Question on working problems

[daywalker]

Hey all,

I got a question regarding working the problems in the Practice Problems book that complements the Lindeburg Environmental book. I noticed that several of the beginning chapters of the book are merely math problems, fluid problems and a variety of other random topics. My math is a little rusty, but I seem to be wasting alot of time on these problems. Are there any recommendations for doing these problems or should I just skip right to the meaty subjects. Are there basic conversion, area and ideal gas law problems on the test such as these in the first few chapters or do they just throw these in for review?

Thanks

 

[Dleg]

I say skip it. Study only the chapters directly relevant to the exam. If you run into basic concepts you are rusty on, then you can go back and practice a little, as necessary.

When I first studied, I started with the Thermo chapter and ended up thinking I had wasted my time. However, I went through the Statistics chapter pretty thoroughly later on, after running into a number of "real" problems that revealed my lack of prep.

 

[Wyatt72]

Since I was blessed with taking the exam 3 times I recommend skipping the irrelevant chapters like Math. Focus on the main topics as listed by the NCEES. In those examples you will get the math that you need for the exam.

 

[daywalker]

Thanks Dleg. I really appreciate the advice. I will skip right to the meat of the subject.

I also noticed that the Lindeburg practice problem exam book is unlike a normal textbook or even a FE study guide where a certain category may have several similar problems to reinforce a certain concept. The Lindeburg engineering practice problems book and 101 Environmental engineering practice problems book has maybe one or two practice problems per concept one extra in the EVRM (if you count the example problems in each chapter). My problem is that once i have completed the problems in the book and reviewed the formulation and answers, there are no other problems to reinforce the concept further. Its tough to go back and redo a problem that one already knows the answer to. How did you guys handle this? I have a couple of other problem books, but unlike the FE exam where there were a multitude of practice manuals with numerous examples to formulate and reinforce concepts, there are but three, maybe four environmental example books. What was your approach to limited example probllems is what I guess I am trying to ask. I hope this post is not too confusing

CONGRATULATIONS Wyatt72!!!!!

 

[_Gambit_]

Thanks Dleg. I really appreciate the advice. I will skip right to the meat of the subject.
I also noticed that the Lindeburg practice problem exam book is unlike a normal textbook or even a FE study guide where a certain category may have several similar problems to reinforce a certain concept. The Lindeburg engineering practice problems book and 101 Environmental engineering practice problems book has maybe one or two practice problems per concept one extra in the EVRM (if you count the example problems in each chapter). My problem is that once i have completed the problems in the book and reviewed the formulation and answers, there are no other problems to reinforce the concept further. Its tough to go back and redo a problem that one already knows the answer to. How did you guys handle this? I have a couple of other problem books, but unlike the FE exam where there were a multitude of practice manuals with numerous examples to formulate and reinforce concepts, there are but three, maybe four environmental example books. What was your approach to limited example probllems is what I guess I am trying to ask. I hope this post is not too confusing

CONGRATULATIONS Wyatt72!!!!!

A few comments:

1) I agree on skipping the basic chapters. I believe the preface of the book also mentions that some of the chapters are provided for reference. I just skimmmed through them and made a mental note (or added a tab) of certain items just in case I needed to find them. This applied to chapters 1-13 in the EVRM....and for me, the basic fluid mechanic chapters.

2) My approach was to tackle EVERY example in the EVRM and the supplemental practice problem book for each of the "meaty" chapters. I started with my weaknesses - Air related chapers (Ch 29-38), then went into the later chapters dealing with health and safety, remediation, toxicology, etc. I saved Water and WW for last, as that is my strength and I wanted to make sure I spent enough time on my weaknesses. After three months, I had at least attempted every problem....and felt pretty confident having doing so, although I have no idea if I passed yet...

3) Don't think you will run out of problems with the same approach I took. In fact, after 2 months, I went back to re-attempt problems that I have already completed and found that I totally forgot how I did them. However, one thing I wish I had was that 101 Env practice problem book...

4) The supplemental study guide are slightly more difficult than the actual exam problems....you won't see any "1-hour time limit" type problems on the exam.

5) I recommend the NCEES practice exam...much more similar to the actual exam.

6) The EVRM does not have enough info on groundwater and remediation problems....this cost me a few questions on the Oct 09 exam.

7) Good Luck.

 

[daywalker]

Hi Gambit,

Thanks for the response.

I think I your approach seems pretty plausible. Air Pollution Control is also my weakness. I am going to take your advice and start to review that material first.

Fortunately, for me remediation is a significant part of my environmental background and everyday work, so I have a handle on that. I just hope that there are a few questions on the test. I am also a freshly minted Mass Grade 5 combined WWTPO, so the material is still pretty fresh in my head. The material from the operators exam seems pretty similar to some of the practice questions in the books minus some of the more technical math. So I will probably study that last.

 

[Dleg]

^Sounds like you should do fine on the PE exam, then. I agree with Gambit's statements - you should get plenty of practice on most other subjects if you just do all the available practice problems. The key is to always keep your mind focused on the underlying principles and not necessarily the particular form of the equation. E.g. mass balances, 1st order kinetics/decay, and the ideal gas law - all of those seem to underlie many of the subjects.

 

[sedonacoon]

I wouldn't worry about the HVAC stuff either. Those couple of chapters I could have skipped completely.

 

[VGAC]

Hi Gambit,
Thanks for the response.

I think I your approach seems pretty plausible. Air Pollution Control is also my weakness. I am going to take your advice and start to review that material first.

Fortunately, for me remediation is a significant part of my environmental background and everyday work, so I have a handle on that. I just hope that there are a few questions on the test. I am also a freshly minted Mass Grade 5 combined WWTPO, so the material is still pretty fresh in my head. The material from the operators exam seems pretty similar to some of the practice questions in the books minus some of the more technical math. So I will probably study that last.

As a freshly minted PE, most of the study material is pretty fresh in my head. All the above posts are correct. Skip the intro and go straight to the meat.

Lindberg and associated material overprepares you. Before the test if you feel comfortable with the practise problems - you are in great shape. I found the test to be a walk in the park as far as Practise Problems/ Examination Problems etc.

Remediation was huge in Oct 2009. Couldn't have done it without Jeff Kuo's book.

Wouldn't be surprised if April 2010 is full of Wastewater / AST questions.

Overall, it is a lot easier than what it looks like right now...

Good luck

 

[daywalker]

Hey VGAC!

Were the overall test questions geared more towards design type problems or more look up type problems like regulatory, concepts, law and H&S conversions? Was it like 50 /50?

 

[RIP - VTEnviro]

There are a lot of straight up qualitative problems.

What is the MCL of substance X?

40 CFR 123.45 defines hazardous goo as...

There are also a number of 'quantitative' questions where you look up several things, then plug it into a simple formula

A workers is exposed to X 40 hrs a week for 20 years. What is his risk of developing cancer?

The half life of cheese is 150 years. There are 100 grams today. How much will be left after 500 years?

The rest of them are hardcore design problems.

 

[_Gambit_]

There are a lot of straight up qualitative problems.
What is the MCL of substance X?

40 CFR 123.45 defines hazardous goo as...

There are also a number of 'quantitative' questions where you look up several things, then plug it into a simple formula

A workers is exposed to X 40 hrs a week for 20 years. What is his risk of developing cancer?

The half life of cheese is 150 years. There are 100 grams today. How much will be left after 500 years?

The rest of them are hardcore design problems.

I hope I got that cheese one right...come on, VA... :brickwall:

 

[VGAC]

a good mix of everything you listed above. As far as design problems go, if you do not get to the answer in 2-3 steps, you are probably on the wrong track. So fairly straightforward ones involving a series of plug and chugs.

 

[FatherTime]

You're right. some of the chapters are light on problems, when mastery is the intended result. Lindeburg's Environmental Engineering Reference Manual and its accompanying Practice Problems Manual were "designed" to accomplish several simultaneous goals, including (1) providing a thorough review of the background subjects such as math, chemistry, and physics if you needed it, and (2) assembling an amount of work that would keep an average engineer busy for about 4 months.

Most engineers end up needing to review some of the math concepts during their preparation. Regardless of if you need to review logarithms, probability, or differential equations, you'll find what you needed. You kind of find out what you need while going through the material. After you take the exam, you'll find the ENVRM to be a good depository of that information for the future.

After slogging through ENVRM and taking the accompanying (purchased separately) sample exam, if you STILL have time before the exam, then you're a candidate for one of the several PPI problem-set books (the 6-Minute series, etc.) It's kind of a modular approach. Cafeteria style.

 

[maryannette]

Skip the math and any other "background" chapters. Use them for reference when you need to.

 

[Dleg]

You're right. some of the chapters are light on problems, when mastery is the intended result. Lindeburg's Environmental Engineering Reference Manual and its accompanying Practice Problems Manual were "designed" to accomplish several simultaneous goals, including (1) providing a thorough review of the background subjects such as math, chemistry, and physics if you needed it, and (2) assembling an amount of work that would keep an average engineer busy for about 4 months.
Most engineers end up needing to review some of the math concepts during their preparation. Regardless of if you need to review logarithms, probability, or differential equations, you'll find what you needed. You kind of find out what you need while going through the material. After you take the exam, you'll find the ENVRM to be a good depository of that information for the future.

After slogging through ENVRM and taking the accompanying (purchased separately) sample exam, if you STILL have time before the exam, then you're a candidate for one of the several PPI problem-set books (the 6-Minute series, etc.) It's kind of a modular approach. Cafeteria style.

Yeah, but... the ENVRM is incredibly weak in certain areas, such as hazardous waste and site assessment and remediation. I expected more of PPI. Yet, here we have all this additional stuff that we didn't even need... (HVAC, thermo, math, etc..) The whole thing just seems cobbled together from the CERM and ChERM to me. Adequate to get the job done, but "mastery"???

 

[Keatingiv]

Yeah, but... the ENVRM is incredibly weak in certain areas, such as hazardous waste and site assessment and remediation. I expected more of PPI. Yet, here we have all this additional stuff that we didn't even need... (HVAC, thermo, math, etc..) The whole thing just seems cobbled together from the CERM and ChERM to me. Adequate to get the job done, but "mastery"???

yeah I was wondering about all of those chapters in the ENVRM (HVAC Thermo). I recall some of that on the EIT. It isnt on the exam is it? I could see where it could fall slightly under Air pollution control, but as I recall from college, those topics were geared more towards Mechanical engineering courses