Every attempt is made for accuracy in every portion of the guide. It pains me to find mistakes, but I post them here in an effort for complete clarity and most importantly to aid in better exam prep.
I greatly appreciate any and all feedback from users in improving this guide. All of these updates are incorporated for future editions.
2018 PE Prep Guide Errata:
Formulas 1.4, 1.5, & 1.6: Reference to FPH 2-129 and 3-308-310 should be removed.
Formula 2.3 (p41): Flame height for wall configurations should use total heat release rate, not convective heat release rate. [ zl=0.166(Q*/k)^0.4, not zl=0.166(Q*c/k)^0.4 ]. This is identified in FPH p18-45 Formula (2). The other two formulas for axisymmetric fires listed in Formula 2.3 are still correct (these originate in NFPA 92, page 92-12).
Formula 5.8: The C-factor line should read "The C-Factor must be converted for internal pipe diameters different from Schedule 40 pipe."
Formula 5.42: If NFF > 2500 (not 5,000), route to the nearest 500 gpm.
Formula 8.8: Kv should read 81 deg F (27 C) (not 1 deg F (27 C))
Formula 9.14: Flame length factor should read "K = 8 for chemical and agricultural dusts". (The number "8" is missing.)
Problem #29: The original question's answers should be (a) 1.7 kW/sqm, (b) 6.9 kW/sqm, (c) 7.2 kW/sqm, and (d) 12.4 kW/sqm, matching page 133.
Problem #31: This question relies upon a formula which has since been removed from reference material, and should be removed. In order to solve, atmospheric transmissivity, angle of target, and the heat release must be given or assumed.
Problem #53: The worked solution is correct (page 177), but the initial question answers don't match the solution (page 172).
Problem #77: T.T. Lie's Equation is referenced by MeyerFire 10.2 but is being phased out for NDS Methodology (see SFPE 5th p1985). It does not appear in SFPE 5th Edition, and therefore would not be credible for the exam. This problem will be removed for future editions.
Problem #109: The 5th Edition does not contain the foam friction loss charts, so it wouldn't be eligible for the exam. If the foam solution is 1:1 then Hazen-Williams would apply, and the equation or the nomograph on page 1394 could be used.
[End of Errata]
I greatly appreciate any and all feedback from users in improving this guide. All of these updates are incorporated for future editions.
2018 PE Prep Guide Errata:
Formulas 1.4, 1.5, & 1.6: Reference to FPH 2-129 and 3-308-310 should be removed.
Formula 2.3 (p41): Flame height for wall configurations should use total heat release rate, not convective heat release rate. [ zl=0.166(Q*/k)^0.4, not zl=0.166(Q*c/k)^0.4 ]. This is identified in FPH p18-45 Formula (2). The other two formulas for axisymmetric fires listed in Formula 2.3 are still correct (these originate in NFPA 92, page 92-12).
Formula 5.8: The C-factor line should read "The C-Factor must be converted for internal pipe diameters different from Schedule 40 pipe."
Formula 5.42: If NFF > 2500 (not 5,000), route to the nearest 500 gpm.
Formula 8.8: Kv should read 81 deg F (27 C) (not 1 deg F (27 C))
Formula 9.14: Flame length factor should read "K = 8 for chemical and agricultural dusts". (The number "8" is missing.)
Problem #29: The original question's answers should be (a) 1.7 kW/sqm, (b) 6.9 kW/sqm, (c) 7.2 kW/sqm, and (d) 12.4 kW/sqm, matching page 133.
Problem #31: This question relies upon a formula which has since been removed from reference material, and should be removed. In order to solve, atmospheric transmissivity, angle of target, and the heat release must be given or assumed.
Problem #53: The worked solution is correct (page 177), but the initial question answers don't match the solution (page 172).
Problem #77: T.T. Lie's Equation is referenced by MeyerFire 10.2 but is being phased out for NDS Methodology (see SFPE 5th p1985). It does not appear in SFPE 5th Edition, and therefore would not be credible for the exam. This problem will be removed for future editions.
Problem #109: The 5th Edition does not contain the foam friction loss charts, so it wouldn't be eligible for the exam. If the foam solution is 1:1 then Hazen-Williams would apply, and the equation or the nomograph on page 1394 could be used.
[End of Errata]
