<p>Hey guys, I am new to this forum and had a couple of questions. Hopefully Ken285 and Aibarr will be of assistance! </p>
<p>1) I am not taking Calc-based physics until next year. However, I have never taken a Physics class (not even high school) and am worried about my ability to survive. Will it be beneficial to me to take Algebra-based Physics first to get my feet wet and become a little more prepared? Or is that a complete waste of my time and money?</p>
<p>2) I'm attending Oregon State and they have both a Civil and Construction Engineering Management program. The CEM program is very unique and I feel it would prepare me for many different areas. However, it is mainly a "construction" degree and I feel my mobility my be limited if I follow that route. Truthfully, I am only leaning towards the Civil route because of the options available to me once I graduate. If I do eventually move into construction, what other career options are available after Project Manager? I can't seem to find any information on advancement beyond that posisiton if someone were to desire a less hectic lifestyle later in their career. </p>
<p>I am also very interested in Structural. I find it fascinating, but understand my strengths, and although I am decent at mathematics, I don't know if my aptitude in that area is high enough in order to become as good as I would need to be in that area in order to get a good job. Transportation is also an area of interest, but not as much as Structural. I literally gaze in amazement when I see a beautiful structure or bridge. I look at the connections and try to understand why they are shaped a certain way, or the reason for the choice of materials. It's all pretty amazing to me! Well, I've obviously gotten off topic! Any advice or information on your experiences would be great. </p>
<p>One last thing: I am currently doing an internship for the city. I am currently assisting the Senior Engineering Tech with her upcoming road slurry project. Will this experience make any difference when applying to an actual engineering job?</p>
<p>I've always strongly suggested getting a degree in civil engineering for the exact same reason you stated. You at least have the option of going into design if you change your mind. Three years is a long time so don't be surprised if you change your mind. </p>
<p>I'm not sure I understand your question about what options are available after project manager. At my company, you start out as a Project Engineer, then move on to Assistant PM, PM I, PM II, Senior PM, and Vice President if you're around long enough on the project management track. There's also field supervision and estimating/logistics tracks. It's not uncommon for someone to switch tracks midway through their career at my company. I don't think they get any less hectic as you go up the food chain though. </p>
<p>And yes, experience is always helpful when you're applying for a job.</p>
<p>If it is your first time taking on physics, it might be wiser to take the non-calculus based physics before getting into calculus based physics. The level of math does not necessarily make calc-based physics hader. Calculus allows you to derive basic physics concepts, but the calculus in and of itself is not difficult. What does make calc-based physics harder to some students is the level of understanding that is expected. In "regular" physics, you can memorize formulas and use it to solve problems without necessarily understanding why you use that equation or how that equation was derived. Dimensional analysis still gets you to the answer in most cases, but a higher level of understanding is required to solve the more difficult, not-so-straight forward problems.</p>
<p>I don't know if algebra based physics teaches you the same tools to solve calc based physics problems, but it should give you a decent overview of the subject matter so that you can spend less time figuring out what something is and more time understanding how to solve certain problems. Some basic tools you should work on is dimensional analysis, understanding and utilizing free body diagrams, using calculus to derive equations (for example: finding the relationship of Impulse, momentum, and Newton's 2nd Law), and vector analysis (the use of vectors adds a level of difficulty to physics, but it also makes it much easier to solve physics problems through the use of Law of Superposition).</p>
<p>If you do not want to push off taking calc-based physics at your current institution, try taking either non-calc based physics or calc-based physics (whichever one you feel best suits your needs) at a local college during the summer or at night. This could or could not be for transfer credit, but regardless it should give you a heads up so you don't get behind trying in your physics course at OSU. Another option, if you are the self study type) is to get your hands on a physics prep book (such as Barron's or an AP Physics C Prep) or the textbook you will be using next year (assuming it doesn't change), and start reading and solving the examples.</p>
<p>Don't fret too much. Physics is not impossible to learn and a lot of it seems harder than it actually is (that is until you get into upper level physics courses). Also, some of the concepts and skills you learn/use in your physics mechanics course will come in handy towards your engineering courses. Make sure to pay close attention to Moment of Inertia and get comfortable using free body diagrams.</p>
<p>Thanks for the information and tips on Physics! I will take your advice and go ahead and sign up for the algebra based first. Kind of tough adding it in my schedule, but I think it will pay off down the line. Ken- you pretty much answered my question on career tracks. What is your work environment like? Mainly outdoors? A mixture of both? I have heard that the stress level in the field can be a real killer. Would you agree? As you can see, I am trying to pick your brain!</p>
<p>I wouldn't sweat the math. I'm doing Structural Engineering and in the 6 calculus classes I'm required to take, I got C's in all except 1 of them. In physics I got B's in all 3 of them.</p>
<p>Right now I'm taking structural analysis and for the most part math is not an integral part of it. Physical understanding of a beam and how shear/moment applies is much more important. After a while you start to recognize things and the math becomes more obsolete, more of a tool that you use to calculate your final values rather than a method you depend on. In solid mechanics I was taught how to mathematically derive formulas to calculate deflection, which was difficult for me, but in this analysis class, I'm learning how to get that deflection with very little math and more intuition.</p>
<p>This is kind of brief, because it's kind of late, and I kind of have an addendum to issue Thursday...</p>
<p>
[quote]
If it is your first time taking on physics, it might be wiser to take the non-calculus based physics before getting into calculus based physics.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I dunno about that... College non-calc physics is hard, and college calc physics is hard. If you don't have to take both, and if you've taken calc, and if calc physics is required, best to get just the one set of physics-based C's on the transcript, eh? ;)</p>
<p>
[quote]
I literally gaze in amazement when I see a beautiful structure or bridge. I look at the connections and try to understand why they are shaped a certain way, or the reason for the choice of materials. It's all pretty amazing to me! Well, I've obviously gotten off topic! Any advice or information on your experiences would be great.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, sounds like you're on the right track! That desire to understand and design structures is what makes the best structural engineers, from what I've seen. You don't have to be a math genius to go into any engineering field... You just have to be diligent at it. It'll ramp up, as all math does, and you just have to be willing to tackle it. Eventually, as seesys says, the math fades out (beware, seesys... it will come back with a vengeance occasionally, particularly in grad school). As my EE PhD candidate brother pointed out today, eventually the math gets so hard that you do the math once, and let the computer take over from there... Same goes for this field.</p>
<p>Internships are great. They're good resume material. Civ companies like to see people with at least some engineering experience within civ, even if it's not in the same subdivision of civ.</p>
<p>I guess I could have been misleading you. Yes, what aibarr said is true. College level physics, whether it's calc-based or not, is hard. Like I mentioned at the end, you can self study to get a feel for the basic concepts, and just save a semester and dive into calc-based physics because there is no guarantee that you will get an A in non-calc based physics. It could be just as equally hard because it goes at a faster pace trying to cram a lot of information into one semester (I believe the course adds in some material from e/m and also some optics/waves and/or modern physics).</p>
<p>Do what you feel best suits your needs. And if you find yourself struggling, just make sure to go ask for help. There are also physics courses you can check out online such as through MIT's Open Course Ware (OCW).</p>
<p>
[quote]
What is your work environment like? Mainly outdoors? A mixture of both? I have heard that the stress level in the field can be a real killer. Would you agree?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>In terms of the physical work environment, it can really vary a lot, depending on your position. Some people work as estimators in the corporate office. Some work as superintendents; their environment varies as the project progresses. The company I work for is pretty big, so people end up specializing in certain areas. If you're a foundations/superstructure super, you'll be outside in the heat/cold a lot. If you mainly do interior fitout and interior finishes, then you'll of course be indoors most of the time. I did this on my last project, and we had heating/AC running about a month or two after I got there. Project managers' work environment can vary a lot as well. Right now, I'm working from a trailer at the bottom of an excavation. The PM's on my previous project worked from an office that they leased near the job site. So, yea, it can be pretty different, but I wouldn't go into construction if you don't want to get your hands dirty.</p>
<p>In terms of the people environment, it's good for the most part. Those who work in this industry love to play pranks and have fun. Around Christmas last year, I was working a few floors up and I hear bells and a guy yelling "ho ho ho!" I look out the window and lo and behold, I see my labor foreman dressed in a Santa suit... sitting on a chair on a dolly... being pushed all around the block by his guys... in the middle of NYC. I couldn't stop laughing! </p>
<p>Of course, there are times when people do get frustrated, and people do yell and scream and curse and everything. It happens. Everybody's being pressured to perform because there's just so much money on the line (my last building generated $2 billion in sales for the developer). People have short memories though. Today, two people can be at each other's throats for whatever reason, and tomorrow they'll be best friends.</p>
<p>I'd say the job can be stressful, but I wouldn't say it's a killer.</p>
<p>Well, Structural is the main branch of civil engineering that I am very interested in learning about, so that is my main goal. I am happy to know that I don't have to be a math wiz in order to succeed in the field. I do however understand that a strong proficiency in math and a solid understanding of physics (mainly mechanics) is required, so I will begin working to attain a strong level of understanding in both. Ken285, thanks for the info. I am glad to finally have answers to my questions from someone who's working in the field. Although I do like construction, and find some projects fascinating, I am not really into getting my hand dirty :) Estimating has always been of interest to me though, so who knows. Thanks for the relpies!</p>
<p>when you're comparing calc based physics to non calc based physics is it the same material but one has calc and one doesn't? If thats the case I'd say the non calc is easier. Do you know what kind of stuff your physic classes cover?</p>
<p>PH 211.GENERAL PHYSICS WITH CALCULUS(4).
A comprehensive introductory survey course intended primarily for students in the sciences and engineering. Topics include mechanics, wave motion, thermal physics, electromagnetism, and optics. Elementary calculus is used. Laboratory work accompanies the lectures. Lec/lab/rec. (Bacc Core Course) PREREQS: MTH 251. COREQ: MTH 252. Concurrent enrollment in a recitation section is strongly recommended. </p>
<p>PH 201.GENERAL PHYSICS(5).
Introductory survey course covering a broad spectrum of classical and modern physics with applications. Topics include dynamics, vibrations and waves, electricity and magnetism, optics, and modern physics. Laboratory and recitation sections accompany the lectures. Mathematical preparation should include college algebra and trigonometry. Lec/lab/rec. (Bacc Core Course) PREREQS: MTH 111, MTH 112. PH 201, PH 202, PH 203 must be taken in order.</p>