Washington Electrical Admin Exam

[acrwc10]

I have taken many exams for certifications and this bit of advice is important,,,,, The exam is most likely timed, go through and answer all the questions you know and don't need to look up, skip all questions that you need to look up, on the first pass. Then go through the questions a second pass and answer the ones that you need to look up and know where the answers are, in the code book. On the third pass answer all the questions you skipped and if one seems really hard, skip it until you have answered all the questions you can. DO NOT LEAVE ANY QUESTIONS BLANK, guess if you are running out of time.
This will maximize your effectiveness and help speed you up.

 

[quantum`]

HA! I remember this now, thank you @acrwc10.

 

[quantum`]

( 1) Loads at Transformer Supply Points Only . Where all loads are connected at die transformer supply points at each end of the tie and overcurrent protection is not provided in accordance with Parts I, II, and VIII of Article 240, the ampacity of the tie shall not be less than 67 percent of the rated secondary current of the highest rated transformer supplying the secondary tie system.

Loads? At supply points?? Of a transformer??? 67 percent whada whada?

Whadda mess...

I assume they won't be asking about the fscked-up passages.

 

[quantum`]

On the Calculations (which everyone seems to fail), are there any tricks, like using mm instead of gauge?

 

[Strathead]

I have taken many exams for certifications and this bit of advice is important,,,,, The exam is most likely timed, go through and answer all the questions you know and don't need to look up, skip all questions that you need to look up, on the first pass. Then go through the questions a second pass and answer the ones that you need to look up and know where the answers are, in the code book. On the third pass answer all the questions you skipped and if one seems really hard, skip it until you have answered all the questions you can. DO NOT LEAVE ANY QUESTIONS BLANK, guess if you are running out of time.
This will maximize your effectiveness and help speed you up.

This saves me a lot of typing. Add to or emphasize. DO NOT open the code book until you have read every question like acrwc tells you above. During first reading, take scratch paper write down chapter 1 through 8 and tables and unknown. As you read each question, write the question number next to the chapter you believe it is in. On your second "pass" as defined above, start with the questions beside the chapter with the most questions. Two things this does. While looking for one answer, YOU WILL find n answer to another question. You already have a list of all the other questions in that chapter. You spend more time in the chapters that have the most answers.

Very important. DON'T change an answer unless you are 100& sure the new answer is the right one. Don't second guess.

Skip the questions that you know are going to take time to calculate. Only do those at the end, even if you KNOW you can get it right. a question that takes 1 minute to look up gest the same number of points as the one that takes 4 minutes to calculate.

Get 3x5 cards and make flash cards of each chapter and section of the table of contents. USE THEM. Add things that you will know to add, like tables 250.66, 300.5, 310.16, and code sections like 210.8 GFI's and 210.52. Really work at memorizing these.

Lastly, the studying is a lot more about finding answers than knowing answers. Readding the code book will get the big picture of things in your head and is helpful, but practicing finding answers is the way you will really learn what to do. While studying, get in the habit of finding even the question you know the answer to. So, for study material anything that has code questions with the answers is good. Tom Henry and Mike Holt both have journeymans prep books that have tones of code questions.

 

[quantum`]

Sage advice @Strathead, well taken. Collating questions by chapter should be enlightening. I'll use the ToC for quick categorizing.

Studying calculations today and am surprised to find I'd already mowed through them. But am now giving those and your tables and sections special attention. I can see why practically memorizing them makes things more efficient, although the exceptions and 'other' references complicate things. I'm expecting some flipped-over upside-down questions, like specifying a pump motor without mentioning continuous or not.

I've focused on Code and WAC+RCW because a) I can't afford the courses, and b) I am guessing that the intent of the exam is Following The Rules. Mainlining the Code seemed like my best choice. I've highlighted many key passages. My exam is this Wednesday. :^/ It doesn't help that I'm waiting to find out whether my lender will let me keep my 5 house development project, into which I've poured my whole life's savings...

A few clarifications:

• Is a "receptacle", one outlet or a standard dual? Or does it matter?
• For dwellings does 3VA/sqft include HVAC, cooking, dryers, or as I suspect is it just lighting and outlets, because: "Motors rated less than 1/8 hp and connected to a lighting circuit shall be considered part of the minimum lighting load."
• I'm guessing that the Demand Factor must be multiplied by the load of a given structure?

 

[quantum`]

Nightmare Question# 926

- Given the following stipulations:

{ huge list of sqft, small & large appliances, number of units, house lighting, HVAC, weather at the North Pole, etc}

Which method will result in a smaller service line, the standard or the optional method, taking into account all the exceptions, remote references, Demand Factor(s), Info Notes, and convoluted rules. Do not spend more than 180 seconds on this question.
a. Normal
b. Optional
c. Standard
d. None of the above
e. Two of the above

 

[Strathead]

Sage advice @Strathead, well taken. Collating questions by chapter should be enlightening. I'll use the ToC for quick categorizing.

Studying calculations today and am surprised to find I'd already mowed through them. But am now giving those and your tables and sections special attention. I can see why practically memorizing them makes things more efficient, although the exceptions and 'other' references complicate things. I'm expecting some flipped-over upside-down questions, like specifying a pump motor without mentioning continuous or not.

I've focused on Code and WAC+RCW because a) I can't afford the courses, and b) I am guessing that the intent of the exam is Following The Rules. Mainlining the Code seemed like my best choice. I've highlighted many key passages. My exam is this Wednesday. :^/ It doesn't help that I'm waiting to find out whether my lender will let me keep my 5 house development project, into which I've poured my whole life's savings...

A few clarifications:

• Is a "receptacle", one outlet or a standard dual? Or does it matter?
• For dwellings does 3VA/sqft include HVAC, cooking, dryers, or as I suspect is it just lighting and outlets, because: "Motors rated less than 1/8 hp and connected to a lighting circuit shall be considered part of the minimum lighting load."
• I'm guessing that the Demand Factor must be multiplied by the load of a given structure?

I am specifically not saying to memorize the tables. But memorize what the tables are and what their sections are. More important is getting your brain around things like, the rules for transformer conductors is in 240, but transformers are in 450. That NM through bored holes is in 300 not 334. That terminal temperature restrictions are in 110. And a hundred other little issues. Calculations will be the death of you if you concentrate on them. They are guaranteed to take time by their nature and no matter how many time you run through them they are prone to easy errors like decimal point. They should be the last thing you work on.

 

[quantum`]

Ok. I have to say, this is all more difficult and convoluted than the Law, in which I have training.

Great tip on transformers. Looks to me like they assigned the Loser of the group to write the most dreary section on transformers, and it is awful. And the constant intercession of references to other sections, although economical with space, and exceptions upon exceptions just makes consuming the information much more complex and difficult. I hope the 2026 version cleans some of this up to make more mathematical sense. They'd kind of gone down a rabbit-hole with 2020.

I've spent 7 days on NEC and made it through reading about half, then one day on RCW and WAC, and one day on calcs, and that's as far as I am going to get for now. BUT these FastTabs that came with my NEC book are pretty good with tables and chapters they're associated with, and relevance to questions.

How do I know this? Going through the Currents Question of the Month is extremely helpful and has hit alot of my soft spots. I've dog-eared and marked key pages of Code for quick reference. I hope the testing center doesn't get upset with this and my highlighting.

Yes doing questions is the best exercise but I think only after learning your way around the Code. Of particular surprise was taking the square root on 3-phase systems. I'm halfway through the archived Questions and will continue working on them until I have to leave for Olympia today. (Flea-bag motel overnight, Exams tomorrow) Didn't sleep much last night. I'm just going to do the best I can.

High their:


It's fur his-a stiyll:


I had a good laugh over this one, as it looks like something I'd do (top rail of fence used as conduit):

 

[quantum`]

So on the NEC exam I made 68%. Yes one question short of passing. DAMN. I had to look up virtually every question in the Code as I didn't know. About half the questions I found a reference close, or found the answer not in the expected place... but in another location referenced in the expected place. That latter is a trick they use alot. The very most useful reference to me was the Index in the back of the Code -- used it for most questions. I do not shy from publishing my failure, as I expect a number do. I also noticed during the first third of the exam I felt no sense of urgency, as there was 'plenty of time'. Well I needed every minute of it.

The exam on Law I made 88%, not unexpectedly.

The exam on calculations I made a stunning 30%. Reading the Code simply does not prepare you for calculations at all, so I will be ordering a study guide.

 

[quantum`]

Does Mike Holt's Practice Exam explain -how- the calculations are done?

 

[Strathead]

Does Mike Holt's Practice Exam explain -how- the calculations are done?

Yes, the first two thirds of the book is all about calculations. Still, do the math on your test, if you had failed every calculation but looked up and answered every regular question, would you have passed? I am guessing yes. Also, in my experience and opinion, if you are using the index that much, then you are going to run out of time. For example, if a question is about sizing grounding electrode connectors you should be able to look in the table of contents find the page for them and jump there is 10-20 seconds, because you should certainly know that grounding is in article 250, looking it up in the index, took my over 30 seconds, closer to a minute and then it told me a section number which I find harder to look up than a page. It gave me (3) sections to look at. The biggest thing that will make you quicker is practicing with real questions and finding them in the code.

 

[quantum`]

To me the ToC is more general, and the FastTabs were pretty good. I don't know the book well enough to zero in as well as you can. And yes the Index is time-consuming. But I felt I could look for specific terms there. If I hadn't been so leisurely at the beginning (which I knew better than to do, so tightened up), I might have passed. I came close to running out of time on NEC, but just quit early on calcs. I thought sure I had the NEC beat, as I confirmed every answer I possibly could.

I sure will do my own math, but I don't know the how's and why's. And it was too hard to find the Standard vs the Optional methods in Code, and I never did find the Optional Method even though I knew it is there, so I just slapped it up as I knew I was going to fail. All motors (garbage disposers, dishwashers, A/C units) I multiplied by 1.25, and in every case I eliminated A/C, as heating was the larger draw. And for dwellings I used 100% of the first 8kW and 40% of the remainder. But none of my fscking answers matched any of the choices, so I always chose the next-larger current-limiter. That was the extent of my knowledge for calcs, and I was wrong in most cases, someway, somehow.

Should the choice be Mike Holt's Master Practice Exam, or Tom Henry's Calculations?

 

[tortuga]

I'm quite technical and have wired my own houses complete for years, but the thing I'm worried about and what many seem to fail the first go-around on the exams, is calculations.

You mentioned your 71 years young and know electrical theory well, did you build your own house(s) and wire them your self as a owner / builder or are you a electrician perhaps residential electrician?

on the NEC exam I made 68%.
The exam on Law I made 88%,
The exam on calculations I made a stunning 30%.

I am not familiar with Washington State do you need to pass all three exams with 70%?
If your residential only do you take the same test?

Mike's materials as in his sales interview he emphasizes electrical basics, which I've been all about for 50 years.

What kind of electronics or electrical engineering background do you have?

 

[quantum`]

I'm a real estate developer, starting in 1984 with rent-houses. My profession is enterprise InfoSec, for 25 years, and in a former life I was intel tech services for NATO in Europe.

I don't -have- to have the Admin license, but would like to have it. I hire exclusively Veterans, and from the DoC, and train and run my own crews as I use novel building techs which very few subs know or will touch. No I am not in the electrical trade if what you're asking is why I'm so dumb.

Great would be if I could train staff in electrical to count for hours, but I couldn't with Admin, and I have no counted hours for Journey, much less Master. My crews and I have built every inch of my current 5 house development thusfar, from all in-ground utilities to streets/sidewalks, to unit 1 as it stands today. (pictured) I train them to do everything, roof-down, and I am up there working with them on the extremely slick metal roof, in the 40* rain, where to fall, is not an injury.

Unfortunately my construction lender unexpectedly stopped my draws and has put me in receivership, leaving me without enough cash to pay my own bills. I've been frantically trying to line up a new lender as my life's savings is in this project and I could lose it all. Receivership, instead of foreclosure --immediate and in totality-- worst case. Horrendous. I am within 2 weeks of knowing whether a lender will fund me... which hasn't led to any extra pressure at all on thees exams, oh no... :[

 

[quantum`]

You asked, so in a former life I was intel tech services for NATO S.H.A.P.E. in Europe. (Read: Extensive electronics training and field work) My BS is Political Economics (Univ. of Texas), and MBA is Land Use Economics (SMU), IOW real estate finance and economics. I've developed as a sideline for most of my years -- now I'm so old that no one will hire me in my profession so I'm developing full-time. Maybe my age is the reason I'm so stupid?

In WA you do need to pass all three with 70%. Those you pass you don't have to re-take, but you still have to pay full freight ($105) to re-take any remaining. (Plus drive from Everett to Olympia) There are electrical specialty exams and maybe residential is one of them, but I've also done commercial so don't want to be limited. Obviously I'm a GC, and licensed as Level 1 Fire Sprinkler Contractor.

 

[quantum`]

Looks like Mike has taken down his free learning resources.

 

[quantum`]

Hmm, dishwashers are not counted, as they are "combo appliances". I wonder the same about disposers, electric fireplaces, heating, and condensers?

The only reasonable course of action is to get drunk.

Meanwhile I've ordered Tom Henry's Calculations, as he does not seem like a hopped-up cokehead in his videos.

 

[tortuga]

Thanks sounds rough sorry,

it was too hard to find the Standard vs the Optional methods in Code, and I never did find the Optional Method even though I knew it is there

Article 220 Part III is standard, there are many optional methods all in part IV.
They dont mix and match, but sometimes you need to do both.
Who does the load calculations for the work you do now? Perhaps they can help?

All motors (garbage disposers, dishwashers, A/C units) I multiplied by 1.25,

Bad

and in every case I eliminated A/C, as heating was the larger draw.

Good.

And for dwellings I used 100% of the first 8kW and 40% of the remainder.

Read 220.82 that is the common optional.

But none of my fscking answers matched any of the choices,

Sounds about right if you've never done a load calc before.
There are examples in the back of the book in Annex D, as you work thru whatever book you have post a new topic here for each calculation you need help with.

 

[quantum`]

In going through the Electrical Code Coach's videos I am unclear what to count as what, in dwellings... there are 'permanently' installed appliances such as dishwashers, disposers, water heaters, etc. When these are asked in the question, do you just bundle them all as 4,500 watts? Or do you count only the ones mentioned in the question as 1,500w each?

I understand that ranges, ovens, and HVAC are done in a different way.

I guess that plugged-in appliances are not counted, being included i the overall square-footage load.