How did the PE Mech exam go? 1

[Tobalcane]

I will be taking the PE Mech this Oct. Can you give me some insight to the exam? Was it like the sample exam? For the guys who took the PE Mech, was the PPI MERM enough for the exam, if not what other books were needed? How did the morning section go, were they all separate questions? Was the exam in standard or SI? Any hind sight thoughts that you can share?

Thank you for your time and effort.

Tobalcane

 

[plasgears]

The best prep is to attend a class with teams and homework. This made the difference with me. The best part if it was that this class of experienced engineers brought different specialties. Everyone had their own short cuts. It removed the mystery and esoteric fog from engineering problems.

I did an HVAC mixture problem on the board using the psychrometric chart. This problem took a few seconds, and the class responded, "is that all there is to it?" This was one of the professional questions, which could have taken an hour to solve.

Attend a class, and multiply your chances to pass the PE.

 

[ludikris]

Tobalcane;

I sat for the P.E exam last April and prepared for it with the Lindeburgs M.E. Reference Manual and one other book of sample problems.

Personally, I thought the morning session was quite easy and during lunch was filled with quite a sense of hubris. The afternoon session provided a much more challenging set of problems and I wouldn't have called it "easy" by any means. Some were hard because I'd chosen to skip studying of certain areas, and others were complicated just based on their complexity.

I thought the exam was a good basis for testing a wide range of engineering concepts from the basic to the almost obscure. Whether you chose a study group, or to go it alone, my advice is practice, practice, practice.

Erik

 

[Tobalcane]

Plasgears;
I agree with you. I love to take a class, but due to family and work, it is tough. I passed the EIT just studying on my own so I figured that I'll do the same for the PE.

Ludikris (erik);
Was the exam in US standard or SI?

Thanks
Tobalcane

 

[swertel]

Just don't take a suitcase full of references. You do not have that much time to look information up and it is doubtfull that you have that many references memorized that you can just flip to the page. Then again, you may.

I brought 6 references, 3 to use, 3 just in case. I did end up with enough time to use 1 of my just in case references and it did help me solve 1 problem.

I took the machine design specialty. I found the morning section to be a bit tougher because I didn't take a class and forgot how to best utilize a psychrometric chart. The afternoon section, more specialized in what i do day-to-day, was a breeze. But, like everyone how else feels, I may see them again in October, too.

--Scott

For some pleasure reading, try FAQ731-376

 

[Tobalcane]

Swertel;
Were there many HAVC/thermal problems in the morning section?

 

[ludikris]

As I recall it was mostly in English, if not 100%. I know that I practiced many problems with both units of measure, just to be on the safe site.

With six months to study and depending on your state of readiness at this point, I would set aside ~4-6 hours per week to work on your P.E. I'd suggest multiple sessions throughout the week so you don't get stale. I had the best luck with working problems from the book using the reference books I knew that I was going to take. All said, I had a standard backpack of books and I think I carried one of the bigger references. I used perhaps 3 books. The Lindeburg ME Reference, a Cameron's Hydralic Data book and Marks Std Handbook were what I spent the vast majority of my time in.

IMHO, you are wasting time (and energy lugging in anything more than your top 10 references. You'll do much better if you know how to use a few reference rather than bring in everything you think you might need.

E-

 

[monkeydog]

Tobalcane,
I took the test in October (passed) and used the Passing Zone web site. They use Lindburg's reference and may work best for you if you cannot take a traditional refresher class. What worked best for me on the passing zone was the structured lesson plan (forced me to review one segment at a time). I would start reviewing now.

 

[Tobalcane]

Monkeydog;
Ive been thinking about joing the Passing Zone. I have actually started studying 6 months ago. Im planing to take the week off befor the exam to pull it all together.

Did you take the Mechanical Design section for the afternoon? If so, any hindsight you can share with me?

Thanks
Tobalcane

 

[bubb375]

Tobalcane-

The MERM is perhaps the best reference you can have. The opening section of the book explains how the exam works (its all English units). I would suggest working each chapter over a long period of time. I set aside about three days per chapter, of course consolidating the first few and last few.

I took a review course at a local college, and the only thing I benefited from is the structure of the course. It simply kept me focused on studying. If you can't afford to do that, then definately join a group like the passing zone.

I took the sample exam one week before the test. The exam is similar, but the sample exam seemed easier to me. I set up the same environment as the actual exam (4 hours per section, 30 minutes for lunch, only enough references to fit in one milk-carton, my own room at a local library, etc.) I scored my sample exam and was able to focus on a few areas I was lacking in over the next week. I didn't study the day before the exam, and actually spent it sightseeing and having a nice night on the town with my wife.

Those are my suggestions, good luck and start studing!

Brian

 

[plasgears]

Tobalcane,

In my generation we trained parallel in both systems in college, but in actual practice it was mostly the british system. The exam was in both systems, as I recall.

Incidentally, the exam was brought down from the state capital to the plant because there were about 300 applicants. The plant manager had made a casual reference to the benefits of the PE, and practically the whole plant applied. We had 6 study groups in the plant after hours. The facility types were mostly PE, and they taught the classes. It was a mind expanding experience. (GE, Evendale, OH, 1973).

I recommend it to all graduate engineers. It has given me confidence to make ballpark and detail calculations when others were giving opinions.

 

[Tobalcane]

Plasgear,
When I was in college, we only used SI. In my opinion SI is better than standard. For some reason, I better understood the subjects. But, when I started at my first job, it was havoc. I could not tell the difference between Newton to pound force and Kilograms to pound force or was that pound mass. Nine years later, now I’m used to standard, I’m just hopping that the exam will be in standard.

Tobalcane

 

[imagitec]

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= "

http://ppi2pass.com/catalog/servlet/MyPpi_pg_Errata-Errata.html"

>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

http://www.livejournal.com/users/robcampbell

 

[imagitec]

I guess underlining and hyperlinks don't work.

Rob Campbell

http://www.livejournal.com/users/robcampbell

 

[Tobalcane]

Rob Campbell

Wow Rob, thanks for the your response. I too am using the P&P to study for subjects that I will probably see on the breadth and then use MERM for the depth (Machine Design). But P&P does have a lot of misprints so some time I feel that I cannot trust some of the solutions or tables. MERM is overwhelming to try to study out of; it’s like trying to study for a history exam using an encyclopedia. Since MERM is set up as a reference manual and not as a review book like P&P, it gets a little frustrating when doing the practice problems and the solutions are from left field. I also purchased PPI’s mostly used equation book did you use this book?

Here at work I do a lot of static, dynamic, and heat transfer analysis. So the thermal, HVAC, and fluids are a little rusty. I’m making it an effort to do more practice problems in these subjects.

Rob, what was your choice for depth? If so, were they more like P&P or MERM practice problems? Also, I see you did not list the solution manuals as one of the books you brought in, were you not allowed to bring them in?

Thank you for your thoughts
Tobalcane

 

[Tobalcane]

Rob,

I just clicked your web site and found that you are here in Massachusetts. I am also here in Massachusetts. I'v read some where that you were not allowed to bring in any books with pencil markings in them, not even using pencil to underline words. Did you see any enforcement of this rule?

Tobalcane

 

[zdas04]

I took the test a couple of years ago (all U.S. units), and in studying I found Potter much worse than worthless. There are so many mistakes in it that you never know what to trust. 6 weeks into my study, I stopped using it and starting working through MERM. If anyone wants to buy a copy of Potter CHEEP you can have it for the cost of postage.

In Colorado there was no attempt to enforce the "no pencil marks" rule (if there is such a rule). All of my references had extensive marginal comments and many tabs. I did Fluids in the afternoon and the only steam tables I used were in Cameron. I did the whole test out of MERM, Crane 410, Cameron, and Marks. Never opened the other 3 references I lugged in.

It took every bit of 12 weeks to get results back even in these new days of all multiple choice.

David

 

[monkeydog]

Tobalcane,

When I took the exam last October I did take the machine design for the afternoon portion of the exam. All units were in standard units. The books I used most were the MERM, Machinery Handbook, and Marks in that order, but almost exclusivey the MERM. I had several other books that acted more as a security blanket then anything else. If I had spent more time on the dynamics portion during my study I would have been more confident coming out of the exam. It is good that you have been studying already, you need to keep it up. If you have established a regular pattern for your studies, then you are ahead of the game.

Besides the books, batteries etc, I took bottled water, 2 rolls to Life Savers (helped me stay focused - I don't know why), a cushion to set on the hard chair.

Very little has to do with luck.

Monkeydog

 

[imagitec]

Tobalcane,

I'm from southern New Hampshrie and have worked mostly in Mass, but I now live in Vermont and took the exam there.
Vermont's exam was administered by ELS. I don't know if my comments apply to all jurisdictions.

Notes and annotations in references are fine. Even handwritten notes, so long as they're in a binder, are fine. Writing on anything but the exam booklet _during_ the exam is forbidden. The concern is that people could copy and distribute or discuss the questions.

To answer another of your questions, I used my own notes instead of PPI's equation book. The reviews on Amazon were negative. I did some of my notes in MathCAD, which I'd be happy to share as PDFs or the original MathCAD files. You get what you pay for, however.



Rob Campbell

http://www.livejournal.com/users/robcampbell

 

[imagitec]

David wrote: "I took the test a couple of years ago (all U.S. units), and in studying I found Potter much worse than worthless. There are so many mistakes in it that you never know what to trust. 6 weeks into my study, I stopped using it and starting working through MERM."

I can't argue with that. Most of the errors I found and corrected were in vibrations, since that's the subject I used it most for. I would not surprised to learn that negative publicity from this book sank Great Lakes Press.

While we're on the subject of P&P, I'll list another of its annoyances. Unlike MERM, P&P doesn't aspire to be an all-encompassing reference manual that you'll use the rest of your career. It bills itself as a PE review, and that focus is its strength. But then there is this gem from the fluid mechanics chapter:

"We have used metric (SI) units only since those are the units most often used. Make sure you are familiar with SI units. We have given some quantities in both sets of units since this book is also often used as a general referece."

Huh? But the PE exam only uses English units. At least the properties of water are given in SI and English units, though units of slugs/ft^3 for density are inconvenient. (A side note: memorize or write down the density of water in a convenient location.)

This continues in the vibrations chapters, which omits g.c from pertinent equations. I can deduce where it belongs from the units, but I don't want to be doing that during the exam. Annotate your reference manual with g.c in the correct locations.

These details may have bothered me less if I used English units regularly, but I've worked in the metric system for the past four years. g.c is not intuitive for me.

It's unfortunate that P&P was done as poorly as it was, because there is a need (opportunity) for a book focused on preparing for the PE.

Rob Campbell

http://www.livejournal.com/users/robcampbell