SECB
SECB
(OP)
My boss gave me a copy of a form he has from the "Structural Engineering Certification Board" (SECB). It's stated purpose is to establish uniform standards of examination, licensure and practice throughout the United States to enable, encourage and facilitate competent structural engineering and to identify structural engineering as a distinct discipline of engineering practice. Now, did I miss something or are we not already a distinct engineering pracrtice? Why on earth would we need something in addition to the PE and SE tests that are well established? To me this sounds like a blatant money-making ploy that will never really do anything to improve the profession or help protect the public. The cost is $350 plus $100 per year. There are also provisions for "grandfathering". If you get grandfathered in then the purpose of certifying competent engineers is lost. Doing something for 20 years certainly doesn't make it right. Everyone else has to take an exam but even that won't accomplish anything IMHO. Exams only weed out those who can't take a test, they do nothing for people who really don't belong in engineering such as those who don't care about doing quality work or just want to make an unethical buck. Any idiot can cram for an exam but learn nothing. Anyway, this is my take on it. Has anyone else had any experience with this board? What are your opinions out there? I'm not trying to start another PE thread, I've already searched the forum and didn't find this topic at all.
www.secertboard.org
www.secertboard.org






RE: SECB
RE: SECB
RE: SECB
RE: SECB
DaveAtkins
RE: SECB
RE: SECB
RE: SECB
I don't foresee ant great rush until the certification carries some weight. Until then, we'll look like planners and financial advisors with eight sets of initials after our names - to the point where each one is diluted by the others.
Regards,
Crossframe, BSCE, ASCE, SEI, PE, EIEIO, ETC.
RE: SECB
RE: SECB
RE: SECB
Don't you think that an electrical engineer would not be so smart to compete with structural as much as it is for structural engineer to perform electrical engineering?
I am not really hung up on the SE license or the “SECB” as long as the engineer is competent and does not stray from his practice. I grant you that some engineers may double practice.
My mentor was a good structural engineer. He had a mechanical engineering degree. He practiced structural engineering till he died. I thought he was very knowledgeable and competent.
Dr. Blodgett is nationally recognized for his in-depth knowledge in structural and welding engineering. If my memory serves me right, he has a metallurgical engineering degree! I think his knowledge in structures is one of the best. His delivery method is one of the clearest and this is demonstrated by his text books and writings.
I live in Florida and we are same as NJ. I have been in the engineering business since the early 1980s. I must say that I did not encounter any issues with other engineers cross practicing. To be honest, I came across many PEs, that did not impress me, who are practicing structural and who are PhDs as well
If a mechanical engineer who is competent is doing stress and strength calculations, I do not see any reason why they could not do it. As a matter of fact, I have seen very sharp mechanical engineers who have better understanding for welding, stress computation and have greater understanding of fatigue and stress concentration.
I do not want to pay more fees, fill out more forms at the end of every year or two. I am not less of an engineer since I do not have “SECB" certification.
Now I will step off my soap box.
Regards,
Lutfi
www.cdeco.com
RE: SECB
RE: SECB
Doctors, accountants and lawyers do a fantastic job in projecting the professional level and what it takes to become licensed individuals in their organizations. In my humble opinion, engineers DO NOT.
I would be interested in a survey of the average "public" to see if they can answer correctly their understanding of what does it take to be a doctor, lawyer, CPA and PE. I dread the fact that several would not even know what the acronym “PE” stands for!
I had trouble for many years call myself registered engineer! What is that all about? I am not a product or a dog to be registered! I am more for Licensed Engineer title. May be this is where the “SECB" certification idea came from. I think if we are about to make a change, we should think it through and make it with results that would improve the engineers image.
We still have what I think is a big inconsistency between the various states as far as licensing requirement. What is that all about! I happen to have license in three states. Each one of them has its own set of qualifications for becoming a licensed engineer. While all three may be similar, there are some differences. I often ask myself, WHY?
In Florida our legislature passed a law requiring only PEs can use the title engineer. I supported the law. Then the political machinery got involved and the law was amended to exclude those engineers that work for the space center (Aerospace Corporations) and the Military. Keep in mind that these same exempt engineers require consultants to be PEs to do work for the space center and the military!!
Bottom line, I do not think that “SECB" certification is the solution by itself. May be the profession licensing needs an overhaul on the national level?
Lutfi
www.cdeco.com
RE: SECB