evolDiesel
Mechanical
thread559-178434
Hey guys,
I stumbled on the old thread above, noticed it was from 3 years ago so I wanted to bump and update as I just took the CSWP. I would suggest reading this if you are interested in the CSWP and haven't attempted it yet.
I've attached the CSWP practice exam, created by SolidWorks. There are some important things to know about this practice exam and its relationship to the real exam.
The real exam is broken out into 3 segments:
CSWP -
1. Part modeling (90min)
2. Configs (40min)
3. Assemblies (80min)
Tip 1 - Practice Exam only covers part modeling:
The practice exam only covers segment 1. Yes, that's it. It's doesn't touch segment 2 or 3.
Tip 2 - Practice Exam is short:
The practice exam is [at best] 2/3 the size of the real segment 1. The real segment 1 is 90 minutes. If you're doing the math you've realized that you will be wasting your money unless you can rip through the practice exam in 60 minutes.
Tip 3 - Mass properties:
You will be tested on data found in the mass properties. It's important to be very familiar with accessing mass properties and interpreting them. The test is clever. Usually the first question is multiple choice and it's exactly what the answer is. So, you should not answer future questions until you have the exact answer of the first question. If you don't have the exact answer of the first question - you will most likely fail the following questions. This is crucial as there is no "partial credit" and the exam itself is a coarse one, with few questions and little room for error.
Tip 4 - It's an exam:
It's a real exam. It is timed. And there is no partial credit. You have to be precise in your work and entering you answers. You should scan through all the questions immediately and determine how much time you have to spend on each one. Look at the summary. Determine the point value of each question. Realize that you must get 75% or higher to pass. When I took the CSWP I want to say segment 1 only had 6 questions. You can get away with one wrong answer, but you won't get away with 2. In other words - you should also consider the precision of your answers when you took the practice exam. Were you perfect? Why not? Figure it out and correct the mistake before taking the real exam – you’ll be glad you did.
Tip 5 - You failed despite all my awesome tips:
The real exam runs on a client. The client is well built. You can take each of the 3 segments independently and in any order you want. Each costs $33 for a total of $99. If you fail a segment you can re purchase it for $33 and retake that segment no more than 14 days following the failure. During those 14 days you can take the other segments.
Tip 6 - Purchasing:
You can get a free test from you VAR, SW World (I think), events and user groups sometimes have codes, and you can even dig around online and find some free coupons. In other words - money shouldn't be the hold up. Besides... even if you do have to shell out the cash it's only $99 - assuming you pass all 3 segments on your first attempt.
Here's how my CSWP went:
Segments 1 - Failed: Got 2 wrong.
Segment 2 - Passed: Got 1 wrong which was 87%.. one away from failing!
Segment 3 - Passed: 100% & finished with 10 minutes remaining.
Segment 1 really got me. I didn't time myself on the practice exam and I'm sure my leisurely pace killed me on the real thing. Especially when I saw the actual segment 1 was built like 2 practice exams. I was scrambling, which made me sloppy, and with the margin of error as tight as shown above, I didn't stand a chance. After I failed segment 1, I assessed the remaining 2 segments, read up on the content I wasn't familiar with (collision detection, creating origins) and banged them out while waiting for my 14 days to pass until I could retake segment 1.
Final thoughts:
The community is touting this exam as well rounded and a true litmus test of a SW "pro". I don't know if I can go along with that. The CSWP is a narrow exam. It fails to capture even a mere fraction of the skills taught in the basic part modeling and assembly classes. For example, I never needed to do a draft, revolve, loft, wrap, pattern (seriously? Yes.) or any drafting at all. I was amazed at how little knowledge was required at times and how repetitive it could be. I would say it's better than nothing, and it's not bad, but knowing that a candidate possessed such a certification would not affect my decision to recommend or hire them. I would say that you could probably rely on only one assumption and that is that the certified does not require basic training, however even that is suspect. If the certified passed the exam 10 years ago is he still a fluent user now? Moreover, the certified might not have any idea how to apply the more sophisticated featuring as the exam doesn’t cover it. Once again, patterns?! Really? How can that not be tested? And drafting? Not a single shred was tested yet the “SolidWorks Drawings” is a recommended training course for the CSWP. Lastly, and most importantly, the certified is not tested in resiliency. I’m talking about the errors, glitches, crashes, fubar, red lights, and philosophies that either make or break you. This is what makes a sophisticated, productive cad jockey versus a crusty old whiner (we all know both). This test does nothing to discern between these 2 people. The testing runs flawlessly and the toolset required is minimal.
Passing this test tells you something about the individual. It has value. Sure… but I can’t say that this particular certification is indicative of a “professional”. It tells me they were serious enough to take it in the first place. Maybe that is where the value lies.
Jack Lapham
Engr Sys Admin
Dell M6400 Covet (24 Season 8, Ep 22)
Intel Core 2 Duo T9800, 2.93GHz, 1066MHZ 6M L2 Cache
8.0GB, DDR3-1066 SDRAM, 2 DIMM
1Gb nVIDIA Quadro FX 3700M (8.17.12.5896)
W7x64 | sw-01: 55.92
SolidWorks x64sp4 in PDMWxE
Hey guys,
I stumbled on the old thread above, noticed it was from 3 years ago so I wanted to bump and update as I just took the CSWP. I would suggest reading this if you are interested in the CSWP and haven't attempted it yet.
I've attached the CSWP practice exam, created by SolidWorks. There are some important things to know about this practice exam and its relationship to the real exam.
The real exam is broken out into 3 segments:
CSWP -
1. Part modeling (90min)
2. Configs (40min)
3. Assemblies (80min)
Tip 1 - Practice Exam only covers part modeling:
The practice exam only covers segment 1. Yes, that's it. It's doesn't touch segment 2 or 3.
Tip 2 - Practice Exam is short:
The practice exam is [at best] 2/3 the size of the real segment 1. The real segment 1 is 90 minutes. If you're doing the math you've realized that you will be wasting your money unless you can rip through the practice exam in 60 minutes.
Tip 3 - Mass properties:
You will be tested on data found in the mass properties. It's important to be very familiar with accessing mass properties and interpreting them. The test is clever. Usually the first question is multiple choice and it's exactly what the answer is. So, you should not answer future questions until you have the exact answer of the first question. If you don't have the exact answer of the first question - you will most likely fail the following questions. This is crucial as there is no "partial credit" and the exam itself is a coarse one, with few questions and little room for error.
Tip 4 - It's an exam:
It's a real exam. It is timed. And there is no partial credit. You have to be precise in your work and entering you answers. You should scan through all the questions immediately and determine how much time you have to spend on each one. Look at the summary. Determine the point value of each question. Realize that you must get 75% or higher to pass. When I took the CSWP I want to say segment 1 only had 6 questions. You can get away with one wrong answer, but you won't get away with 2. In other words - you should also consider the precision of your answers when you took the practice exam. Were you perfect? Why not? Figure it out and correct the mistake before taking the real exam – you’ll be glad you did.
Tip 5 - You failed despite all my awesome tips:
The real exam runs on a client. The client is well built. You can take each of the 3 segments independently and in any order you want. Each costs $33 for a total of $99. If you fail a segment you can re purchase it for $33 and retake that segment no more than 14 days following the failure. During those 14 days you can take the other segments.
Tip 6 - Purchasing:
You can get a free test from you VAR, SW World (I think), events and user groups sometimes have codes, and you can even dig around online and find some free coupons. In other words - money shouldn't be the hold up. Besides... even if you do have to shell out the cash it's only $99 - assuming you pass all 3 segments on your first attempt.
Here's how my CSWP went:
Segments 1 - Failed: Got 2 wrong.
Segment 2 - Passed: Got 1 wrong which was 87%.. one away from failing!
Segment 3 - Passed: 100% & finished with 10 minutes remaining.
Segment 1 really got me. I didn't time myself on the practice exam and I'm sure my leisurely pace killed me on the real thing. Especially when I saw the actual segment 1 was built like 2 practice exams. I was scrambling, which made me sloppy, and with the margin of error as tight as shown above, I didn't stand a chance. After I failed segment 1, I assessed the remaining 2 segments, read up on the content I wasn't familiar with (collision detection, creating origins) and banged them out while waiting for my 14 days to pass until I could retake segment 1.
Final thoughts:
The community is touting this exam as well rounded and a true litmus test of a SW "pro". I don't know if I can go along with that. The CSWP is a narrow exam. It fails to capture even a mere fraction of the skills taught in the basic part modeling and assembly classes. For example, I never needed to do a draft, revolve, loft, wrap, pattern (seriously? Yes.) or any drafting at all. I was amazed at how little knowledge was required at times and how repetitive it could be. I would say it's better than nothing, and it's not bad, but knowing that a candidate possessed such a certification would not affect my decision to recommend or hire them. I would say that you could probably rely on only one assumption and that is that the certified does not require basic training, however even that is suspect. If the certified passed the exam 10 years ago is he still a fluent user now? Moreover, the certified might not have any idea how to apply the more sophisticated featuring as the exam doesn’t cover it. Once again, patterns?! Really? How can that not be tested? And drafting? Not a single shred was tested yet the “SolidWorks Drawings” is a recommended training course for the CSWP. Lastly, and most importantly, the certified is not tested in resiliency. I’m talking about the errors, glitches, crashes, fubar, red lights, and philosophies that either make or break you. This is what makes a sophisticated, productive cad jockey versus a crusty old whiner (we all know both). This test does nothing to discern between these 2 people. The testing runs flawlessly and the toolset required is minimal.
Passing this test tells you something about the individual. It has value. Sure… but I can’t say that this particular certification is indicative of a “professional”. It tells me they were serious enough to take it in the first place. Maybe that is where the value lies.
Jack Lapham
Engr Sys Admin
Dell M6400 Covet (24 Season 8, Ep 22)
Intel Core 2 Duo T9800, 2.93GHz, 1066MHZ 6M L2 Cache
8.0GB, DDR3-1066 SDRAM, 2 DIMM
1Gb nVIDIA Quadro FX 3700M (8.17.12.5896)
W7x64 | sw-01: 55.92
SolidWorks x64sp4 in PDMWxE
![[pc2]](/data/assets/smilies/pc2.gif "[pc2] [pc2]")
![[poke]](/data/assets/smilies/poke.gif "[poke] [poke]")
![[glasses]](/data/assets/smilies/glasses.gif "[glasses] [glasses]")
![[thumbsup2]](/data/assets/smilies/thumbsup2.gif "[thumbsup2] [thumbsup2]")
