Thank you 1

[sendithard]

I got a 90% on my senior exam. I just wanted to thank everyone here that has helped me understand everything. You all are a great resource with all the real life knowledge you have on many part geometry.

 

[Belanger]

Congratulations!



John-Paul Belanger
Certified Sr. GD&T Professional
Geometric Learning Systems

 

[Burunduk]

sendithard,
Congratulations!
No surprise you made it, as you are always so determined to make sense of geometric tolerancing. Keep at it.

Sometimes I think of attempting this too. How was the experience of taking the test?

 

[dik]

...a well deserved BPS.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[sendithard]

Burunduk,

You and most people here could sleep thru it

Lots of datums questions, seemed like they never ended. Plenty of composite position/profile. Many virtual condition on composites calculating two vc's. Minimum distances for composite profiles pattern setups. Typical definitions and symbology that are easy. The chapters with only 6-8 questions are the easy ones so I read those more carefully(form, orientation, runout). You gotta get 50% on every chapter so I just made sure I knew those easy chapters very well in terms of language in the standard not so much understanding them bc they are easy in that regard. They had more reasoning/application/common sense questions than I thought they would have where two answers felt right, not too tough though. I finished in just over 2 hrs and took 45 minutes to walk thru any questions I marked for review, most I left alone. I'd say it is not as rigorous at all like I was expecting. That geotology downloadable exam was pretty similar to the real thing imho.

 

[greenimi]

Did they open the 2018 test or still 2009 is the latest?

 

[3DDave]

It's an interesting situation, right? Who would most likely contribute to the test but suppliers of training materials that create their own tests. Would they want the test to be difficult? Certainly not - they sell that they can train people to pass the test, the same sort of test they create for their courses. If those students who were willing to spend that much on an exam kept failing they would not get much word-of-mouth advertising supporting their business.

 

[greenimi]

I agree with 3DDave.
Most of us are getting paid by our employer.
Scott Newman and his father are their own employer hence Scott is involved in all possible committees including but certainly not limited to Y14.5.2 (certification creators and testing)

 

[SeasonLee]

Did they open the 2018 test or still 2009 is the latest?

From the contents below, we know that 2018 test is not ready yet.

Season

 

[SeasonLee]

That geotology downloadable exam was pretty similar to the real thing imho.

Would you please advise the website that we can download the exam.
Thanks

Season

 

[sendithard]

I misspoke it is gdtology.com. go to the downloads section. I think there are 5 questions or so with wrong answers.

 

[greenimi]

I think

https://geotol.com

had a paid version of GD&T preparation mocked exam.
The cost is high.
Last time was around 1.3k or so,...

 

[sendithard]

Green,

Geotol actually has a 15-20 question mini test that I've given out to some new employees to get a quick slap in the face. If I interviewed people, I'd consider using this neat little test to gauge what position I could put someone in and perhaps upfront pay offer.

https://geotol.com/resources/gdt-quizzes/

 

[sendithard]

3DDave,

I agree with what you said, but my counter would be this. I'm no where near as qualified as some of you, but #1 to take the test you have to have a goal that you want to improve your knowledge on the language and then #2 it would be odd if you didn't over study for it imho. Had I not made it a goal to take the test, I would never had read the standard front to back and deciphered every diagram in the 2009 std.

So in my instance, while I felt the test was on the easy side, it did it's job for me...forced me to read the standard and prepare for something really tough. Also, how tough can you really make the test? Do you toughen it up with math or with recalling language/definitions in the standard? I'm the type that the math and composite tolerance stuff is like 2+2, but knowing what tolerance applies to a finished knurling operation is nothing I will ever encounter, but was on the exam.

I feel the exam will pass someone that has read the standard at least once with care and understand the math behind calculating all the controls presented, and I think it will fail someone that knows only one of those areas.

 

[3DDave]

There is a benefit to that, but the majority I expect are looking for clout; to be able to make the "I am a certified expert" claim. Some I have worked with who have gotten a certificate have been unimpressive on practical application. One was already impressive without the cert - got one anyway to have clout.

 

[Burunduk]

I don't mind the clout GDTPs get, or the money made by Geotol or any other companies run by committee members, as long those things have a positive impact on product definition practices worldwide. Whatever motivates people to get better at geometric tolerancing is welcome. I've seen enough terrible results of the lack of such motivation.

 

[3DDave]

The money to be made is why the standard is so difficult. If it was easy, classes and books would not be sold, or the cost would be far lower. This has a negative "impact" as does a weakened test.

It doesn't motivate everyone to improve. It gives many licence to use their own interpretations.

For example - on the pawl key test, there are two datum features defined with (M) but referenced without it. Are those features mated with parts that are fixed size as (M) suggests or mated with expanding parts as the symbol omission suggests?

Why is the quiz like that? If it wasn't there are questions that become very difficult to calculate. Does passing that quiz indicate the person understands this is a contradiction? Did the creator of the test understand that or are they passing along a practice the learned without understand it?

My recent post seems to support this - I created an interactive demonstration that showed the way projected tolerances worked - no comments. Imagine if anyone could check their understanding without involving an expensive instructor or spending endless hours studying to tease out what is hidden by jargon? People with clout do. They understand exactly what that would mean.