I use MERM and Potter's <u>Principles and Practice of Mechanical Engineering</u> as my review manuals. I don't think P&P is published anymore, but it is available used. Professional Publications, MERM's publishers, now own the rights to P&P. They maintain <a href= "
>errata</a> for both, though it's sparse for P&P. I found and corrected errors that I plan to submit to them. Get the errata for your manual. I also used the solutions manuals for both.
The difference in depth and breadth between the two is remarkable. One could pass using P&P together with other references, such as college text books. One could pass using MERM alone. One could also be overwhelmed by MERM and never finish studying.
I used MERM to review the machine design topics listed in its introduction, except for pressure vessels (which I skipped) and vibrations (which I used P&P for). I worked every example and practice problem in MERM and many in P&P. That's what nearly overwhelmed me. The test was three weeks off and I hadn't cracked the chapters on heat transfer, fluids, and thermo.
I worked through the vibrations chapter in P&P and read the fluids, thermo, heat transfer, and economics sections. I did not read the sections on power plants, fluid flow, or HVAC. Then I took the sample exam.
I passed the sample exam with a 75 on the breadth section and an 88 on the depth (not counting any complete guesses; what's the point on a sample exam?). One of the reasons I didn't do better on the breadth section is because I was put off by the apparent complexity of the problems I had not studied for; there was often a set up followed by two or three questions. I skipped them to work ones I knew better and never had time to go back. After the test, I realized much of the given information was extraneous and the questions were often trivial. The actual exam was not as bad in this regard, but be sure to read the questions.
MERM's index is an invaluable reference. After the exam, I realized if I had looked up key words from problems I had trouble with, I often would have found the answers. I got some of the psycrometrics problems this way.
I spent the next week reviewing the HVAC, power plants, and fluid flow sections in P&P, and did nothing the following. This was a mistake. The exam was not as simple as the sample. I wish I had spent more time studying, especially HVAC and heat transfer.
I thought that machine design was under-represented on the breadth section of the exam. This may be a matter of perception; perhaps it seemed that way because I knew the material so well, and the HVAC and fluid guys felt the same way about their subjects. I'd like to hear others' opinions. I left one question blank without so much as a guess; grrrr.
There wasn't a problem I didn't know how to solve on the breadth section, though there were times I expected my answer to be closer to one of the "most nearly" choices. I checked my work but couldn't find a mistake, though there was probably a silly one in there.
One question used a term I had never seen in that context. None of my references - Shigley, Machinery's Handbook, MERM, or P&P - had any refrence to it. I guessed at their meaning. It was one of those that my answer wa not close enough for comfort to one of the choices, making it worse. I forgot to take advantage of the feedback sheet to report this.
I brought MERM, P&P, Shigley, Machinery's Handbook, and one text book for each of heat transfer, thermo, and fluid mechanics. I used the first four, though there was nothing in Machinery's Handbook I couldn't find in the others. I used the thermo book for the reference tables, which were duplicated in both P&P and MERM. I didn't use the heat transfer for. I didn't use the fluids book, though I did for one problem on the sample exam.
I hope it doesn't take the eight to twelve weeks to get my grade that the disclaimer said it would. Perhaps that's for subjects that still use open-ended rather than multiple choice questions, if there are any.
I'll add more thoughts as they occur to me.
Rob Campbell
