# another flight of stairs



## katellwood (29 Mar 2020)

Following an entry I placed on this thread and now having a bit of enforced time on my hands 

stair-advice-please-t118948-15.html

I would now like to go through the build of this flight of stairs

Firstly I would like to congratulate MikeG on his excellent build of his staircase and apologise in advance re the lack of pictures taken during the build. 

This staircase and balustrade also acts as the support for the upper landing with the client wishing to maintain a view to some original leaded windows found in the property (which dates from the 18th century and was originally a pub/Inn) and which I have previously restored and framed in oak. 

In addition beneath the main stairs is another flight which accesses the cellar and was extremely difficult to design owing to the limitations of the floor space area available 

All the newels are constructed from 90mm square u/s softwood (made up of two pieces of 50mm glued back to back to prevent and movement. These were then clad in 20mm panelled oak creating 130mm square newels 

Hope the pictures help in understanding this 















































A full size rod in plan was created on an 8 x 4 sheet of mdf to locate all wall and wall corner locations and the radius in plan.

From the rod a jig was set out and built out of ply, 2x2’s and 3 layers 6mm mdf glued together and clamped with ratchet straps to facilitate making the curved string (sorry no photo’s of this however I still have the jig if anyone any pictures).
Upon making the jig it was then placed on the rod and riser lines of the cured section projected onto the jig followed by tread lines, in essence I turned the jig into a curved rod which included the top and bottom lines of the string. 

As this setup was too big for my airbag and also the reason for three layers of 6mm mdf I covered to area of the string on the jig with clear packing tape then laminated 4mm birch ply to a thickness of 28mm. This was done in two stages with the first stage being glued on top of the second stage in an attempt to eliminate springback. 

Lengths of materials/offcuts kicking around the workshop were utilised to clamp the ply to the jig, I also glued strips of hardboard with CA to these offcuts on the outer edges to spread the clamping effect. 
















Once the ply had dried I resawed a piece of oak to 5mm on the bandsaw and ran it through the drum sander down to 4mm. This again was placed on the jig and all clamped up again 






When everything was fully cured the jig was used as a setting out rod for the curved string and a reverse curved base was made for the router, the base had a straight edge at a right angle to the curve to allow it to run alongside of another straight edge 











The riser housings were created in a similar way with underside wedge room also being routed (again a lack of pictures here). The housings in the upper newel were also routered and a dry fit was attempted. This is where working alone can be a right pain trying to balance/support everything to check all the joints. 











This whole upper curved section was glued and wedged, in addition I screwed the treads through the back of the curved string to keep everything tight. (both treads and risers are made from solid oak as opposed veneered mdf for the risers)

I then made a short section of two treads with closed strings which went against walls, this was attached to the curved string with a series of dominoes
















To further make this joint more secure I routered a couple of 30mm x 6mm deep grooves into the back of the curved and straight string and glued some appropriate strips into the groove to improve strength. 

This assembled upper section was to be jointed into two newel posts half way up the full stair where it came into contact with walls (all will become evident as I proceed). 

The next stage was the lower section which was to be cut or open string. I would have liked to have included brackets to the design as I think they enhance a stair plus they can hide a multitude of fixings however, on this job it was not to be however, I did incorporate mitred breadboard ends to all the lower treads. Again I did not photograph the construction of the cut string but have a sketchup of how the construction went 











All joints were fitted and as much of this section was glued in the workshop to as larger sections as were practicable to facilitate transport and access. Scotia moulding was machined added to the underside of the treads.

NB, on a cut string to secure the riser a screw can be used behind the scotia and behind the tread prior to it being fitted








































Re the assembly, I will show what photo’s I have taken, any questions please ask.





















A bullnose step was made however the fitting of this awaits until a new floor is fitted and I can scribe the riser to the floor (its not level)











To follow is a the few photo’s I took re balustrading I know I should have taken more but I just get engrossed in the workshop and in essence I forget 

















































































Currently stalled from the final finish as waiting for some slightly longer wrought ironwork being powder coated, when fully finished with snagging, final sanding and oiling I will post more photo’s 

Please any questions, comments constructive criticism please don’t hesitate

Thanks 

Chris


----------



## xy mosian (29 Mar 2020)

From my perspective, that looks like a display of proper skill. Well practised too.
Thanks for posting. It took a while for my jaw to close.
xyo


----------



## MikeG. (29 Mar 2020)

Fabulous, Chris. That looks wonderful. Love the curved string, and the curved handrails. But particularly, I love the paneled newels. I drew mine like that, but changed my mind. Seeing those I kind of wish I'd stuck with the idea. That all makes mine look extremely simple.

Just a thought, though. Is there a minimum 50mm going on all those steps winding around the newel?


----------



## Inspector (29 Mar 2020)

So...like... what did you do in the afternoon? :wink: 

Incredible work. No flies on you.

Pete


----------



## AJB Temple (29 Mar 2020)

Super work. The photos say it all. Clearly you have the skill and the kit to support it. Looks really good to me.


----------



## Jonathan S (29 Mar 2020)

Fabulous work! 

I would loved to been with you and see you make those curved handrails.

How many hours involved in the complete job?

Sent from my SM-J530F using Tapatalk


----------



## Trevanion (29 Mar 2020)

Absolutely outstanding!


----------



## pollys13 (30 Mar 2020)

Really amazing, true craftsmenship there! 
Thanks for posting.


----------



## Doug71 (30 Mar 2020)

Top job =D> =D> =D> 

Good to know there are still some craftsmen left left in the world.


----------



## katellwood (30 Mar 2020)

Thanks all for the kind and encouraging comments. Mike yes the going on the winders at the newel are in excess of 50mm, with incorporating a scotia and the rounding of the tread the nosing is 35mm that plus an 130mm newel the going is approx 60-65mm 

In relation to time on and off been on it since Oct last but not full time as there were numerous delays mainly waiting for the wrought iron as i did not supply it.

Further to the above, I would like to share how I set out the oval on the goose/swan neck 

I, like probably a lot of you enjoy puzzles etc, and enjoy watching this guy on youtube. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RI2p-e7dL3E 

I thought what if the midpoint of the ladder was offset i.e. not midpoint, this would create a major and minor axis and as the ladder slid down the wall a true oval would be formed.

Substitute ladder for a rod the length of both major and minor axis with a pencil at the meeting point and as stated you get a true accurate oval. Then using two rods taking into consideration the depth of the handrail you achieve a handrail template with no messing around with bits of string and nails (wished I’d taken pictures) 

So in true sketchup style 


























Some of you may probably use this method or similar but thought I would share

The main curve in plan is purely a semicircle which was achieved with a router on a radius bar then a bearing guide on the spindle


----------



## Doug71 (30 Mar 2020)

MikeG.":w72cegmz said:


> Just a thought, though. Is there a minimum 50mm going on all those steps winding around the newel?



I always found building inspectors interpreted this as 50 mm of tread showing where it meets the newel which is easier to achieve (fit in) then the 50 mm going which it really should be but who am I to question them.


----------



## MikeG. (30 Mar 2020)

I've never had a Building Inspector be that lenient! It's very hard with 90mm newels to get more than 3 winders to work, and there is often a little secondary newel planted alongside the main one. This one is deceiving because the newel is 130+ square, which fools the eye somewhat when you're used to smaller.


----------



## SBJ (30 Mar 2020)

MikeG.":751yykhl said:


> I've never had a Building Inspector be that lenient! It's very hard with 90mm newels to get more than 3 winders to work, and there is often a little secondary newel planted alongside the main one. This one is deceiving because the newel is 130+ square, which fools the eye somewhat when you're used to smaller.


It's ok just to say you got it wrong. [WINKING FACE]

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## katellwood (30 Mar 2020)

does this help 






and any interpretations

I take it as the width of the tread inc nosing not the going from the pitch line (where riser meets tread) but I might be wrong 

In the past i have increased the nosing on kite winders only on a narrow stair to meet the regs dictated by centre line of winders being same or greater then going, got away with it.

my experience is council man/woman walks up and down stair to see if it feels right, checks for 2m head height from pitch line and sub 100mm between balusters.


----------



## Doug71 (30 Mar 2020)

Looks like I'm wrong on the 50 mm going thing then #-o 

I don't do staircases anymore but sure it was 50 mm going and not tread width, although it was actually 2" at the time so yeah I'm probably out of date with the regs....


----------



## MikeG. (30 Mar 2020)

It is minimum going, not tread. It's clear in the Regs (para 1.18B), and in the NHBC standards. However, the diagram in the regs is misleading as it definitely shows tread rather than going.


----------



## Jake (30 Mar 2020)

That's a lovely job. Just the idea of the layout for that makes my head spin.


----------



## Jake (31 Mar 2020)

Unless I'm missing something the 2013 App Doc K (which I think is current from the planning portal) clearly states the guidance as being that you can follow the diagram 1.9 (ie tread):






https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... K_2013.pdf


----------



## MikeG. (31 Mar 2020)

You're missing the interpretation, Jake. It's right there in what you posted:

".....for the going" (of tapered treads....). The going is the nose-to-nose measurement.


----------



## kevinlightfoot (31 Mar 2020)

Lovely work,I have made a few flights of stairs in my time but never curved work like this.Brilliant execution of the handrails and the made up newels.Your attention to detail is to be admired.Not wanting to sound patronising but very well done,regards Kevin.


----------



## ColeyS1 (31 Mar 2020)

Absolutely fantastic !!!! Smartest flight I've seen in a long time !!

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## Doug71 (31 Mar 2020)

I have just looked back in an older edition of Part K of building regs and it clearly states in writing the going at the narrow end of tapered tread should be minimum 50 mm but shows the diagram saying 50 mm tread #-o. In the latest edition the only reference I can see to it is on the diagram people have already posted showing minimum tread width 50 mm. 

I guess it has been amended for obvious reasons, I would interpret it as 50 mm tread width now as that is what it says and going is not mentioned.


----------



## Jake (31 Mar 2020)

Oh right - I hadn't missed that, thought there might be something elsewhere. Given those words are setting aside and replacing the standard going requirements, I think that is clearly intended as a statement that the requirements for tapered treads are those on the diagram (going on centre line, tread on inside). I don't think the two together can sensibly be interpreted any other way. But, it's not a law. 

If your local BO disagrees, wind him by saying it's just guidance and not binding anyway. (Maybe not).

Edit: Also 1.27 makes no sense unless 1.25 is saying there is no going requirement on the inside, just a tread requirement. Otherwise, your inside 50mm going in fact has to be as wide as your going on the straight treads, and that way lies madness. In 1.27 therefore, the going requirement for the tapered treads has to mean a single (centre line) going requirement. The reference to a going requirement cannot be different as between 1.25 and 1.27 (or it would have to stipulate in 1.27 just the centre line going to exclude any separate inner going requirement). Accordingly, the inside tread requirement in diagram 1.9 has to be separate from the single centre line going requirement for a tapered tread.


----------



## Geoff_S (3 Apr 2020)

That goes beyond skill. I just love the photos and the way it progressed. Brilliant!


----------



## katellwood (25 Jul 2020)

Have been wanting to post these for a while now, images of the completed flight


----------



## MikeG. (25 Jul 2020)

Did you design these yourself, or were you working from someone else's drawings?


----------



## katellwood (25 Jul 2020)

If I recall I posted a sketchup on your stair thread. 

All my own work inc design with lots of variations prior to the agreed design


----------



## joel4mo (26 Jul 2020)

Beautiful work, love the panelled newel post. 

Mind letting me know what finish you used?

Would it be uncouth of me to ask you what you charged for the whole process? Id never have the luxury of the time Id need to dedicate to this unfortunately. In our last wave of proposed architect drawings our new landing is very similar, if not identical, but includes a 3 step drop between floors. (PM is fine or tell me to pipper off)


----------



## Harbo (26 Jul 2020)

Excellent work 

Rod


----------

