PE vs new 2-day SE
PE vs new 2-day SE
(OP)
Advice please.
I'm starting year 4 of my 4 years toward being able to sit for my PE exam. I've spent those 3 years, most of my schooling, and my internships doing 90% structural engineering. I'm comfortable doing site work, fan engineering, hydrology, and so on but it's not what I want to do.
I figured I'd get my head in the game as to what I have left to do and make sure I'm all ready when test time comes. I'm early but I like to be prepared. I got almost 100% when I went to take my private pilots exam and I was super comfortable for my FE so it seems to work for me.
Now, my question is should I sit for the new 2-day SE test or just take the normal PE test? I'm thinking the new 2-day SE is the way to go for me. I work in Maine right now under a PE but am 90% sure that I will not remain in this state (or possibly even the country). The way I see it is:
Pros for the new 2-day SE:
-Will get me a PE in most states.
-Will get me a SE in most states.
-Will make it easy to get a PE or SE in the states that I didn't get one in.
-Will be a nice feather in my cap. Might make up for that moderate 3.15 GPA I had in college for my resume.
-Will help focus my career more on the things I want to do.
-Will probably not be that much harder for me to take and study for as I will only have structures and no general civil. Heck, it might be even easier (and will probably be easier to study for).
-Reading about recent test takers, they found it not terribly difficult.
-If I fail one section but pass another I only have to retake one section.
Cons for the new 2-day test:
-Costs more...a lot more! (I'm assuming I'll spent about $1,000 on the SE where I'd spend something like $300 on the PE).
-Longer test (16 hours vs 8 hours).
-Not really necessary (yet). I'm thinking that in the future they may start making structural engineers take the 2-day test to get an SE but this is a long shot. For now, unless I move to CA or IL, I doubt I'll need an SE.
-Might be all a waste if I go to another country that wont accept the SE to practice engineering there.
So, does anyone have any good advice on what they would do?
I'm starting year 4 of my 4 years toward being able to sit for my PE exam. I've spent those 3 years, most of my schooling, and my internships doing 90% structural engineering. I'm comfortable doing site work, fan engineering, hydrology, and so on but it's not what I want to do.
I figured I'd get my head in the game as to what I have left to do and make sure I'm all ready when test time comes. I'm early but I like to be prepared. I got almost 100% when I went to take my private pilots exam and I was super comfortable for my FE so it seems to work for me.
Now, my question is should I sit for the new 2-day SE test or just take the normal PE test? I'm thinking the new 2-day SE is the way to go for me. I work in Maine right now under a PE but am 90% sure that I will not remain in this state (or possibly even the country). The way I see it is:
Pros for the new 2-day SE:
-Will get me a PE in most states.
-Will get me a SE in most states.
-Will make it easy to get a PE or SE in the states that I didn't get one in.
-Will be a nice feather in my cap. Might make up for that moderate 3.15 GPA I had in college for my resume.
-Will help focus my career more on the things I want to do.
-Will probably not be that much harder for me to take and study for as I will only have structures and no general civil. Heck, it might be even easier (and will probably be easier to study for).
-Reading about recent test takers, they found it not terribly difficult.
-If I fail one section but pass another I only have to retake one section.
Cons for the new 2-day test:
-Costs more...a lot more! (I'm assuming I'll spent about $1,000 on the SE where I'd spend something like $300 on the PE).
-Longer test (16 hours vs 8 hours).
-Not really necessary (yet). I'm thinking that in the future they may start making structural engineers take the 2-day test to get an SE but this is a long shot. For now, unless I move to CA or IL, I doubt I'll need an SE.
-Might be all a waste if I go to another country that wont accept the SE to practice engineering there.
So, does anyone have any good advice on what they would do?
EIT with BS in Civil/Structural engineering.





RE: PE vs new 2-day SE
Hg
Eng-Tips policies: FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: PE vs new 2-day SE
I know that they recently changed the SE exams but if you do not have a PE that doesn't apply to you. You have to first get a PE.
RE: PE vs new 2-day SE
My understanding was that only a few states had a requirement of X years as a PE before you could qualify as a SE but nothing was required to actually sit for the SE test. Then, the licensing to become a PE only required that you take an 8 hour professional test and the 16 hours for the SE seemed to fit that requirement.
EIT with BS in Civil/Structural engineering.
RE: PE vs new 2-day SE
Well, I guess that answers that questions.
EIT with BS in Civil/Structural engineering.
RE: PE vs new 2-day SE
"The answer is yes. Maine use[d] to license an applicant who passed just the Structural 1 exam. Many States required both the SS1 & SS2 exams. California, New York and maybe a few more States required the Civil, SS1, SS2 and a State specific exam to be licensed as a Structural engineer. The option for just the SS1 or the SS2 is no longer available. So, yes, you can take the 16 hour Structural exam and obtain a Maine PE license once you pass."
So, I guess I'm back to my original plan and question. Is it worth it to take the SE to get a PE. Seems like it is to me.
EIT with BS in Civil/Structural engineering.
RE: PE vs new 2-day SE
I took the SEI and SEII(comparable to the new 2 day structural exam), but not the Civil PE. Basically, I can get registered in any state east of the Rockies. To get registered in CA (and some other states) I would have had to take the Civil PE first, along with some other state specific tests.
If I had taken the Civil PE only, the only state east of the rockies I could not get registered in for Structural type work would have been Illinois. However, that may change if other states begin to adopt the model law SE (which seems to be likely.)
So depending on where you want to get registered you may want to take one or the other, or both.
RE: PE vs new 2-day SE
Most states you DON'T have to take the PE prior to the SE.
Where did you read that the PE is required first?
I'm licensed in 22 states, three with the SE, and have never heard of that before.
In Illinois, for example, they don't require the PE to get an SE.
RE: PE vs new 2-day SE
From my research it seems that there are indeed a few states that require you to take the PE test (California for one) but they are limited. There are a few more that require you to have worked as a PE for a few years before registering as an SE there (but you don't need to have taken the PE test from what I see).
So, I think both JAE and bklkjh are right, that there are a few states that require you to have taken the PE test to be a PE (and an SE) but that they're only a handful and that, more commonly, if you're a PE in one you're a PE in almost all.
EIT with BS in Civil/Structural engineering.
RE: PE vs new 2-day SE
As an instructure for the SE licensure test preparation, I've heard many stories from course takers that they were required to take more coursework. The most commone of courses were Masonry and Wood.
And keep in mind what Maine described in their response to you. Even if you do take the SEI and SEII you may still have to sit for third exam that is state specific. I believe both California and Washington have this requirement.
Another small obstacle to consider is that often times states likes to restrict a lot of out of state applicants by requiring references that have a SE in the state your seeking application in.
JAE - Are you licensed in Washington as an SE? I'd like to know what you're experience was if so.
Regards,
![[pipe] pipe](https://www.tipmaster.com/images/pipe.gif)
Qshake
Eng-Tips Forums:Real Solutions for Real Problems Really Quick.
RE: PE vs new 2-day SE
For Illinois - I can't recall the specifics for experience but I had an MS in Structural Engineering at the time so this probably satisfied any course requirements.
RE: PE vs new 2-day SE
As for the course work it seems that I might meet that. From the NCEES "model law engineer-structural engineering":
"Has passed a minimum of 18 semester (27 quarter) hours of structural analysis and design courses. At least 9 of the semester (14 quarter) hours must be structural design courses."
I've taken (off the top of my head):
Steel Design: 4 hours
Concrete Design: 4 hours
Wood Design: 4 hours
Structural Analysis 1 and 2: 8 hours (if I recall correctly, might be only 6)
So I should be all set there.
The only thing that does worry me is that I don't believe I have anyone whom I can reference and that has a SE designation, only PEs.
EIT with BS in Civil/Structural engineering.
RE: PE vs new 2-day SE
RE: PE vs new 2-day SE
RE: PE vs new 2-day SE
I decided to take the PE first because it is easier, and kind of gave me a heads up of what to expect for the SE (like time factor & additional test taking experience).
In Illinois, you cannot be a licensed PE without taking the PE exam. You must take both exams to hold both titles.
RE: PE vs new 2-day SE
RE: PE vs new 2-day SE
Regards,
![[pipe] pipe](https://www.tipmaster.com/images/pipe.gif)
Qshake
Eng-Tips Forums:Real Solutions for Real Problems Really Quick.
RE: PE vs new 2-day SE
EIT with BS in Civil/Structural engineering.
RE: PE vs new 2-day SE
They do not for the SE exam....or didn't when I received mine. I believe it's been mentioned before, the Illinois SE is a practice act and has been for longer than anyone cares to remember, well before CA decided to have a SE. And for whatever reason, they decided not to accept reciprocity from other states. I don't know if that has changed now or not.
Regards,
![[pipe] pipe](https://www.tipmaster.com/images/pipe.gif)
Qshake
Eng-Tips Forums:Real Solutions for Real Problems Really Quick.
RE: PE vs new 2-day SE
EIT with BS in Civil/Structural engineering.
RE: PE vs new 2-day SE
RE: PE vs new 2-day SE
But, yes, I agree. Technically, by any ethical standard, one should not practice out of their field of experience. Thus, I wouldn't dream of doing a cable-stayed bridge as I have no experience in it.
However, I totally agree with what you mean. Just the other week I reviewed a top slab of a small reinforced concrete vault used for stormwater collection in parking lots. The Engineer (who according to their stamp number has been around a while) put little to no rebar in it, had many un-reinforced stress concentration points, and had a tapered section that could barely take the weight of a car, to say nothing of the H-20 loading it was supposedly rated for. Trying to explain to the client that just because they stamped it does not make it structurally sound was not fun.
Anyway, it is good to hear that not only will getting a SE license be a nice feather in my cap but that many firms (and probably the ones I'd like to work for) are recognizing the SE license as a useful designation.
EIT with BS in Civil/Structural engineering.
RE: PE vs new 2-day SE