To: "'seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org'" <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
Subject: RE: Need Practical Mechanics of Matl's/Structural Analysis Book
From: Paul Crocker <paulc(--nospam--at)ckcps.com>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 11:54:37 -0700
"Maybe the test should have more depth?"
Well, finding the bending moment was only the opening act to the problem
(trying to check stresses or something of that sort), but you could
certainly make that argument. I took the NCEES PE exam, which is as I
understand basically used nationwide, with CA adding two extra sections of
their own. It was annoying to have to study pipe flow and such for the
morning session. The afternoon section was reasonable. All things
considered, I like the approach that I have heard some states take in using
the SE I exam as the PE for structural minded folks. Now that I am studying
for the SE exam I am much happier with my preparation, because I don't
consider it "time wasted" as I did studying pipe flow and such. Some of it
is very interesting.
Paul Crocker, P.E.
* This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
* Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
* subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
* Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
* send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
* without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
* site at: http://www.seaint.org