Structural II 10

[civilstructuralNDE]

I am waiting for the Structural I PE exam result taken this April, 2007.
I would like to know about the Structural II. What would be the benefit if I had structural II additionally?

Can I get more opportunity to get a job or a higher salary?

Thank you in advance.

 

[swivel63]

what's wrong with putting XXX, PE, SE after your name. it is your credentials afterall.

 

[Boiler8019]

My vote is to take the STR II.

StructuralEIT. Since you have 4 years I'd recommend you start making crib sheets and tabbing your codes/text now as problems come up at work. It should include design procedures and all the notes you need to guide you through the design processes. The exam has been becoming more difficult every year, so try not to let anyone who hasnt taken it in the past three years tell you how simple it was. The subject matter can be pretty simple, but it's the time that will kill you if you have to review anything during the test. True, if you do design work every day you'll have an advantage, but the exam subject matter is so wide I dont see how anyone could be at a firm who designs it all, and on a daily basis. I dont know of anyone who is proficent at both bridge and building design.

 

[COEngineeer]

swivel, so I have to take structural 1 even if I have a civil PE license? so 2 more exams for me?

swivel, I would put PE or SE after my name but not EIT. I just feel like EIT is not really something I am proud of lol. Although I do know some people who had to take EIT 3X and still didnt pass it. OK thanks for the explaination guys. I will look into Structural 1 and 2.

BTW. How many of you engineers drive a train? lol

 

[Lion06]

Boiler-
I don't have 4 years experience yet, I only have 1. However, I am already anxiously awaiting the date.

 

[Boiler8019]

I know, that's what i'm saying, you should be preparing in the upcoming YEARS to take this exam....not a cram session in which you'll forget everything a few months after the exam.

 

[271828]

Boiler8019, you and I see this completely oppositely. Perhaps different things work for different people.

If I acquire good general knowledge along the way, then cram near the end, that's optimum for me. I look at the cramming more like "getting in shape for a test" than acquiring knowledge.

If I'm going to create crib sheets, I'll do it as a last second review, a final pounding of the details into my skull. I think this is most of the benefit of having crib sheets anyway, at least for me.
Anyway, that's best for me.

For the Strl I, I started studying 4 months in advance, with my best subjects first. I figured that knowledge would be dulled the slowest. I didn't even make crib sheets, but it would've been a good idea. I didn't study bridges at all--just surrendered those points and used the extra time. That worked out well, but it was a little hair-raising to just drop those points.

I didn't study at all for the Strl II, which was probably smart. I never would've covered the crazy stuff they put on there, LOL. Either have seen it before and pass, or dead meat, LOL.

 

[swivel63]

yea, you'll have to take the S-1 and S-2 to become an SE i think. at least in illinois. according to them, a civil PE CANNOT offer SE services and vice versa.

i would put both PE, and SE behind my name if i could...because of the illinois rule alone.

i was blessed in a sense that i had done damn near most of the stuff on the S-1 exam (except for bridges) while i was coming up as a young engineer.

i studied about 4-5 month in advance for the S-1 and probably had a total of about 150 to 200 hours total. i might have gone a little overboard, but i usually spent about 4 or 5 days a week studying at about 2 hour a session (a couple problems). my social life took a serious hit for this exam, but it sure was worth it. i didn't make any special sheets either, just took the codes i needed and the kaplan books.

i'm still looking for good study guides outside of the same kaplan and NCEES books for the S-2.

 

[swivel63]

oh yea, EI would NEVER go behind anything. that's like putting BSCE or even MSCE behind your name. and that's a little random to me.

 

[UABGrad]

My state doesn't require the SEII, but I took it anyway just to cover myself and I have used it. I took the SEI and SEII in my late 30's and I sure as heck didn't want to have to take it after my brain gelled much more. I have since worked on projects in Nevada, Arizona and Illinois that required an SE.

IMO, the SEI was easier than the CE, but the SEII is the beast. It took me 3 times to pass the afternoon section. Back when I took it in the late 90's, it wasn't that expensive, but I think now it cost >$500.

A good source to research different state requirements is NCEES.org. They even have a survey there with responses from the state PE boards on tons of different issues (one being SE requirements and another the testing fees). They also have a list of links to all of the states board's.

http://www.ncees.org/licensure/licensing_requirements_2005/

 

[271828]

UABGrad typed: "...but the SEII is the beast. It took me 3 times to pass the afternoon section."

LOL, sounds like my story.

The first time I took the Strl II, the afternoon was a big shell bldg with an interior mezzanine that didn't make it to the endwalls. It was supported off a 4 of the sidewall cols. Come up with mezz diaphragm shears & chord forces. Design the mezz diaphragm connections to the sidewalls. Design the sidewall columns (bm-cols), roof diaphragm, endwall x-braces, etc.

I wasn't very good at going through all those different seismic force levels for diaphragms, connectors, etc. and didn't have a prayer of learning it on the fly.

Second try I got something I knew how to do and finished the afternoon part an hour early.

That's why I say it's not worth it to study for the Strl II. There's no way to guess what craziness they might put on there.

 

[COEngineeer]

271828, I am confident I can pass struct. I if I study enough but Structural II??? Hmmm, I feel like I need to work for a different company. I think just designing residential houses and light commercial buildings will not prepare me to pass STRL II. Anyone else thinks the same way? Or shall I just not worry about STRL I&II and just design houses for the rest of my life :-( ?

 

[271828]

COEngineer, I think you can take the same approach that I (and UABGrad probably) took. Keep taking it until you get something similar to what you've done before.

I heard of one test that had a bunch of CMU and wood diaphragm, collectors, etc. I'd guess that you would fly through that.

The test I passed just had some easy seismic and a bunch of detailed concrete beam design. I walked into the second try ready for my butt-kicking and was like "you serious?!" LOL.

Like I typed, it's like a crapshoot.

Ironically, I know a few people who work on the same type of huge projects over and over again, always using composite steel and moment frames. No wood, CMU, etc., so they could get smacked upside the head very easily too, LOL. I think we all could.

 

[swivel63]

saying keep taking it is easy until you have to pay up that 500/test fee, LOL.

naw, all jokes aside.....i guess it passing the exam really does have no bearing on how good an engineer you are.

 

[271828]

swivel, I agree. It's more a matter of ability to take punishment, lol.

 

[271828]

Another thing, swivel and coengineer, it might be different now. I think I took the Strl II in 2002.

I just looked on the ncees website and the Strl II had a higher pass rate than the Strl I. Gotta keep in mind, though, that only folks who took the Strl I were taking teh Strl II, so the numbers are a little skewed.

http://www.ncees.org/exams/pass_rates/

Maybe they fired the rogue(s) who was writing the tests back then. I seem to remember the pass rate being something totally ridiculous, like 15% back then, but I'm not sure.

 

[COEngineeer]

Someone told me that Civil PE can take Structural II without taking Structural I. But you have to pay a special proctor fee (someone actually sit right next to you to make sure you are not cheating). Is that right? I think it is a pretty riliable source. He called the ncees office.

 

[271828]

No clue. Sounds good to me, though.

I assume he'd know if he called the ncees office.

 

[JAE]

You may be able to take the SE II without the SE I but I can guarantee you that some states (Illinois in particular) will not allow you to get licensed without the SE I)

 

[swivel63]

i think california might let you do that, i didn't see anything about requiring anyone to take the S-1.

civil, S-2, then S-3.

 

[sundale]

The "political winds" of the licensure boards are blowing towards the requirements of the NCEES "Model Law Structural Engineer": 16 hours of structural exams. The current NCEES newsletter has an excellent article about the Byzantine state to state structural licensure requirements. Blessedly, NCEES is trying to eliminate separate SEI and SEII tests and come up with ONE 16 hour two day test for structural licensure that most states will accept. I don't see CA, WA or OR waiving a SEIII though.

This is a GOOD thing for the profession of structural engineering and will serve to distinguish a true "structural" engineer from some of the "civil" engineer types who design a beam on Monday, a grading and drainage plan on Tuesday, a wastewater design on Wednesday, etc... I don't mean to denigrate any PE's with this statement because I have worked with some outstanding structural PE's in my career. There are, however, folks who stretch the "civil" discipline too far (beyond their knowledge of current codes) I think.

Take the SEI and SEII. Demonstrating your ability to pass these tests will likely become the minimum structural licensure bar in the near future.