Did anyone take the new 16 hour exam in April? 1

[frv]

I was hoping to get some feedback from those of you who took the new 16 hour exam last month. I plan on taking it in October and wanted to get a general feel for it, as April was the first time it was offered.

Were you surprised by anything in the test? What percentage of the questions were AASHTO? Did you feel that a sufficient amount of time was given for each of the four "modules"? Tips?

Thanks!

 

[frv]

Bueller......?




Bueller......?





Bueller......?

 

[SLTA]

I would give a star for the nice Bueller reference... but I'd likely get red-flagged. I am curious about this too, although I'm PEd and that's enough for me.

 

[x5bulldog]

I took the structural exam in October 2010 and passed. Since I passed it and felt that I could recall alot of the information from studying last year I decided to take both days in April 2011. The mornings for both days was what I expected (gravity was harder for me) and think I did okay. For the afternoon be prepared to work quickly!!! I was not prepared for Friday afternoon, I guess studying for last years exam threw me off because I was use to studying all multiple choice. I did horrible in the afternoon for the gravity. I spent too much time on the first problem and that just ruined me for the rest of the exam. My handwriting has always been messy and combine that with working fast, not good!! But the first day prepared me for the second day. I knew what to expect for the afternoon. I believe I did okay on Saturday (if they can read my handwriting ..... hoping! I don't know if the exam grading committee wants you to write equations (that is before you plug in the actual values) and from what code section it came from and also what tables and figures you used. At first I thought this would not be a concern but after doing it alot of times thoughout the exam the seconds add up to minutes.

Everyone has their own test taking methods and mine has always been read the first problem and try to answer it then move on to the next problem. From the exams I took the longest problem was problem 1 for both days and problem 4 for both days were the easiest. But during the exam you don't know which problem is the easiest because you have to read about a page and look at several figures for each problem and could spend well over 10-15 minutes reading and looking at figures and then trying to figure out if you can do this problem quickly. Combine that time with what I mentioned earlier about writing the equations and what code sections it came from and maybe also what tables or figures used, valuable time clicks away.

All the problems are doable, I just panicked on Friday afternoon. After the exam I was very disappointed in myself because I knew what to do but just choked!! I can sit down and recall the problems and answer them now without hestitation, but that doesn't matter now.

As for the AASHTO questions it was either hit or miss for me. There were some questions that I didn't know how to do but was patience and looked throught the AASHTO Design Spec and got lucky and found sections and equations on how to solve some problems. Other bridge question were easy because if you study some for bridges you can answer some of them. On the NCEES website you can findout how much AASHTO questions to expect and thought the amount on the actual exam was that.

 

[Lion06]

There are still bridge and building questions mixed together? I thought this exam allowed you to choose one or the other.

 

[frv]

Thanks, x5bulldog. I'm surprised you say that Gravity was a bit more challenging. I would have expected it to be the other way around.

Yeah, Lion.. I thought that too, but I did a little bit more digging, and it is only the afternoon sessions where you choose buildings or bridges.

 

[fancypants]

Wow, Deja Vu. Reading x5bulldog's post I would think it was coming from my own mouth.

I just took the new test also and can tell you it was a 2 day special Lol.

I could not agree more with bulldog. First day morning session i was finished early and actually got to go over my work. Afternoon session POW, right in the kisser. I started on the first problem and got in my own little world. I was sketching things and being real neat. Looked up at the clock and oh boy! an hour and twenty minutes and still had one part to answer. So without saying, neatness had to go out the window.

That first problem ate up way too much of my time and I did not get to answer the last part of the last problem.

Second day I was also ready for it and completed the afternoon session just as the proctor said stop.

The morning sessions are full of AASHTO problems. Some are specific and you will need to look it up in the code unless you have it memorized. However, some of the problems does not require anything except general structural skills. Be sure and read the AASHTO problems. I know some people that skip them out of hand and I believe it hurts them.

My best tip would be Know Thy Codes fairly well and by that I mean know where to find what in the codes.

 

[BAretired]

"All the problems are doable, I just panicked on Friday afternoon. After the exam I was very disappointed in myself because I knew what to do but just choked!! I can sit down and recall the problems and answer them now without hestitation, but that doesn't matter now."

That being the case, it is surprising to me that the examination board has not found a way to reward the candidate who knows his stuff and to penalize the candidate who does not.

BA

 

[MJB315]

I too find it surprising that it was the gravity section that jumped out to folks at being more troublesome. What made it so? Was it unfamiliarity with certain materials (wood detailing, masonry design, etc.), tricky analysis problems, or what? Was it really as simple as trying to neatly/professionally tackle the first problem that threw the later ones?

Knowing what you know now, what would you recommend to the next round of test-takers? Are there any particular references manuals / study guides you wish you had spent more time with prior to taking the exam?

MJB

 

[zlindauer]

I figured the main challenge for the new test would be the additional seismic problems that used to only be required in California. Was that not an issue?

I'm comfortable with the equivalent lateral force procedure for determining seismic loads, but I haven't learned anything about the other analysis methods. I also have always used R=3 steel framing to avoid seismic detailing requirements. Is that enough seismic knowledge to succesfully take this test?