SE Lateral Exam 1

[JoshH726]

Without discussing specifics of the exam itself, will anyone share thoughts about why the lateral portion of the SE exam seems so much more difficult than the gravity portion? Postings I've seen hear and elsewhere point to a lot of people pass the gravity, but not the lateral portion. Some take the gravity and lateral at different times, but with the same results. I'm sitting for both gravity and lateral in April for the first time. I have all the code references NCEES requires, and the sample/practice tests from NCEES and PPI. Is it just that so much more of the code provisions are focused on lateral concepts? Any thoughts or comments are appreciated. Thanks.

 

[KootK]

I think that we're generally just less good at lateral design. Rigorous lateral design concepts and code provisions are recent developments in the world of civil engineering where change is glacially paced. Gravity load design is much more intuitive for many of us and the consequences of messing it up are much more immediate.

I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.

 

[TehMightyEngineer]

I actually think both tests were equally hard. The statistics of it are that this is the second test taken and most people take these back to back. Thus, poorer performance overall. I also attribute this to study schedules. People start their studying with vertical and end with lateral. Finally, what KootK said; it's a harder concept and something we run into less often in engineering.

Overall I felt the problems were actually easier for lateral in the sense that there is much less they can test you on in the lateral exam. It was much easier to focus my studying. That said, it still took me two tries to pass the exam (but I only missed it by about one afternoon problem).

Maine Professional and Structural Engineer.

http://www.fepc.us

(Just passed the 16-hour SE exam, woohoo!)

 

[Lion06]

I agree with TehMightyEngineer. My take is this. Most engineers deal with all of the gravity topics daily (or pretty close to it). While most engineers taking the exam deal with lateral loading regularly, most do NOT regularly deal with the specific seismic requirements that live on the exam.

I also believe that the only way to get through the afternoon portion of the lateral exam is to have worked examples for the seismic design and detailing questions. I just don't think that it's realistic to answer the questions fully, completely, accurately, showing all calculations and code references in the time allotted without the worked example(s). There are too many provisions to do so without a worked example to guide your answer.

 

[TehMightyEngineer]

I also believe that the only way to get through the afternoon portion of the lateral exam is to have worked examples for the seismic design and detailing questions. I just don't think that it's realistic to answer the questions fully, completely, accurately, showing all calculations and code references in the time allotted without the worked example(s). There are too many provisions to do so without a worked example to guide your answer.

^THIS!!!^

I didn't pass lateral the first time due to an incomplete question. Second time around I made a flow-chart for much of the concrete questions I expected, such as seismic design of shear walls for example. Used it on the exam and I credit these flow charts with finishing ahead of time (while my 2 fellow test takers did not finish on time). The steel seismic design manual is very complete and you can likely use it as a reference for all the steps required. Wood and masonry lateral is simple enough for exam purposes.

Maine Professional and Structural Engineer.

http://www.fepc.us

(Just passed the 16-hour SE exam, woohoo!)

 

[JoshH726]

Yes, I did not think of making my own flowchart, that is very helpful. If I may ask, how did you setup your responses to the afternoon essay questions? Most of the time I spend doing hand calcs, I just use scratch paper so I can doodle, number crunch, and then move to a finished, "clean" copy once I've collected my thoughts. But I don't imagine I'll have the luxury of time.

 

[TehMightyEngineer]

You will not have the luxury of time at all! For multiple choice questions I just scribbled on the actual question booklet with my doodles and calculations. Essay sections are much harder, you can't afford to copy calculations as you'll barely have enough time to physically write them down.

Here's an ASCE 7 seismic flowchart I made for the exam (and also this engineer's blog):

http://structuralengineerhq.com/blog/2014/09/02/three-seismic-design-requirements-flowcharts/

Maine Professional and Structural Engineer.

http://www.fepc.us

(Just passed the 16-hour SE exam, woohoo!)

 

[BS2]

I passed the SE exam on my first attempt (back to back days) in April of 2014. I did not think the lateral test was that much more difficult than the gravity test. However, I do have a master's degree and took a high seismic design course. As others have said, generally, engineers are less familiar with lateral topics. With my background I was able to work through problems and systems I had never seen before.

The biggest piece of advice I can give to you is this: practice the basics until your hands cramp and then some - every day! Calculating seismic coefficients and distributing lateral forces in rigid diaphragms should become second nature to you. Hang in there... preparing for the test was an excellent exercise and greatly helped me develop as an engineer.

 

[Archie264]

TME,

That was very generous of you. Thank you.

 

[MrHershey]

My take is lateral isn't covered as much in school (especially undergrad). While gravity began to be covered from day one in your steel/concrete classes, I don't believe there's a whole lot of the lateral analysis or provisions within ASCE 7/IBC that are covered extensively in school. Maybe a class or two, but you're not hammered with it class after class like gravity is. First month of first steel/concrete class, you're designing beams or columns. You'll get up to 2 or maybe even 3 before you're doing shear walls/braced frames/moment frames, if you even do that at all. Usually the ins and outs of the different systems are more special topics presentations than items that significant classroom time is spent on. Analysis provisions might get covered in a studio class, an earthquake engineering class, or even a special topics class. But it wasn't something for me that was present throughout virtually every structural engineering course like gravity design was.

On top of that, at least in my experience, lateral (especially analysis) is more of a global item than a local item. Most young engineers aren't being handed whole projects (which is understandable, but unfortunate) that they're working on from start to finish and can really get a strong handle and feel for lateral behavior. They'll get parceled off items perhaps, but running the whole design from a lateral standpoint is usually reserved for engineers that are a little bit older it seems. Perhaps after a couple years they'll get to start running the show from an analysis standpoint, but by that time you've got half the experience in lateral as you do in gravity if you're taking the exam as early as you can. Some firms/companies are better than others at pressing the issue from a young age.

I don't think it's necessarily 'harder'. I think we just don't focus on it as much in the education and early stages of career that most engineers will have spent the bulk of their time in before taking the exam. Which is perhaps good. Major lateral events are by their nature rather rare, seems like a structure is much more likely to be forced to withstand its design gravity demand within any given year than its lateral demand. That philosophy doesn't really help you on the exam though, you still have to pass both parts.

 

[WiSEiwish]

I actually though the vertical portion was harder. The odd thing was that I passed the vertical portion on my first try and it took me two tries to pass the lateral portion. I agree with the posters above that the lateral portion is more difficult in part due to the amount of training that we have with lateral loads compared to the topics covered in the vertical load exam.

You should look up the NCEES results. Around the same amount of people pass for both exams. For buildings it was 41% pass for vertical and 40% pass for lateral. Among repeat takers it was 24% pass for vertical and 31% pass for lateral. Stats say that vertical may be harder.

With respect to studying it does depend a lot on who you are and how you learn. I struggled the first time with concrete and when studying I essentially illustrated the seismic chapter in the ACI code. I also spent a large portion of my time studying ASCE 7-05 (I know it is 7-10 now). The Seismic Design Manual is a bit overrated in my opinion. I had 341-05 and 358-05 and that got me by. I did have the SDM but didn't open it.

When they say it is a 8 hour exam they really mean it is 8.00001 hours. You will most likely not have time to go back and check much.

 

[jeffandmike]

Not certain of how relevant it is today, but I took the CA SE exam back in 2004 or 2005, as soon as I was eligible for it (only five or so years after my BSCE, at the time) and passed it the first try (no MSCE required, though I eventually got that as well). I began studying about a year in advance by coming into work an hour early every day, and then having additional hours (maybe three - four) on weekends. I worked every problem I could find in review manuals and references. Working a lot of problems is key to passing.

Though it was expensive, and a great deal of time (I believe it was 13, 8-hour sessions at the time), I took the BYA Publications review course (

http://www.structuralsolutions.com/seminars.html).

I highly recommend this course, not just for the content and the instructors, but also for the networking opportunities. For example, at the time I took it, many people in there had already sat for the exam two, three, or more times. One such prior test taker informed me that I would be smart to know the CA SEAOCC Seismic Design Manuals (

http://seaoc.org/bookstore/2012-ssdm-complete-collection-volumes-1-5)

frontwards and backwards. I took their advice and was pleasantly surprised to find one of the problems on the exam was very relevant to a sample problem in the manuals.

Other decent references to consider getting (I had them and knew them well) are the Structural Engineering Reference Manual (

http://www.amazon.com/Structural-Engineering-Reference-Manual-Williams/dp/1591263719)

and 246 Solved Structural Engineering Problems (

http://www.amazon.com/246-Solved-St...s=246+solved+structural+engineering+problems;

not certain if this one would be as helpful anymore).

I would also, obviously, recommend having all of the required references, tabbing/highlighting them up like crazy, and also knowing them frontwards and backwards. I actually created a guide to all of my references so that if I encountered a problem on the exam I could find maybe several problems similar to that one, in my references, in less than ten seconds. Without going into too much detail, think of creating a guide organized by material (i.e. wood, steel, concrete, masonry, etc), type of element (i.e. beams, columns, footings, shear walls, etc.), and by reference... or something to that effect.

The other thing I think is important is attitude. Don't go into the exam, not studying, saying you're just going to audit it this time, and then pass it in the future. Don't go in saying you're going to pass half this time, and half next time. I had the attitude that I was only going to sit for it once, and I was going to pass it. Had I not passed it the first time, I think I would have been too demoralized to sit for it again. Not saying you can't be successful doing it those ways... I just think it decreases your chances.

Getting the SE is one of the smartest decisions I have made in my career. Don't psych yourself out. It's worth the time and effort required to obtain it.