Mechanical Aptitiude Test

This one?

I like the diagnostic 8 ball...

snipped-for-privacy@mauve.rahul.net (Edward A. Falk) wrote in news:hdi113$5rk$2 @blue.rahul.net:

Hmm. So did I. The wording on one or two was a bit ambiguos. I wonder if we both screwed up the same questions.

Doug White

Don't worry: some of the questions were VERY badly worded. AND Q41 (on hydraulics if I remember correctly) was illiterate nonsense with NO correct answer.

-I got 94% by guessing what hey really thought was the answer.

They claim no trick questions (true), but that does not mean no tricks...

It has been awhile since somebody messed with my mind like that.

Well, that would tend to suggest that it's not really a mechanical aptitude test. Wording? Please. A mechanical aptitude test should come in a box or bag, and need putting together, or taking apart, or taking apart, fixing, and putting together (best).

Some folks who are terrible at taking written tests are whiz-bang at putting stuff together, taking it apart, and fixing it - and vice versa. Just because it's easier to have multiple guess questions on a computer doesn't mean it's remotely close to assessing actual mechanical aptitude.

On that one 'reverse' is the only gear train that DOESN'T reverse the output. The disclaimer suggests they received a lot of complaints from people more rational and analytical than they are.

Don't over-analyze =3D don't see more than we did.

jsw

One of my friends in San Diego teaches auto repair at a private tech school. He told me that the kiddie jail sends graduates there to teach them to be mechanics, and spends a ton of money and buys them a pretty nice starter set of tools. Unfortunately they don't screen these kids for mechanical aptitude and my friend says that 90% of them could never make a living as a tech. Your Gov't inaction!

Ten percent go on to make an honest living fixing cars?

The result could be much worse, yes?

--Winston

Let the Record show that Doug White on or about Fri, 13 Nov 2009 00:02:54 GMT did write/type or cause to appear in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

Recently, I had a question on 'trade math", testing if one can add feet inches and fractions correctly. One of the questions read 2'-8"x3' My response was (which I wrote down) was "that is a volume, but 2'8" x

I had a similar thing occur in tech school. Instructions were "What are the square of the following:" (2x^2+ 3y^2) * (3x^2 -5y^2)^2 Yeah, square the quantity squared. X^4 etc. So I worked it all out, by hand (it was for a test) and turned in my paper to the chief. He came down and wanted to know what I'd done. I showed him, and he decided that he'd give me the credit, but I couldn't tell any of the other students! I agree- but it was obviously a case of the writers of the workbook not checking details, and 99% of students doing what was expected, not what was written.

- pyotr filipivich We will drink no whiskey before its nine. It's eight fifty eight. Close enough!

I missed that one as well, because of the same reason. To me gear reduction means the output turns slower than the input (regardless of direction) and reverse means the resulting output rotates in the opposite direction of the input (disregarding any speed differences)

Maybe part of the test is to question the people who made up the test?

In article , Jim Wilkins wrote: :On Nov 12, 10:46=A0pm, snipped-for-privacy@mauve.rahul.net (Edward A. Falk) wrote: :> In article , :> Chris Holford =A0 wrote: :>

:> >Don't worry: some of the questions were VERY badly worded. AND Q41 (on :> >hydraulics if I remember correctly) was illiterate nonsense with NO :> >correct answer. :>

:> A piston with 14 sq inches surface area at the top, and 2 sq inches at :> the bottom. =A0Apply 50 psi at the top, what's the psi at the bottom? :>

:> I thought that was pretty obvious. :>

:> The other one was the "match the drive ratio type with the letter...". :> This one was kind of ambiguous, but I guess if they had made it clear :> that it was a car transmission, it would have been more obvious. :>

:> Eh. =A0Whatever. : :On that one 'reverse' is the only gear train that DOESN'T reverse the :output. The disclaimer suggests they received a lot of complaints from :people more rational and analytical than they are. : :Don't over-analyze =3D don't see more than we did.

The one that particularly piqued me was the planetary gear set question where you had to deduce what was meant by "rotates" vs. "revolves."

There's a "review" buttomn near the bottom of the results page . I missed the one on gear nomenclature and the one with the two fans . I guess 96% isn't so bad .

The one with the big and small pistons ? It's a 7:1 ratio ...

Ten percent have the mechanical aptitude to learn to be a tech, but that doesn't mean that they will.

/ /On that one 'reverse' is the only gear train that DOESN'T reverse the /output. The disclaimer suggests they received a lot of complaints from /people more rational and analytical than they are. / /Don't over-analyze = don't see more than we did. / /jsw /

But then again, they define a gear drive as a direct drive. The person(s) that came up with their mechanical aptitude test is clearly incompetent. I've had these types of tests before, you know they are wrong, you could easily prove they are wrong, but they are the ones making the rules and giving the tests so you have to put up with their stupidity.

RogerN

Oh and there were two that could be ambiguous The oil - water . Did they ever hear of miscible oil? and the cooling of the hot liquid It could make a big difference depending on the thermal conductivity of the container. Conduction losses could be larger than evaporative cooling. But it's easy to figure out which they were looking for. ...lew...

But it's still fun.

...lew...

The key thing to keep in mind here is that this test is on an automotive site, not a generic science site.