exams so I thought I'd post regarding my experience to give back.

I'm a structural engineer in Arizona who already passed the PE a year ago and just took the Seismic Exam earlier this month, and am taking the Surveying next week.

Per Civil Dawg's recommendation I bought Hiner's Seismic book.  I didn't bother reading it, and just did all the 20 or so long questions and all ~430 of the shorter questions.  Not sure how long I studied in total, but I felt very prepared going into the exam having done so many practice problems.  As others have noted, time really is the biggest issue and you have basically no time to try and look anything up.  One question asked .............<deleted>............. and I definitely spent wayyyy too long finding it in the ACI because I was too stubborn to skip it.  

Anyways, I  still think I did well and would definitely recommend Hiner's book and cranking out all the problems if you have time, I can't imagine a better way to study.

I'd also like to add, as others have said, I think it's ridiculous how much of a time crunch these tests are.  Doesn't reflect the real world at all and only tests you on your test taking ability.  Sure, the percent you need to get correct is low, but why not allow another hour and half and increase the number of questions required to pass.  I really think that would better reflect ones knowledge over just their test taking abilities.  Why does the PE exam offer 4 hours for 40 questions while seismic/surveying is 2.5 hours for 55?  Doesn't seem right, and part of me thinks it's just a money grab by the California board.

Anyways, good luck to anyone else taking it this April or in the future, I'll update my post after I finish up with the Surveying exam.

Ha, a money grab by the California board!  If that was true, what makes you think the board would stop there?

"Sure the percent you need to get correct is low,..." - yeah I suspect you don't really know this but just guessing.

If you would refer to the statistics published by the board, more candidates are passing the two California Civil exams than ever before in history and the overall pass rate has steadily climbed in the years since CBT was implemented.  Kind of counterintuitive to your observations.

 

[houkah26]

Ha, a money grab by the California board!  If that was true, what makes you think the board would stop there?

"Sure the percent you need to get correct is low,..." - yeah I suspect you don't really know this but just guessing.

If you would refer to the statistics published by the board, more candidates are passing the two California Civil exams than ever before in history and the overall pass rate has steadily climbed in the years since CBT was implemented.  Kind of counterintuitive to your observations.

My statistics only come from word of mouth, what I've read here on this forum, and on this very post in addition to some of my study books.  I don't care to look up the published statistics.

I stand by my statement that I don't see the point in making these tests such a time crunch.  Doesn't reflect upon the real world of engineering, and doesn't reflect on your knowledge or ability of the subject.  It tests you on your ability to take timed tests.  Which I'm honestly great at, considering I'm not that far removed from school. However, I have many colleagues and friends who aren't, who are then forced to retake these tests, even though I would say they are very knowledgeable and cable engineers.  So they are forced to devote a larger amount of time to doing 400+ practice problems (fun when you have a full time job and a family) so that they have the ability answer all these questions in 2.7 minutes or less on average.  Even if you manage that you have zero time to check your work, again how realistic is that?

Not sure what your stake is in the matter or why you're defending the process.  Are you on the board?  What is your reasoning for supporting the test format?  The money grab probably isn't true, probably isn't that much money anyway overall.  I have found that board members don't care too much about making the application process easier for younger engineers entering the field.  This is mostly based on my experiences dealing with the Arizona board, however.

 

[houkah26]

Thanks ptatohed

I already thanked him, after he so graciously corrected my absent minded mistake which i was not able to correct due to the features of this forum.  But thanks for thanking him extra.

 

[CAPLS]

My statistics only come from word of mouth, what I've read here on this forum, and on this very post in addition to some of my study books.  I don't care to look up the published statistics.

I stand by my statement that I don't see the point in making these tests such a time crunch.  Doesn't reflect upon the real world of engineering, and doesn't reflect on your knowledge or ability of the subject.  It tests you on your ability to take timed tests.  Which I'm honestly great at, considering I'm not that far removed from school. However, I have many colleagues and friends who aren't, who are then forced to retake these tests, even though I would say they are very knowledgeable and cable engineers.  So they are forced to devote a larger amount of time to doing 400+ practice problems (fun when you have a full time job and a family) so that they have the ability answer all these questions in 2.7 minutes or less on average.  Even if you manage that you have zero time to check your work, again how realistic is that?

Not sure what your stake is in the matter or why you're defending the process.  Are you on the board?  What is your reasoning for supporting the test format?  The money grab probably isn't true, probably isn't that much money anyway overall.  I have found that board members don't care too much about making the application process easier for younger engineers entering the field.  This is mostly based on my experiences dealing with the Arizona board, however.

I understand how you arrive at your point of view.  But you should want to look at the published statistics as every examinee should. It provides you with a more tangible picture than just one perspective or what a few say. The overall exam results over a period of time simply do not support the position that examinees don't have enough time to adequately complete the exam.

i should add that it's been my experience, both personal and talking with so many examinees/licensees, that time during an exam is a direct correlation with how prepared the person is for the exam and being licensed. The more you believe that not enough time is allowed, odds are the less prepared you are for the exam.  It's not a knock on you or any other person. It's an observation based on my experiences.  

Go back and look at your original post in this thread.  You talk about not taking the time to read the book and only focus on answering the example problems.  If your attempts at the exam are not successful based on the practice approach, try going back and reading what you skipped.  Licensed previously or not, you may gain some additional knowledge that will help you and changing your practice approach likely will change your perspective during the next exam.

You also mentioned that you spent too much time researching something in a book during the exam.  Honestly speaking, if you need to refer to your books more than once or twice during the exam, you are likely not prepared to be there yet.  Try to prepare your books to allow you to very quickly find any topic without spending unnecessary time.

Lastly, I can't speak for the Arizona Board or your specific experience with them, but your statements about board members not caring about the application process is generally untrue.

 

[CAPLS]

I already thanked him, after he so graciously corrected my absent minded mistake which i was not able to correct due to the features of this forum.  But thanks for thanking him extra.

I was only thanking him for helping to ensure that exam content was not discussed inappropriately, whether that was inadvertent or otherwise. It wasn't about you. It helps everyone.

 

[SoCalBound]

I can add my experience in the surveying exam in this cycle:

I was skeptical going into the exam regarding the allowed time of 150 minutes for 55 questions. But the questions were not that difficult. Finished all in 100 minutes, skipped 5. Spent the rest of the time for checking all and answering the remaining 5 questions. Overall, I can say that I only needed to look at my reference materials for about 10 questions.

In other words, if you are prepared, there is enough time allotted for the exam.

 

[samopuddles]

I applied for the next exam cycle last week and am confused about something. Once I am approved, I can take the two exams during the Oct 19 - Nov 9 window and then will get results in December or thereabouts. But my understanding is that I won't know if I'm approved until possibly 6 weeks before the exam window??

 

[SoCalBound]

I got approved about 2 months before the exam cycle opened.

 

[ptatohed]

If anyone has suggested changes to post #1, please let me know.  I want to keep it current.  Thanks.

 

[cal91]

I'm also curious about the timeline for notification of approval. I just recently submitted my application and am not sure when I'll get my notification of approval.  Is 2 months before the exam cycle opens pretty typical as SoCal said? 

I'm especially curious because I'm not sure if my references pass all the requirements... 2 of my 4 references were at my last job, which I quit before I finished my Master's degree (so the time I worked with them did not count towards my work experience). Only the other 2 references have I worked with since I graduated with my Masters. Any thoughts on this?

 

[SoCalBound]

I'm also curious about the timeline for notification of approval. I just recently submitted my application and am not sure when I'll get my notification of approval.  Is 2 months before the exam cycle opens pretty typical as SoCal said? 

I'm especially curious because I'm not sure if my references pass all the requirements... 2 of my 4 references were at my last job, which I quit before I finished my Master's degree (so the time I worked with them did not count towards my work experience). Only the other 2 references have I worked with since I graduated with my Masters. Any thoughts on this?

I am no expert but after applying to multiple states for licensure without NCEES record in the past 6 years, I can say that California is the most accommodating of all. Their requirements are not as strict and you can actually talk to live people on the phone who listen and understand. Some other states have robotized people who repeat the same line given to them by their supervisors 10 times before you give up.

 

[StandardPractice]

I am a bit confused on the registration deadline for the Seismic and Surveying exams. If I already possess a PE license from another state, I still have to meet the "new" file deadline correct? I was not expecting it to be so early (May 1st for this Fall cycle) and a little annoyed I may have to wait until April 2018 to take these two small exams. I've emailed the board, but wanted to get any personal experiences or a possible work around that others can provide, thanks.