Some while back (1 year?) there was a posting on this newsgroup with a link
to a mechanical aptitude test.
Can anybody repost the link?
From what I can remember, the test would have good "discussion points" for
the high school IED (Introduction to Engineering Design) class with which I
firstname.lastname@example.org (Edward A. Falk) wrote in news:hdi113$5rk$2
Hmm. So did I. The wording on one or two was a bit ambiguos. I wonder if
we both screwed up the same questions.
Don't worry: some of the questions were VERY badly worded. AND Q41 (on
hydraulics if I remember correctly) was illiterate nonsense with NO
-I got 94% by guessing what hey really thought was the answer.
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.
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!
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
My response was (which I wrote down) was "that is a volume, but 2'8" x
3 is 8 feet."
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.
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?
:> >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."
/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.
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.
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.