Scheme Design Book/Manual for IStructE Part 3 exams (UK)

[DavyBeans]

Hey Everyone,

I'm hoping to sit the part 3 IstructE exams next summer and was wondering has anybody come across an Scheme Design Manual that could be used for the exams. I have heard that the IStructE actually published such a book in the early 90's but I can't seem to find it on the internet. I know that separate IStructE books for concrete and steel do exist as well as the concrete council design manual for concrete scheme design - but the manual i'm looking for contained the 4 main design materials of steel, concrete, timber and masonry.

Or if anybody is aware of a text book that is good on scheme design I would greatly appreciate it.

Thanks to all in advance.
DavyBeans.

 

[engstructural]

I passed the exam a number of years ago but never came across this manual, the concrete manual gives you the info you need for the paper, in scheme design section take the concrete principles and apply they to the other materials. I.e discuss load transfer to foundtaions vertically and discuss the buildings stability method etc.

I would prepare noted on the load transfer system veryically and for stability etc. for a number of structural forms of concrete and steel buildings, these can then be refered to in the exam. also leave space at the end of each section, you will end up wanting to come back and add info the different sections.

 

[csd72]

DavyBeans,

Okay, this is something I am really familiar with as I recently passed it.

The 'Structural engineers pocket' book is perhaps the most useful (and popular) reference. It has good information on preliminary design and basic design data on all materials.

I expect this is what you are looking for.

If your company has an account with ihs then you can download it from there.

The most important thing for you to do is practice, practice,practice. I did not do enough of this the first time and so got overwhelmed when it actually came to the day. Do as many full day past exams as you can in full exam conditions.

When you actually do the exam you will have very little time to look up information so I actually put together a few pages of relevant material for each section for ready reference. I took in other information but I dont believe I actually looked at it.

If you google it there are a few good articles out there on exam preparation though I would definately recommend a preparation course.

 

[ooox]

DavyBeans

Arup have produced a scheme design handbook covering a range of materials and rules of thumbs for schematic design. You may be able to find a copy with a quick Google search.

 

[FinnB]

When I did the exam I used the following scheme design books:

1. "The Building Scheme Design Manual" by The Concrete Centre. I reckon this is the most relevant book for the exam and sets out the procedure for the exam well. It has lots of rules of thumb type information.

2. Arup Scheme Design Manual

3. Structural Engineers Pocket Handbook.

Personally I think these books cover everything you need for the exam. I would make your own personal folder of information that covers information you are familiar with that might be relevant for the exam. Personally I would only make one A4 folder of information.


As csd72 has said there is very little time to look up references when you are in the exam. I think I looked at a reference only once or twice during the whole exam. As the exam is essentially about scheme design the calculations are more rules of thumb or basic calcs just to show the scheme and a few of the main elements work.

 

[csd72]

The structural engineers pocket book is very similar to the arup scheme design manual - though the methods and information are a little different in many parts. Really you only need one or the other, I found that having both only tended to complicate things.

 

[valleyboy]

I passed the exam in 2007, and as part of my prep did come across a book of worked examples published by the IStructE.

Unfortunately, I have now passed this on to some of my colleagues who are attempting the CM examination in April 2012.

I will make some enquiries and get back to you. From memory, it had a yellow card cover.

In its absence though, some excellent recommendations contained above. In addition, be sure to get hold of the IStructE past papers, and the preparation CD ROM - all good sources of information.

Good luck!!

 

[BAretired]

I suppose that having "rules of thumb" in your bag of tricks could be an advantage in writing certain types of exams. In my view, any examiner who poses a question which can be answered by the use of "rules of thumb" should be banned from the fraternity of examiners because, in so doing, he is is violating the principles of serious educators.

There is no substitute for knowledge. Those who write exams must understand the theory behind their answers. If they do not, what is the point of having exams? Learn the theory. Do not settle for rules of thumb because you owe yourself more than that...you owe yourself a proper understanding of engineering principles.

BA

 

[csd72]

BAretired,

The IStructE exam is unlike any other, it is not about crunching numbers but about your ability to produce a logical scheme design to a difficult structure.

There is not sufficient time allowed in the exam to provide full code calculations and therefore it is the appropriate use of rules of thumb that are encouraged.

I would go so far as to say that I think this is by far the most appropriate type of exam for a structural engineer as it tests your high level engineering judgement skills rather than your ability to follow a code.

 

[BAretired]

csd72,

Can you provide an example of a rule of thumb that one might need to write the exam?

BA

 

[csd72]

BA,

Any rule of thumb that you would use for preliminary scheme design would be of use in the exam. S/D ratios, while crude, can be a good starting point to determine if a particular structural configuration is feasible given a certain ceiling to floor height.

The exam is really not about the numbers but about your understanding of structural engineering. Sounds like a wishy washy exam but believe me it is really hard work. As one of my peers once said it is like doing a weeks work in a day.

past exams can be found at:

http://www.seabc.ca/struct_eng.html

Typical study notes can be found at:

http://www.istructe.org/exams/files/Part3_prep_notes_Stroscio.pdf

 

[Paperandpencil]

I think the publication that you are looking for could be 'Notes to accompany the course of preparation for the Institutions Part 3 examination' published by the IStructE. It does contain some rules of thumb, span/20 for initial beam sizing etc and methods for approximate analysis. Its the structural concepts thats the important part though. Using rules of thumb to quickly size a scheme based on the wrong idea in the first place is no good. My experience was that if you need to look in a book then you are going to struggle to pass.

 

[BAretired]

csd72,

I looked through some of the material you referenced with interest. I believe the emphasis is on understanding structural principles. No doubt, there are a few rules of thumb such as span-depth ratios but I don't believe they are the main focus. I can believe that a person writing that exam would exit feeling quite drained.

Thorough preparation and attention to time management during the exam would be essential. Although it is an open book exam, there is not much time to do much reading.

BA

 

[apsix]

'Thorough preparation and attention to time management during the exam would be essential.'

That pretty well nails it.
I passed it second time round by doing a preparation course and strict time management.

 

[csd72]

BAretired,

Yes, the rules of thumb are purely to aid in the decision making. It is possible to get most of your calculations wrong and still pass the test as this is not what it is about.

You would recieve a guaranteed fail if the scheme was unstable or unsafe to build or violated the clients brief. So as you say the emphasis is on structural principles.

I really think this is a more appropriate test for engineers than that for the PE (though I have not actually sat this).

 

[FinnB]

The IStructE Chartership Exam has always been described as the toughest construction industry exam in the world.

I don't know for sure if that is true but it is a very tough exam. When I passed it, luckily first try, my biggest feeling was relief.........relief that I would never have to to sit taht exam again.

The exam is basically

1)Propose two scheme options for a building (or bridge or off shore structure).

2) The building will be complex enough to require that an engineer has a strong understanding of the stability of astructure. Building problems will include no bracing being allowed, large open spaces with unusally long spans, floors that must be hung from the roof etc. All sorts of tricky questions to test knowledge of structures and the candadates ability to think 'outside the box'

3) Ground conditions will often be challenging and knowing whether to use piles or conventional foundations requires careful consideration based on the geotechnical information provided.

4) The two schemes need to be different in terms of the frame arrangement and structural materials used.

5) Recommendations on which scheme is better and why must be given.

6) A letter to the client must be written dealing generally with an unforseen circumstance happening on site or a major client change.

7) 6-8 full calculations for the most relevant elements of the structure including stabilty checks etc.

8) Full scheme drawings for the building that are good enough for priced.

9) Draw up a constuction program for the building.


Doing that in 7 hours is tough. My hand was shaking for a half an hour after the exam was finished. Most engineers are capable of passing the exam with an average of 5-7 years experience. The world wide rate of only 35% of candidates passing the exam means that many engineers have to sit the exam a number of times before they pass.

 

[BAretired]

Choosing which of the eight problems to tackle is a bit daunting in the fifteen minutes prior to the exam.

BA

 

[FinnB]

BAretired

Most exam candidates describe the first 15 minutes of the exam as blind panic.

It is often said that if a candidate cannot see a question that they know how to answer very quickly they are already in trouble.

There are always a few candidates who walk out of the exam within the first hour because they cannot see a question they can answer.

There is so much information to be put down in a limited time that a candidate must be going at 100 mph from the start. That is what makes the exam difficult. Given enough time most engineers could work out how to scheme design their chosen building. The restriction of time means that the candidate has to be able to think quickly on their feet and have the experience to pretty much do the exam without looking at references too often.

It is a tough exam but every question is the same format and only the buildings change. In order to pass it is critical to learn the format and practice for it. Knowing enough theory and having enough experience then hopefully allows the candidate to understand the building and client requirements.

An experienced engineer who practices for the exam should pass. The problem is any mistake to do with the stability of the building will mean an automatic fail. When under pressure it is also easy to misinterpret the client requirements which is also a big no no. Some leading engineers have failed the exam the first time they took it so failing it is no great shame.

The reward for the passing candidate is to call himself a chartered engineer and to use the letters MIStructE after their name. I have always assumed that a chartered engineer is the equivalent of a PE in that it allows the engineer to approve and stamp compliance certificates. MIStructE is a badge of respect among structural engineers the UK and Commonwealth countries. A recent President of the IStructE was a Canadian structural engineer.

 

[BAretired]

I wonder how realistic it is to expect a candidate to complete such a huge assignment in such a short time. We don't work that fast in the real world. When designing any project such as those depicted in these exams, most engineers will mull over various aspects of the job and discuss it with others before committing themselves to a particular solution.

I also wonder about the qualifications of the Examiners. Marking a practical exam of this sort is, to some extent a matter of personal opinion, somewhat like judging a beauty contest. A candidate with sloppy design notes will be penalized because the Examiner couldn't follow his train of thought. Haste and nervousness tend to result in shaky hands, hence bad penmanship.

Nevertheless, anyone who has passed this exam deserves a huge amount of credit.

BA

 

[csd72]

BA,

Yes it is definately not a perfect system, but no exam is.

There are 2 anonymous markers that are given extensive guidance on marking the tests. There are no model answers.

It is subject to personal interpretation particularly in the part of the design brief.