Structural II
Structural II
(OP)
I am waiting for the Structural I PE exam result taken this April, 2007.
I would like to know about the Structural II. What would be the benefit if I had structural II additionally?
Can I get more opportunity to get a job or a higher salary?
Thank you in advance.
I would like to know about the Structural II. What would be the benefit if I had structural II additionally?
Can I get more opportunity to get a job or a higher salary?
Thank you in advance.






RE: Structural II
RE: Structural II
RE: Structural II
I am quite far from taking the PE, but I am always looking to improve my chances. Did you make sheets for design procedures or just tab your codes? For example, for a concrete beam would you have a sheet showing minimum reinforcing limits, minimum shear reinforcing limits and spacings, table for h/l to neglect deflection calcs, etc... or did you just tab your ACI code well and quickly go wherever you needed?
Are there a lot of complete design questions or more looking things up in the code?
Do you know why people told you to take the Civil? Did that come from people you work with? Do you do any civil work or just structural? I don't do anything but structural and can't imagine I would take the Civil PE, but hey, you never know.
Also, I know you were sort of up in the air about whether you would be allowed to take the test or not. Did you have a full 4 years after graduation or was it slightly less?
I took the FE in April, graduated in May (so the FE didn't kick in until May), but I would love to take the PE in April of 2010. I hope the 4 weeks between the FE and graduation isn't a big deal.
RE: Structural II
As far as afternoon session goes (structural), make sure you know different methods to calculate deflections (virtual work, conjugate beam, moment distribution, table look up etc.), there were a lot of that. As far as the code, there were a lot of questions from AASHTO bridge loading. You only need to know the loading (chapter 3 AASHTO LFD, not LRFD, this may change in 2010). You dont have to design anything. If you do have to design something, it is probably something simple. Anyway, I think where I am I do not need SE I and SE II to design houses. Maybe if I move to California or Utah, I think they license structural engineers separately from PE. Here is a quote from the PE test website:
If you are pursuing a professional license, you must pass one or more of the Principles and Practice examinations:
• Engineering licensure candidates: take a Principles and Practice of Engineering (PE) exam and any required state-specific exam(s). PE exam disciplines are listed below.
• In jurisdictions that license structural engineers SEPARATELY from professional engineers, structural engineering licensure candidates must take one or more of the following exams: PE Civil, PE Structural I, PE Structural II, and/or any required state-specific exam(s).
RE: Structural II
It depends on your state. Check with your state licensure board. If a PE licence is all that is required in your state, then the Civil PE is adequate. The Structural I is the first of two exams that allows you to get an SE (Structural Engineering license). If you intend on getting the SE it is recommended that you take the Structural I instead of the Civil PE. Some states require an SE for structural design. Illinois I believe is one state that requires this. California also requires it for certain designs of high importance.
RE: Structural II
anyhow, damn.....georgia is giving me the run around on how to apply for the structural 2 for next april.
RE: Structural II
I have to go check the website about that nuance now.
RE: Structural II
My recommendation to you, StructuralEIT, is to try to get a wide variety of experience designing with all materials, and take the SE I. In my opinion, it will be easier than studying all the civil stuff you probably have no experience with.
As for the bridge stuff, the questions are pretty straight forward. I didn't spend any time studying it, I just brought a copy of the AASHTO code and the Structural Engineering Reference Manual, saved the bridge questions for last, and looked them up.
Ice
RE: Structural II
Thanks! The advice is much appreciated!!
RE: Structural II
RE: Structural II
FWIW, I didn't have any trouble with the Strl I and I just took my reference material in with me without additional summary or crib sheets. Those have great value, though, mainly because writing the stuff down gets it in your head better, LOL--seriously. As for finding stuff during the test, I had no issue with that. If you know where things are in your manuals and books, you'll be fine in that regard.
I've known quite a few strictly strl people who took the civil PE exam, which is baffling to me. Who wants to go study all that worthless (to us) non-strl CE stuff? Studying the subjects for the Strl I makes you a better structural engineer. Knowing how to use Bernoulli's Equation makes you better at using Bernoulli's Equation.
RE: Structural II
I guess we should all call ourselves civil engineers instead of structural engineers if we don't have an SE (don't want to make those SE's mad... Haha). I took the SE1 about 4 years ago but will probably not take the SE2 unless my state changes their requirements or our company starts doing work in states that require SE's. In my state, the SE1 and SE2 are both required to get an SE license. I'm not sure if that is like that in all states. Check with your state board on that.
RE: Structural II
I don't like to call myself a Civil Engineer, because I know very little about all of the sub disciplines other than structural.
RE: Structural II
RE: Structural II
RE: Structural II
Does your employer not pay for it?
If you work in design, I personally don't see a reason to study for it. If it's like it was in about 2001 (2002? can't remember) when I took it, it was more of a crapshoot than anything else: Get something you've done before and you pass. Otherwise, pack your stuff up and enjoy the rest of the day! It might be different now, though.
As for CE vs Strl, you guys sound like me. I don't identify AT ALL with the rest of CE. We are A LOT closer cousins to ESM folks than the rest of CE. We're probably about as close a cousins to MEs as the rest of CE for that matter.
RE: Structural II
RE: Structural II
RE: Structural II
That's perfectly fine, IMO. After all, you didn't call yourself a "licensed" structural engineer.
The only time I am careful about this is when I'm writing something official in a state that doesn't have a SE license. For example, in TN, I'd probably put PE after my name instead, if I think any of the potential readers would care.
RE: Structural II
RE: Structural II
StructuralEIT. Since you have 4 years I'd recommend you start making crib sheets and tabbing your codes/text now as problems come up at work. It should include design procedures and all the notes you need to guide you through the design processes. The exam has been becoming more difficult every year, so try not to let anyone who hasnt taken it in the past three years tell you how simple it was. The subject matter can be pretty simple, but it's the time that will kill you if you have to review anything during the test. True, if you do design work every day you'll have an advantage, but the exam subject matter is so wide I dont see how anyone could be at a firm who designs it all, and on a daily basis. I dont know of anyone who is proficent at both bridge and building design.
RE: Structural II
swivel, I would put PE or SE after my name but not EIT. I just feel like EIT is not really something I am proud of lol. Although I do know some people who had to take EIT 3X and still didnt pass it. OK thanks for the explaination guys. I will look into Structural 1 and 2.
BTW. How many of you engineers drive a train? lol
RE: Structural II
I don't have 4 years experience yet, I only have 1. However, I am already anxiously awaiting the date.
RE: Structural II
RE: Structural II
If I acquire good general knowledge along the way, then cram near the end, that's optimum for me. I look at the cramming more like "getting in shape for a test" than acquiring knowledge.
If I'm going to create crib sheets, I'll do it as a last second review, a final pounding of the details into my skull. I think this is most of the benefit of having crib sheets anyway, at least for me.
Anyway, that's best for me.
For the Strl I, I started studying 4 months in advance, with my best subjects first. I figured that knowledge would be dulled the slowest. I didn't even make crib sheets, but it would've been a good idea. I didn't study bridges at all--just surrendered those points and used the extra time. That worked out well, but it was a little hair-raising to just drop those points.
I didn't study at all for the Strl II, which was probably smart. I never would've covered the crazy stuff they put on there, LOL. Either have seen it before and pass, or dead meat, LOL.
RE: Structural II
i would put both PE, and SE behind my name if i could...because of the illinois rule alone.
i was blessed in a sense that i had done damn near most of the stuff on the S-1 exam (except for bridges) while i was coming up as a young engineer.
i studied about 4-5 month in advance for the S-1 and probably had a total of about 150 to 200 hours total. i might have gone a little overboard, but i usually spent about 4 or 5 days a week studying at about 2 hour a session (a couple problems). my social life took a serious hit for this exam, but it sure was worth it. i didn't make any special sheets either, just took the codes i needed and the kaplan books.
i'm still looking for good study guides outside of the same kaplan and NCEES books for the S-2.
RE: Structural II
RE: Structural II
IMO, the SEI was easier than the CE, but the SEII is the beast. It took me 3 times to pass the afternoon section. Back when I took it in the late 90's, it wasn't that expensive, but I think now it cost >$500.
A good source to research different state requirements is NCEES.org. They even have a survey there with responses from the state PE boards on tons of different issues (one being SE requirements and another the testing fees). They also have a list of links to all of the states board's.
http://ww
RE: Structural II
LOL, sounds like my story.
The first time I took the Strl II, the afternoon was a big shell bldg with an interior mezzanine that didn't make it to the endwalls. It was supported off a 4 of the sidewall cols. Come up with mezz diaphragm shears & chord forces. Design the mezz diaphragm connections to the sidewalls. Design the sidewall columns (bm-cols), roof diaphragm, endwall x-braces, etc.
I wasn't very good at going through all those different seismic force levels for diaphragms, connectors, etc. and didn't have a prayer of learning it on the fly.
Second try I got something I knew how to do and finished the afternoon part an hour early.
That's why I say it's not worth it to study for the Strl II. There's no way to guess what craziness they might put on there.
RE: Structural II
RE: Structural II
I heard of one test that had a bunch of CMU and wood diaphragm, collectors, etc. I'd guess that you would fly through that.
The test I passed just had some easy seismic and a bunch of detailed concrete beam design. I walked into the second try ready for my butt-kicking and was like "you serious?!" LOL.
Like I typed, it's like a crapshoot.
Ironically, I know a few people who work on the same type of huge projects over and over again, always using composite steel and moment frames. No wood, CMU, etc., so they could get smacked upside the head very easily too, LOL. I think we all could.
RE: Structural II
naw, all jokes aside.....i guess it passing the exam really does have no bearing on how good an engineer you are.
RE: Structural II
RE: Structural II
I just looked on the ncees website and the Strl II had a higher pass rate than the Strl I. Gotta keep in mind, though, that only folks who took the Strl I were taking teh Strl II, so the numbers are a little skewed.
http://www.ncees.org/exams/pass_rates/
Maybe they fired the rogue(s) who was writing the tests back then. I seem to remember the pass rate being something totally ridiculous, like 15% back then, but I'm not sure.
RE: Structural II
RE: Structural II
I assume he'd know if he called the ncees office.
RE: Structural II
RE: Structural II
civil, S-2, then S-3.
RE: Structural II
This is a GOOD thing for the profession of structural engineering and will serve to distinguish a true "structural" engineer from some of the "civil" engineer types who design a beam on Monday, a grading and drainage plan on Tuesday, a wastewater design on Wednesday, etc... I don't mean to denigrate any PE's with this statement because I have worked with some outstanding structural PE's in my career. There are, however, folks who stretch the "civil" discipline too far (beyond their knowledge of current codes) I think.
Take the SEI and SEII. Demonstrating your ability to pass these tests will likely become the minimum structural licensure bar in the near future.
RE: Structural II
LOL
RE: Structural II
The second time I had a very easy problem, but left my Blodgett at home and didn't have any other reference material with me for designing openings in a steel web. I just took one look at the problem and turned the sheet in and went home. I can't remember the problem on the third test that I passed. Back then IRRC, the fee was only 100-200 dollars.
As far as taking the SEII without the SEI, that's exactly what I did in Arizona, they let the CE count as my SEI. I actually took the SEI after I passed the SEII. Like the fellow above said, you have to have both in Illinois.
RE: Structural II
Any good tips to prepare for the exam???
Are there any courses available to review the material?
Thanks