| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Mechanical Aptitude Test
Found this site on RMH, posted here for
your enjoyment: http://tinyurl.com/379fuh Look for the review button to see your test results. Phil Kangas -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
"Phil Kangas" wrote:
Found this site on RMH, posted here for your enjoyment: http://tinyurl.com/379fuh Look for the review button to see your test results. Interesting, thanks. I got an 82%, most of which were gear issues, half of which were due to over-confidence on simple ones (my achilles heal). Jon |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
kinda amusing - I got 92% - at least once I hit the wrong answer and hit
submit just as my brain said "that's wrong" - I wonder if the test results correlate with anything "Jon Danniken" wrote in message ... "Phil Kangas" wrote: Found this site on RMH, posted here for your enjoyment: http://tinyurl.com/379fuh Look for the review button to see your test results. Interesting, thanks. I got an 82%, most of which were gear issues, half of which were due to over-confidence on simple ones (my achilles heal). Jon -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
Jon Danniken wrote: "Phil Kangas" wrote: Found this site on RMH, posted here for your enjoyment: http://tinyurl.com/379fuh Look for the review button to see your test results. Interesting, thanks. I got an 82%, most of which were gear issues, half of which were due to over-confidence on simple ones (my achilles heal). Jon Well, I got a 90%, (also got messed up on worm gears) but I think there's room to quibble on two others. #15 presumes a frictionless pulley - I live in the real world and know that a straight lift with no pulley requires the least force. #31 has no correct answer stated. The correct answer is 60 since the actual mechanical ratio for the lever is 5:1. I had the same problems with poorly written questions in college. My professors did not seem amused... Carla |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 21:41:54 -0700, with neither quill nor qualm, "Jon
Danniken" quickly quoth: "Phil Kangas" wrote: Found this site on RMH, posted here for your enjoyment: http://tinyurl.com/379fuh Look for the review button to see your test results. Interesting, thanks. I got an 82%, most of which were gear issues, half of which were due to over-confidence on simple ones (my achilles heal). I got the gears but missed some of the pulleys, then I misread the balloon/atmosphere question. 84% here. P.S: Did you find any of that polyester lead yet? titter -- History is often stranger than fiction. Fiction has to be plausible. History is what happens when people don't follow the script. --pete flip, RCM |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
In article ,
Larry Jaques wrote: Interesting, thanks. I got an 82%, most of which were gear issues, half of which were due to over-confidence on simple ones (my achilles heal). I got 92%, fiddling around. It was not a bad test overall. It did have some ambiguous questions. I got the gears but missed some of the pulleys, then I misread the balloon/atmosphere question. 84% here. P.S: Did you find any of that polyester lead yet? titter -- History is often stranger than fiction. Fiction has to be plausible. History is what happens when people don't follow the script. --pete flip, RCM |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
In article , Carla Fong wrote:
94% here (also messed up the worm gears) Well, I got a 90%, (also got messed up on worm gears) but I think there's room to quibble on two others. #15 presumes a frictionless pulley - I live in the real world and know that a straight lift with no pulley requires the least force. #31 has no correct answer stated. The correct answer is 60 since the actual mechanical ratio for the lever is 5:1. I had the same problems with poorly written questions in college. My professors did not seem amused... And also #24, which they describe as a parallel circuit. Sure, the two lamps are in parallel -- but they're in series with the switch... -- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com) It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again. |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
|
Mechanical Aptitude Test
Hmmmmm.......... 94%
1 error due to clicking the wrong button, the other two have some poorly worded questions: are the fans direction specified as both from the front/rear of each or viewed as a system? And gear drive nomenclature could use a bit of work. Phil Kangas wrote: Found this site on RMH, posted here for your enjoyment: http://tinyurl.com/379fuh Look for the review button to see your test results. Phil Kangas |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 09:07:11 -0400, "Phil Kangas"
wrote: Found this site on RMH, posted here for your enjoyment: http://tinyurl.com/379fuh Look for the review button to see your test results. Phil Kangas 94% kind of fun..... Thank You, Randy Remove 333 from email address to reply. |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
Carla Fong writes:
Well, I got a 90%, (also got messed up on worm gears) but I think there's room to quibble on two others. #15 presumes a frictionless pulley - I live in the real world and know that a straight lift with no pulley requires the least force. #31 has no correct answer stated. The correct answer is 60 since the actual mechanical ratio for the lever is 5:1. I think they got that one wrong as well. They seem to be assuming the center of mass of the two boxes is out at their far edges (that gives their answer, anyway). I'd also quibble with 44 -- you have to know a bit more about what's going on downstream before you can predict what's going to happen in tube B. If the tube ends at the edge of the picture, you could get a vacuum in tube B... There are some more where I got their answer, but I think other answers are equally valid: I got their answer for 48, but "suction" is just as good an answer for a mechanical aptitude test (it would be wrong in a physics test). Likewise for 49, what do they mean by "easiest"? Again, I got their answer, but I note diesel can be ignited with no spark at all. I had the same problems with poorly written questions in college. My professors did not seem amused... Course not -- we know what the questions mean, you should read our minds! (I am a professor, and I'm joking) Note -- I got 92. Missed the worm drive, two of the pulley questions had similar enough pictures that I thought I'd mis-clicked and missed one as a result, and the two quibbles above. |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
|
Mechanical Aptitude Test
Phil Kangas wrote:
Found this site on RMH, posted here for your enjoyment: http://tinyurl.com/379fuh Look for the review button to see your test results. Phil Kangas That was fun! Got any more? |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
Doug Miller wrote:
In article , Carla Fong wrote: 94% here (also messed up the worm gears) Well, I got a 90%, (also got messed up on worm gears) but I think there's room to quibble on two others. #15 presumes a frictionless pulley - I live in the real world and know that a straight lift with no pulley requires the least force. #31 has no correct answer stated. The correct answer is 60 since the actual mechanical ratio for the lever is 5:1. I had the same problems with poorly written questions in college. My professors did not seem amused... And also #24, which they describe as a parallel circuit. Sure, the two lamps are in parallel -- but they're in series with the switch... Switches are not considered as part of the circuit for series/parallel determination. Jim Chandler |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
"SteveB" wrote in message ... I got just under a failing grade, and found the test to be crappy. As already pointed out, some of the questions were ambiguous, and there weren't a lot that applied to real world situations, but more to theory. Steve The people who write tests dont deal in real world situations, its all academic to them. They get paid the same weather thier right or wrong. Best Regards Tom. |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
"Phil Kangas" wrote in message .. . Found this site on RMH, posted here for your enjoyment: http://tinyurl.com/379fuh Look for the review button to see your test results. Phil Kangas I got just under a failing grade, and found the test to be crappy. As already pointed out, some of the questions were ambiguous, and there weren't a lot that applied to real world situations, but more to theory. Steve |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
azotic wrote:
"SteveB" wrote in message ... I got just under a failing grade, and found the test to be crappy. As already pointed out, some of the questions were ambiguous, and there weren't a lot that applied to real world situations, but more to theory. Steve The people who write tests dont deal in real world situations, its all academic to them. They get paid the same weather thier right or wrong. Best Regards Tom. And your score, Tom? |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
I missed the hydraulic pressure one with the venturi and two columns. Also
#18, but i disagree with the result, as there seems to be no mechanical advantage or reduction in the diagram. |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
Phil Kangas wrote:
Found this site on RMH, posted here for your enjoyment: http://tinyurl.com/379fuh Look for the review button to see your test results. Phil Kangas 92% but I had the same sorts of concerns about the ambiguous ones as others have already posted. If a switch can't be considered a series element in a circuit why do we tend to say, "Just put a switch in series with it." ??? Because of question 31, I don't think even Einstein could have scored 100% unless he just tossed a dart at the answers to that question and "got lucky". Jeff -- Jeffry Wisnia (W1BSV + Brass Rat '57 EE) The speed of light is 1.8*10^12 furlongs per fortnight. |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
In article 2D4Si.16$od4.13@trnddc04, Jim Chandler wrote:
I also question the direction of rotation on the worm gear. I did too; I thought they'd made a mistake. After the third look at it, though, I decided the answer given is correct. -- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com) It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again. |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
Jeff Wisnia wrote:
Phil Kangas wrote: Found this site on RMH, posted here for your enjoyment: http://tinyurl.com/379fuh Look for the review button to see your test results. Phil Kangas 92% but I had the same sorts of concerns about the ambiguous ones as others have already posted. If a switch can't be considered a series element in a circuit why do we tend to say, "Just put a switch in series with it." ??? Because of question 31, I don't think even Einstein could have scored 100% unless he just tossed a dart at the answers to that question and "got lucky". Jeff A switch is ALWAYS in series with the ENTIRE CIRCUIT, just not considered as a component of the load. Jim Chandler |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 09:07:11 -0400, "Phil Kangas" wrote:
Found this site on RMH, posted here for your enjoyment: http://tinyurl.com/379fuh Look for the review button to see your test results. Phil Kangas 100%. But the boxes on the see-saw question didn't have the correct choice available, so I chose the only one that seemed to fit... Mark Rand RTFM |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
"Mark Rand" wrote in message ... On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 09:07:11 -0400, "Phil Kangas" wrote: Found this site on RMH, posted here for your enjoyment: http://tinyurl.com/379fuh Look for the review button to see your test results. Phil Kangas 100%. But the boxes on the see-saw question didn't have the correct choice available, so I chose the only one that seemed to fit... Right you are. Somebody didn't realize where the center of effort was. -- Ed Huntress |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 20:55:48 +0100, Mark Rand
wrote: On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 09:07:11 -0400, "Phil Kangas" wrote: Found this site on RMH, posted here for your enjoyment: http://tinyurl.com/379fuh Look for the review button to see your test results. Phil Kangas 100%. But the boxes on the see-saw question didn't have the correct choice available, so I chose the only one that seemed to fit... 100% for me, too. Re the poorly formulated questions, sometimes you need to put aside your annoyance with the limits of the information presented and make a decision. Context can help, and the test would have been easier if it were possible to navigate back and forth - in some cases the correct answer was apparent only after seeing the next question. -- Ned Simmons |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
Ed Huntress wrote:
"Mark Rand" wrote in message ... On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 09:07:11 -0400, "Phil Kangas" wrote: Found this site on RMH, posted here for your enjoyment: http://tinyurl.com/379fuh Look for the review button to see your test results. Phil Kangas 100%. But the boxes on the see-saw question didn't have the correct choice available, so I chose the only one that seemed to fit... Right you are. Somebody didn't realize where the center of effort was. -- Ed Huntress Yeabut - it was the only one in the ball park... |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
I managed 96% but found a few a bit ambiguous. Here's to another one
with clearer questions. |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
In article ,
cavelamb himself wrote: Phil Kangas wrote: Found this site on RMH, posted here for your enjoyment: http://tinyurl.com/379fuh This leads me to http://www.forddoctorsdts.com/quizzes/MechanicalAptitude.php which mentions no tests, and takes me to http://www.turbotraining.com/. How do I find this test? All I see are offers of training courses. Joe Gwinn |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:30:53 -0400, Ned Simmons wrote:
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 20:55:48 +0100, Mark Rand wrote: On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 09:07:11 -0400, "Phil Kangas" wrote: Found this site on RMH, posted here for your enjoyment: http://tinyurl.com/379fuh 90%. Missed #7 (overdrive vs. reduction), #9 (worm drive; my eyes got all buggy or something?), #19 (5 pulley lift force), #31 (How does that box weigh 50Kg exactly please? What am I missing?), and #48 (why does air enter the engine cylinder - suction or atmoshpheric pressure? How are those different exactly in this context?) Not bad for someone who works on computers for a living, I guess. Dave |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
Joseph Gwinn wrote:
In article , cavelamb himself wrote: Phil Kangas wrote: Found this site on RMH, posted here for your enjoyment: http://tinyurl.com/379fuh This leads me to http://www.forddoctorsdts.com/quizzes/MechanicalAptitude.php which mentions no tests, and takes me to http://www.turbotraining.com/. How do I find this test? All I see are offers of training courses. Joe Gwinn http://www.forddoctorsdts.com/quizze...alAptitude.php |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
gunsmith wrote:
I managed 96% but found a few a bit ambiguous. Here's to another one with clearer questions. Yepper! That one's a toughie, all right. |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:55:04 -0500, Robert Swinney wrote:
Did you ever hear the one "Nature abhors a vacuum." Pull the air out of anything and gravity pushing on the atmosphere causes it (the air) to rush in. Suction really has nothing to do with it, except that was the method used to eliminate the air. Gasses can be eliminated in other ways, such as the "getter" in the envelope of a vacuum tube at evacuation. Oh, agreed, but both answers are equally wrong. The reason the "air" goes in there is because there's a pressure differential. Which in every car I've owned for the last decade or more has been turbine-compressed. So suction is at least as accurate as "atmospheric pressure". Ah well, not like I'm being graded on it, and a 90% vs a 92% is the same letter grade regardless of the scale, I think. |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
Joseph Gwinn writes:
In article , cavelamb himself wrote: Phil Kangas wrote: Found this site on RMH, posted here for your enjoyment: http://tinyurl.com/379fuh This leads me to http://www.forddoctorsdts.com/quizzes/MechanicalAptitude.php which mentions no tests, and takes me to http://www.turbotraining.com/. I just typed the link you posted, and got the page introducing the test. |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
According to Jim Chandler :
Doug Miller wrote: [ ... ] And also #24, which they describe as a parallel circuit. Sure, the two lamps are in parallel -- but they're in series with the switch... Switches are not considered as part of the circuit for series/parallel determination. Unless there is a series/parallel arrangement of switches to implement "and" and "or" conditions. Enjoy, DoN. -- Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564 (too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html --- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero --- |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
"cavelamb himself" wrote in message ... azotic wrote: "SteveB" wrote in message ... I got just under a failing grade, and found the test to be crappy. As already pointed out, some of the questions were ambiguous, and there weren't a lot that applied to real world situations, but more to theory. Steve The people who write tests dont deal in real world situations, its all academic to them. They get paid the same weather thier right or wrong. Best Regards Tom. And your score, Tom? 98 Best Regards Tom. |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:42:22 -0500, Robert Swinney wrote:
Agreed ? Turbo-charging does nothing more than artificially increase atmospheric pressure - Er, well, atmospheric pressure is 1 bar. My turbo puts out 1.6someting bar. So, what forces air into _my_ engine's chambers is only somewhat atmospheric pressure. or raise thin atmosphere to more nearly "ground pressure", such as in the case of high flying piston-type aircraft. IMO, suction is not a very accurate description of why fuel is drawn into a combustion chamber. Yup, that answer equally sucks. When I was a college student I would have been pretty damn intense about this ****ty question and the fact that both wrong answers suck equally but I'm having a hard time caring ;) All non-Diesel piston engines are considered to be normally aspirated, AFAIK. (someone will correct me, I'm sure) Suction is merely a way of ingesting more stoichoimetric air and fuel mixture. The earliest IC engines had no compression, thus no suction was present. And yet, in the last century, so little has changed in toe otto cycle engine. Isn't that remarkable? |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
I got 98%. The only one I got wrong was the governor, because I assumed
the ring was fixed and the shaft could move. A lot of the questions were ambiguous though, and could have multiple interpretations. I got lucky there, because the alternate (or more correct) answer wasn't one of the options. One of the lever questions was just plain wrong, IMHO. -- -Ed Falk, http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/ |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:05:14 GMT, Jim Chandler wrote:
Doug Miller wrote: In article , Carla Fong wrote: 94% here (also messed up the worm gears) Well, I got a 90%, (also got messed up on worm gears) but I think there's room to quibble on two others. #15 presumes a frictionless pulley - I live in the real world and know that a straight lift with no pulley requires the least force. #31 has no correct answer stated. The correct answer is 60 since the actual mechanical ratio for the lever is 5:1. I had the same problems with poorly written questions in college. My professors did not seem amused... And also #24, which they describe as a parallel circuit. Sure, the two lamps are in parallel -- but they're in series with the switch... Switches are not considered as part of the circuit for series/parallel determination. Jim Chandler Perhaps not by diesel mechanics. They're treated the same as any other circuit element in circuit network analysis. For example, they are sometimes used in parallel with other circuit elements, as in the question with three light bulbs. 98. |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:55:04 -0500, "Robert Swinney"
wrote: Did you ever hear the one "Nature abhors a vacuum." Pull the air out of anything and gravity pushing on the atmosphere causes it (the air) to rush in. Suction really has nothing to do with it, except that was the method used to eliminate the air. Gasses can be eliminated in other ways, such as the "getter" in the envelope of a vacuum tube at evacuation. A correct answer would be "due to pressure differential". Manifold pressure is seldom atmospheric. It's often lower (engine vacuum) in an ordinary engine but it might be higher in a turbocharged engine. "Suction" is created by a lower pressure region causing a pressure differential, so "suction" is closer to right in this case. |
Mechanical Aptitude Test
"Don Foreman" wrote in message ... On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 16:55:04 -0500, "Robert Swinney" wrote: Did you ever hear the one "Nature abhors a vacuum." Pull the air out of anything and gravity pushing on the atmosphere causes it (the air) to rush in. Suction really has nothing to do with it, except that was the method used to eliminate the air. Gasses can be eliminated in other ways, such as the "getter" in the envelope of a vacuum tube at evacuation. A correct answer would be "due to pressure differential". Manifold pressure is seldom atmospheric. It's often lower (engine vacuum) in an ordinary engine but it might be higher in a turbocharged engine. "Suction" is created by a lower pressure region causing a pressure differential, so "suction" is closer to right in this case. The trouble with that is that "suction," like "centrifugal force," is not a term that scientists or most engineers would accept, except in casual conversation. Suction is just the result of a lower pressure acting differentially to a higher pressure; centrifugal force is just the effect of acceleration against the true force involved, which is the centripetal force. When I see "suction" used in a technical discussion I can accept it as a casual term and assume that the person speaking, if he or she is technically knowledgeable, knows there really is no such thing as "suction," as a real force. But I'm not used to seeing it on a test of technical subjects. There really is no "suction." And there really is no "centrifugal force." They're useful concepts but they aren't technically correct. -- Ed Huntress |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:08 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter