What's the benefit of getting the IBC 2009 SEAOC manuals over the 2006 manuals? The IBC 2006 is based off of the ASCE 7 and AISC 341 is the same. The only benefit I could see is the concrete/masonry design. However, most of the ACI chapter 21 was reorganized but had almost entirely the same material. Someone please explain. Thanks.
SE Exam Review Courses - Fall 2012
- Thread starter Chosen One
- Start date
Help Support Professional Engineer & PE Exam Forum:
Chosen One
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2011
- Messages
- 49
- Reaction score
- 1
I wasted spent the weekend watching the Kaplan Live Review this past weekend and I agree with McEngr and others about the content of the webinar. If you are looking to learn something in-depth about the exam topics then this isn't the avenue to go. However, if you need to brush up on some weak areas and get some further guidance on what to study, then it's worth the time and money.
Tim Mays should do his own review as his presentations were excellent and his bridge review was specifically good. I'm not familiar in practice with AASHTO and he covers virtually every possible subject they may ask an exam question about. His review on lateral forces was good as well and he gave tons of types of problems to expect.
The concrete, steel, and wood topics were covered pretty well for only an hour each and I think once I go back and watch them again I'll be able to digest the material a lot better. I thought the masonry review was so-so and the foundation review was an absolute waste of time. The presenter did almost zero problems and spent half the time discussing dynamic soil methods which may equate to one exam question in the morning. Many of the presenters also kept referring to the Vertical review (which I didn't take) so if you are on the fence about taking one or both, then I would suggest both.
Tim Mays should do his own review as his presentations were excellent and his bridge review was specifically good. I'm not familiar in practice with AASHTO and he covers virtually every possible subject they may ask an exam question about. His review on lateral forces was good as well and he gave tons of types of problems to expect.
The concrete, steel, and wood topics were covered pretty well for only an hour each and I think once I go back and watch them again I'll be able to digest the material a lot better. I thought the masonry review was so-so and the foundation review was an absolute waste of time. The presenter did almost zero problems and spent half the time discussing dynamic soil methods which may equate to one exam question in the morning. Many of the presenters also kept referring to the Vertical review (which I didn't take) so if you are on the fence about taking one or both, then I would suggest both.
