Is it true that you don't have to be an engineer in some states to obtain a PE?

[benbo]

My "take" is that if one is prepared for all three depth modules, then the "breadth" morning exam would be much easier. However, starting with April 2009, all of this is moot since the entire exam would be in a specific depth area.

Okay - I misunderstood.

You are correct - that is a good way to prepare. I thought you were talking about continuing to retake the actual exam after you had already passed.

 

[KnowledgeAcquirer]

Okay - I misunderstood.
You are correct - that is a good way to prepare. I thought you were talking about continuing to retake the actual exam after you had already passed.

No, taking the exam more than once would be considered torture. What would happen if you passed, then say, you took it the 2nd time and didn't pass?

A better approach would be to take the PE exam in another discipline, especially in large corporations.

I still think that it would be a better approach to be able to take the test in another depth area at some point.

Right now, my understanding is that once a person has their PE license, say in EE, then it is up to that person to self-regulate themselves as to whether they are competent enough to work in a specific area of that discipline. Say for example, I pass the Computer depth section of the PE in the Electrical discipline. However, as others on the forum have noted, there is no process, other than self-regulation, that the engineer 1) has "proof" of competency in Power and 2) has a process/methodology to feel confident that they have an objective, 3rd party "proof" of competency (e.g., NCEES PE Exam in Powers depth) that the engineer actually understands, able to design in the Power arena.

I do know for Cisco that you must re-certify every 3 years (by exam no less) so one could actually lose their Cisco certification after 3 years even with lots of actual experience.

 

[benbo]

I still think that it would be a better approach to be able to take the test in another depth area at some point.Right now, my understanding is that once a person has their PE license, say in EE, then it is up to that person to self-regulate themselves as to whether they are competent enough to work in a specific area of that discipline.

That's an interestng thought, but it is always going to be up to the person to self regulate. That's why I look on the references as being as much about judgement and ethics as anything else. Which I agree can be judged by PEs and non-PEs alike (I agree with your earlier point- that the states like using PEs so they can track them, not because they are inhernetly more reliable).

But I still have to self regulate. I passed the ECC portion of the exam, but there are MANY things in the area of ECC that I would not feel confident to sign off on, without much additional research and study.

In fact, I might have been able to slide by in Computers or Power. But there is no way I'm going to put myself forward as a power system expert, even if I got 100% on that multiple choice exam. So it is always boils down to me and my sense of responsibility

 

[KnowledgeAcquirer]

That's an interestng thought, but it is always going to be up to the person to self regulate. That's why I look on the references as being as much about judgement and ethics as anything else. Which I agree can be judged by PEs and non-PEs alike (I agree with your earlier point- that the states like using PEs so they can track them, not because they are inhernetly more reliable).
But I still have to self regulate. I passed the ECC portion of the exam, but there are MANY things in the area of ECC that I would not feel confident to sign off on, without much additional research and study.

In fact, I might have been able to slide by in Computers or Power. But there is no way I'm going to put myself forward as a power system expert, even if I got 100% on that multiple choice exam. So it is always boils down to me and my sense of responsibility

My thoughts, exactly.

 

[GT ME]

I'll agree with your resentment -- it comes from 30 years of experience knowing that the preponderance of engineers & PEs have an elementary understanding of blueprint reading, not to mention their struggle to visualize a blueprint to completion.

For example, I was a student and my prof was a PHD PE from MIT (& decorated as one of the best in the country -- and still is) that had an exam with an engineering drawing -- I was the ONLY student to tell him the drawing was wrong after 5 years -- he came into class the next day and said "it's obvious that engineering students should have 2 or 3 years of practical experience before entering an engineering program" -- I will live with that statement in my mind until I die.

Moreover, as a state licensed contractor and the push for "design/build," contractors hold leverage over PEs -- that's right -- you have to impress contractors like me to hire you -- contractors put the drawing on the earth -- not PEs -- don't ever forget that.

Unfortunately, If you don't have experience at the Fortune 10 level in engineering from companies that've been around since the late 1800's or early 1900's, then you would'nt know from experience that floor engineers are far superior.

Have you ever been recruited at that level from a PE from some of the world's largest organizations -- let alone receive an engineering mgmt position like me?

I've known a number of engineers over the years that came up from the floor. Many of them had a solid feel for what is practical that gave them an advantage over engineers with a book-only type of leaning.
However, a few of them also had a deep-seeded resentment, and somewhat of an inferiority complex based on the years they had spent working for people that they consider inferior to themselves. It just burned them up inside for all those years that those book-smart punk engineers had rank over them based on a piece of paper they themselves lacked. Not surprising that that when they finally got their own piece of paper that they would take license to crow loudly about their own accomplishments. The engineers in this category usually mellow out after they get about 5 years of post-graduate experience, unless they have deep-down problems stemming from never being good enough in Daddy's eyes.

 

[Dark Knight]

Don't do it Ben. I know you want to but don't do it!!!!!

 

[engineergurl]

I will DK.

what is up with the word preponderance and you, is your vocabulary limited? If you were an engineer for three years then of course you spotted a mistake that new students hadn't, they haven't learned yet, you only made the professor look like an idiot there, or maybe he was just trying to seek you out to praise you. But if that is the praise that you will live with in your mind until you die then cherish it, mine will continually something much more meaningful from some one so much more important in my life.

You don't have to impress contractors, you have to give them the best bang for their buck, BIG difference... same plans with different costs the least costly will always be chosen. And why would you take the drawing and put it on the earth... your supposed to use it to build things.. not as a doormat, talk about lack of respect.

Fourtune 10... they have been around probably not because of their skills but because they survived the depression and invested wisely...bet they are into all sorts of industries rather then just engineering. Besides 1800's and 1900's is old school anyway, today we are in the 21st century.

No I haven't been recruited at that level, but is that all that important to me? not really, I'm pretty dang happy right now being unemployeed because I now get to see my husband everyday and if it required me to give up my level headedness and become an arrogant ass like you, I wouldn't want to receive an engineering mgmt position.

BTW: you can talk about all the resentment you want, but I look at it all as a learning experience. Being open to ideas makes life so much easier.

I'll agree with your resentment -- it comes from 30 years of experience knowing that the preponderance of engineers & PEs have an elementary understanding of blueprint reading, not to mention their struggle to visualize a blueprint to completion.
For example, I was a student and my prof was a PHD PE from MIT (& decorated as one of the best in the country -- and still is) that had an exam with an engineering drawing -- I was the ONLY student to tell him the drawing was wrong after 5 years -- he came into class the next day and said "it's obvious that engineering students should have 2 or 3 years of practical experience before entering an engineering program" -- I will live with that statement in my mind until I die.

Moreover, as a state licensed contractor and the push for "design/build," contractors hold leverage over PEs -- that's right -- you have to impress contractors like me to hire you -- contractors put the drawing on the earth -- not PEs -- don't ever forget that.

Unfortunately, If you don't have experience at the Fortune 10 level in engineering from companies that've been around since the late 1800's or early 1900's, then you would'nt know from experience that floor engineers are far superior.

Have you ever been recruited at that level from a PE from some of the world's largest organizations -- let alone receive an engineering mgmt position like me?

 

[squishles10]

opcorn:

I got into MIT, but their Civil program isn't all that good so I turned it down. Plus when I visited everyone was weird. I didn't want that stigma for the rest of my life.

As far as I know, U of I almost ALWAYS has a better Civil program.

And isn't it funny that they're not asking him to DESIGN anything... it's not a practical school, it's all based on theory. No good in real life.

I've been recruited by some amazing companies and government agencies- I turned most of them down. A good way to be miserable in your work is to go somewhere just for a name.

 

[mudpuppy]

This was published in the July issue of PE, in response to an article about the proposed BS+30 rule in NCEES' model law:

I believe this is a bad idea. In my younger days, I knew a couple of electrical engineers who had no formal degree. They had gone to work in a shipyard right out of high school and hooked up with an electrical apprenticeship program. They read as much electrical thoery as they could find, learned on the job, and listened to more experienced electricians and engineers. After a few years, they learned enough to pass the then-EIT exam. Then they got the required experience to take the PE exam and passed it. I had the privilege of working with them, and found they had forgotten more electrical engineering than I ever knew--and I have a formal BSEE and hold a PE in several states. Under the current system of requiring a bachelor's degree simply to sit for the FE exam, men such as them, who are a credit to the profession, could not ever be licensed without going back to school. Raising the number of degrees one must hold to qualify for a PE will further cut out talented individuals, while doing nothing to enhance the value of PE registration. Most older eningeers will agree that what is learned on the job is far more valuable than the theory in the text books. I have no problem with higher degrees that anyone wants to pursue, but they should not be a prerequisite for licensure.
Michael H. Davis, P.E.

Mobile, AL

In addition to being an argument against the BS+30 rule, I think this is a strong argument against a BS requirement to sit for the FE.

 

[bigtrees]

I thought NCEES requires an engineering degree from an accredited school.

The NCEES has no authoirty to require or prohibit any qualifications to become a licnsed, professional engineer. The only body that has that authority is the legislative body in each state, and through them, the licensing boards that review and approve applications in each state.

 

[jmbeck]

Have you ever been recruited at that level from a PE from some of the world's largest organizations -- let alone receive an engineering mgmt position like me?

I actually know a guy that is in an engineering managment position at one of these "Fortune 10" companies you talk so highly about.

He only had 8 years experience too. He was 30 years old.

Does that make him better than you?

Just curious, because if Engineering Manager at Chevron is the pinnacle of the engineering profession, I wish I'd have stuck to my childhood dreams of being a fireman.

Or a cowboy.

 

[GT ME]

Houston we have a problem -- I believe GE, GM, & NASA still function in the 21st century.

The fact that they've been around(except NASA) proves my point.

I quess if you're probably the ONLY person in the USA (unless proven otherwise) that is a state certified HVACR contractor & PE that started as a technician in a state sponsored apprentiship program, you'd understand.

This is why I believe you could have a 100 years of engineering experience and never approach my engineering abilities -- you confuse arrogance & confidence.

arty-smiley-048:

Fourtune 10... they have been around probably not because of their skills but because they survived the depression and invested wisely...bet they are into all sorts of industries rather then just engineering. Besides 1800's and 1900's is old school anyway, today we are in the 21st century.

No I haven't been recruited at that level, but is that all that important to me? not really, I'm pretty dang happy right now being unemployeed because I now get to see my husband everyday and if it required me to give up my level headedness and become an arrogant ass like you, I wouldn't want to receive an engineering mgmt position.

 

[engineergurl]

Houston we have a problem -- I believe GE, GM, & NASA still function in the 21st century.
The fact that they've been around(except NASA) proves my point.

I quess if you're probably the ONLY person in the USA (unless proven otherwise) that is a state certified HVACR contractor & PE that started as a technician in a state sponsored apprentiship program, you'd understand.

This is why I believe you could have a 100 years of engineering experience and never approach my engineering abilities -- you confuse arrogance & confidence.

arty-smiley-048:

Fourtune 10... they have been around probably not because of their skills but because they survived the depression and invested wisely...bet they are into all sorts of industries rather then just engineering. Besides 1800's and 1900's is old school anyway, today we are in the 21st century.

No I haven't been recruited at that level, but is that all that important to me? not really, I'm pretty dang happy right now being unemployeed because I now get to see my husband everyday and if it required me to give up my level headedness and become an arrogant ass like you, I wouldn't want to receive an engineering mgmt position.

Look at that, there are quotes. Last time I checked, a PE had to have some knowledge of ethics, and plagerism is kind of an ethical issue, isn't it? Besides, an 80 year old can function in the 21'st century thanks to Viagra.

 

[EM_PS]

Houston we have a problem -- I believe GE, GM, & NASA still function in the 21st century.
The fact that they've been around(except NASA) proves my point.

I quess if you're probably the ONLY person in the USA (unless proven otherwise) that is a state certified HVACR contractor & PE that started as a technician in a state sponsored apprentiship program, you'd understand.

This is why I believe you could have a 100 years of engineering experience and never approach my engineering abilities -- you confuse arrogance & confidence.

My young 'peer', your discourse has grown tedious & wearisome - You may be a PE, but you are anything but a professional.

From Curtis Brown:

"Perhaps one of the greatest attributes of a successful practitioner is measured by how well he gets along with others. Knowledge alone does not make a professional man. He must have knowledge and use that knowledge in guiding, teaching, or mentoring others, and his success in this depends upon how well he can influence others. We have all seen those who have superior knowledge, but who are pugnacious, contrary, unyielding, and never wrong. We have all seen those that display the fiery impulse of an infuriated clam and those that have the backbone of a wet noodle. Such types seldom succeed as professional men."

"To be a successful professional engineer, a man must have more than a narrow technical education. Technical education has to do with things. Employees at the bottom deal with things; professional men deal with people. The fundamental concept in human relationship is that it is not sufficient to be right, a person must also persuade. Things cannot be persuaded; humans can. All of the technical knowledge in the world is of little aid unless a person can also convey this knowledge to others."

Are you ethical? Do others seek you out for advice? Have you contributed anything to the engineering profession, or do you just sit back and let others advance it? Is earning a dollar by any means more important than maintaining a principle? Will you sell your signature? Do you aid others in evading the licensing act? Do you degrade your fellow engineers? Have you actively pushed the cause of all engineers or do you selfishly only look out for yourself? Are you active in your professional society? Have you had articles published in a professional magazine / journal? Do you serve on committees?

Based on your inane & ceaseless chest puffing, you are simply a substandard HVAC mechie, just earned your PE, and you have pronounced self-worth issues. You may be very technically capable at what you do, but you have ZERO professional eminence. Good luck, companies, even Fortune 10 companies, all have a brooding, introverted, ego-centric dipwad who feels the company wouldn't exist except for him & his talents. You're as replaceable as a coffeepot.

 

[MEPE2B]

Houston we have a problem -- I believe GE, GM, & NASA still function in the 21st century.
The fact that they've been around(except NASA) proves my point.

I quess if you're probably the ONLY person in the USA (unless proven otherwise) that is a state certified HVACR contractor & PE that started as a technician in a state sponsored apprentiship program, you'd understand.

This is why I believe you could have a 100 years of engineering experience and never approach my engineering abilities -- you confuse arrogance & confidence.

Oh my, let me back up and reevaluate my ill-conceived doubts about your superior engineering abilities. I didn't realize what engineering greatness we all have been blessed to have visited upon us with your presence. What a milestone to behold in the field of engineering: to be licensed as an HVAC contractor and as a PE, all at once! I won't even bother to check whether it has been done before...certainly this accomplishment must be a first in the annals of engineering history! It seems like I know of dozens of them, but, alas I must be mistaken! You, sir, are right up their with the greats, like Edison and Royce.

So, since we have such a phenominal engineering talent here among us, please let me ask...out of all of the great engineering achievements you must have to your credit, which one, pray tell, would you regard as your greatest engineering accomplishment?? Perhaps you've discovered a great new power source to solve the world's energy crisis? Have you patented a replacement for the space shuttle? Maybe something less extravagant, but more wide reaching, like a light bulb that with a 200% improvement in efficiency?? A replacement for the transistor? Have you single-handedly designed the new world's tallest sky-scraper?

It must be something on a similar scale as the examples I've guessed at, right? Was it something just as amazing, like that you sized an air conditioner for a warehouse and picked out the correct components from the Carrier catalog? Or Perhaps that you were the only student in your college class that could read a blueprint?

 

[Dexman1349]

My young 'peer', your discourse has grown tedious & wearisome - You may be a PE, but you are anything but a professional.
From Curtis Brown:

"Perhaps one of the greatest attributes of a successful practitioner is measured by how well he gets along with others. Knowledge alone does not make a professional man. He must have knowledge and use that knowledge in guiding, teaching, or mentoring others, and his success in this depends upon how well he can influence others. We have all seen those who have superior knowledge, but who are pugnacious, contrary, unyielding, and never wrong. We have all seen those that display the fiery impulse of an infuriated clam and those that have the backbone of a wet noodle. Such types seldom succeed as professional men."

"To be a successful professional engineer, a man must have more than a narrow technical education. Technical education has to do with things. Employees at the bottom deal with things; professional men deal with people. The fundamental concept in human relationship is that it is not sufficient to be right, a person must also persuade. Things cannot be persuaded; humans can. All of the technical knowledge in the world is of little aid unless a person can also convey this knowledge to others."

Are you ethical? Do others seek you out for advice? Have you contributed anything to the engineering profession, or do you just sit back and let others advance it? Is earning a dollar by any means more important than maintaining a principle? Will you sell your signature? Do you aid others in evading the licensing act? Do you degrade your fellow engineers? Have you actively pushed the cause of all engineers or do you selfishly only look out for yourself? Are you active in your professional society? Have you had articles published in a professional magazine / journal? Do you serve on committees?

Based on your inane & ceaseless chest puffing, you are simply a substandard HVAC mechie, just earned your PE, and you have pronounced self-worth issues. You may be very technically capable at what you do, but you have ZERO professional eminence. Good luck, companies, even Fortune 10 companies, all have a brooding, introverted, ego-centric dipwad who feels the company wouldn't exist except for him & his talents. You're as replaceable as a coffeepot.

:appl: :appl: :appl:

 

[FLBuff PE]

Oh my, let me back up and reevaluate my ill-conceived doubts about your superior engineering abilities. I didn't realize what engineering greatness we all have been blessed to have visited upon us with your presence. What a milestone to behold in the field of engineering: to be licensed as an HVAC contractor and as a PE, all at once! I won't even bother to check whether it has been done before...certainly this accomplishment must be a first in the annals of engineering history! It seems like I know of dozens of them, but, alas I must be mistaken! You, sir, are right up their with the greats, like Edison and Royce.
So, since we have such a phenominal engineering talent here among us, please let me ask...out of all of the great engineering achievements you must have to your credit, which one, pray tell, would you regard as your greatest engineering accomplishment?? Perhaps you've discovered a great new power source to solve the world's energy crisis? Have you patented a replacement for the space shuttle? Maybe something less extravagant, but more wide reaching, like a light bulb that with a 200% improvement in efficiency?? A replacement for the transistor? Have you single-handedly designed the new world's tallest sky-scraper?

It must be something on a similar scale as the examples I've guessed at, right? Was it something just as amazing, like that you sized an air conditioner for a warehouse and picked out the correct components from the Carrier catalog? Or Perhaps that you were the only student in your college class that could read a blueprint?

Don't forget stormwater modeling. Probably excels at that too.

 

[mudpuppy]

^^This brings up an interesting and difficult question: Which is more difficult, HVAC design or stormwater modeling?

 

[Katiebug]

Houston we have a problem -- I believe GE, GM, & NASA still function in the 21st century.
The fact that they've been around(except NASA) proves my point.

I quess if you're probably the ONLY person in the USA (unless proven otherwise) that is a state certified HVACR contractor & PE that started as a technician in a state sponsored apprentiship program, you'd understand.

This is why I believe you could have a 100 years of engineering experience and never approach my engineering abilities -- you confuse arrogance & confidence.

No, it's pretty clear that you're arrogant as hell.

In my position at my company I have more experience than anyone in the world when it comes to my component. I have multiple patent filings, and when there's a problem with the product in the field, it comes to me first. Yet, I visibly cringe when one of the field engineers tells the manager of a local office, or a mechanic, that I'm "the expert". It embarrasses me. Sure, I have more experience with the product than anyone, but that doesn't make me an expert; there is still so much that I don't know. I am humbled when I go into the field, especially with our very knowledgeable field engineers who have been in the business since I was a small child. Besides, the only way I became the de facto "expert" is because my coworker died in a car accident - trust me, I'd give up the "expert" title in a heartbeat if it meant my friend was still around to be the go-to guy.

You certainly don't see me - without even an EIT yet - running around on this board and proclaiming my greatness. A PE doesn't make you special. It means you've been able to pass two tests and accumulate some experience. Yes, it's an accomplishment to be very proud of, but one that many engineers have attained. Don't put on airs that you're some kind of brilliant technical mind who everyone should defer to.

 

[RIP - VTEnviro]

In high school we were taught about a great native indian chief that loved trigonometry
SOH-CAH-TOA

sine = Opp/Hyp

cosine = Adjacent/Hyp

tan = Opp/Adjacent

I still use that one today.

OHWA TONNA SIAM. Repeat that over and over, more and more quickly as you do. I've found that to be an excellent meditative practice what I feel stressed.