Stair Design for Comfort

[Guest Alphonsox]

I've been using various online stair design sites to try and plan out our new staircase. One thing I haven't had much luck in finding is a good set of "rules of thumb" for designing a comfortable staircase. Assuming that there are no great space constraints what do I need for a comfortable set of stairs ? I'm thinking of things like width, pitch, rise, going etc.

 

Any thoughts ?

[Mr Punter]

Standard 42 degree, 900 wide 240 going with half landing works fine for domestic.  Much wider and you need handrail both sides.  Half landing gives a rest point and prevents top-to-bottom fall.  I prefer carpet both for safety and sound.

[Ian]

Part K of the Building Regs has the necessary guidance for things like rise, going, pitch and headroom.

Link to English Part K: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20151113141044/http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/br/br_pdf_ad_k_2013.pdf

If you are outside England its worth checking the relevant Welsh, N Ireland and Scottish regs.

 

 

[TerryE]

Neil,as per Mr Punter, but it is also important to keep the rise and going exactly the same all of the way up the stair, and this includes turns, top and bottom stair.  So you need to allow for your floor coverings at the top and bottom.  The bottom tread rise is slightly less critical.  The reason is that your brain is very good at placing your feet, but if the rise and going aren't exactly the same then it becomes quite easy to trip or stumble and this is very dangerous on a stair.

 

So if you do need a turn in your stair then you will find it more comfortable if this is an evenly swept turn, though having this type of design costs more.  A 45° split on the turn is the worst. 

[Guest Alphonsox]

14 minutes ago, Mr Punter said:

Standard 42 degree, 900 wide 240 going with half landing works fine for domestic.  Much wider and you need handrail both sides.  Half landing gives a rest point and prevents top-to-bottom fall.  I prefer carpet both for safety and sound.

 

A pitch of 42 degrees seems too steep for comfort. I am considering dropping down to 37 degrees with a 260 going, 200 Rise - I just wonder whether this is taking things a bit too horizontal.

 

12 minutes ago, Ian said:

Part K of the Building Regs has the necessary guidance for things like rise, going, pitch and headroom.

 

It does - but this defines the minimum requirements for a stair not what is desirable for comfort.

[Dudda]

Part K is minimum requirements. If I was you I'd design a stairs to part M building regulations for a public building. They're designed for people of all capabilities and as a result are a lot more comfortable and therefore a lot larger than what's required for private houses. I'm only up to speed on Irish regulations but presume UK are the same as we usually just copy all the UK regs rather than make our own. Things I'd look at are the following regulations with my comments in red:

 

Section 1.3

(a) the minimum clear width (between enclosing walls, strings or upstands) should 1200 mm; This allows people to pass each other safely
(b) a landing should be provided at the top and bottom of each flight;
(c) the landings should be level and have an unobstructed length (clear of any door swing) of at least 1200 mm or the width of the flight whichever is greater; When coming down a stairs fast it's hard to stop and if someone opens a door you'll crash straight into it.

(d) there should be no single steps; People with low visibility trip easily with only one step as they don't see it.
(e) the rise of a flight between landings should not exceed 1800 mm; Allows people to rest

(f) all step nosings should incorporate a permanently contrasting continuous material on the tread. The material should be between 50 mm and 65
mm wide on the tread and should visually contrast with the remainder of the tread (refer to 1.6.4). Rationale: This will help people with vision impairment to appreciate the extent of the stair and identify the individual treads; (I'd ignore this one for a private house as it won't make the stairs look great)

(g) projecting or overhanging step nosings should be avoided. Rationale: Nosings can cause people to trip or catch their feet. Refer to Diagram 5 for acceptable tread and riser profiles;
(h) the rise and going of each step should be consistent throughout a flight; Obvious
(i) the rise of each step should be between 150 mm and 180 mm and have a going of at least 300 mm. Rationale: A larger going helps avoid accidents on a stair particularly on descent, as it allows a person to place more of their foot on the step;
(j) tapered treads and open risers should not be used as they create a sense of insecurity for people with vision impairment;
(k) there should be a continuous handrail on each side of flights and landings in accordance with 1.1.3.6. The minimum unobstructed width between handrails should be not less than 1000 mm; Like point (a) above it allows people to pass

(i) isn't relevant as it's for very wide stairs

(m) deals with slip resistance

(n) the illuminance at tread level should be at least 100 lux; Consider very low level night lights on a PIR so you don't fall down the stairs if you've to get up in the middle of the night or wobble home late drunk!

(o) not really relevant

(p) ensure good head height.

 

[Ian]

8 minutes ago, Alphonsox said:

It does - but this defines the minimum requirements for a stair not what is desirable for comfort.

 

In table 1.1 it defines the maximum rise and goings as well as the minimum so if you want comfort it's easy to make a judgement.

Edited February 15, 2017 by Ian

[Guest Alphonsox]

6 minutes ago, TerryE said:

Neil,as per Mr Punter, but it is also important to keep the rise and going exactly the same all of the way up the stair, and this includes turns, top and bottom stair.  So you need to allow for your floor coverings at the top and bottom.  The bottom tread rise is slightly less critical.  The reason is that your brain is very good at placing your feet, but if the rise and going aren't exactly the same then it becomes quite easy to trip or stumble and this is very dangerous on a stair.

 

So if you do need a turn in your stair then you will find it more comfortable if this is an evenly swept turn, though having this type of design costs more.  A 45° split on the turn is the worst. 

 

We're intending to carpet the whole stair so we should manage a constant rise/going for everything barring the bottom step. The turn will be via a half landing with no requirements for in stair turns (one of my pet hates).

 

 

[Guest Alphonsox]

7 minutes ago, Dudda said:

Part K is minimum requirements. If I was you I'd design a stairs to part M building regulations for a public building.

 

Thanks - that's an interesting approach, and goes beyond what I was already considering. I'll have a look at the figures and see what the most horizontal stairway we can accommodate is.

[Ian]

If you want to go into to the issue more deeply BS 8300:2009 goes into more detail than Building Regs.

 

Small extract below but it would be best to read the whole of the standard:

 

"5.9.2 Design of steps and stairs
COMMENTARY ON 5.9.2.
Slips on steps and stairs occur in both ascent and descent, but a slip on
descent is more likely to lead to a fall and an injury. Research has shown
that slips while descending stairs are more likely to occur when the
user oversteps, placing only 50% to 60% of their foot on the tread. The
likelihood of an overstep decreases significantly with increased going
size, and beyond 300 mm, is very rare. Beyond 350 mm, it is unlikely
that a large overstep will occur within the lifetime of the building, even
with 2 000 users per day.
Excessively high risers can result in excessive strain being placed on the
knee and/or hip joints of ambulant disabled people, when descending
flights of stairs.
When ascending a stair, people who wear callipers or who have stiffness
in hip or knee joints are particularly at risk of trapping the toes of their
shoes beneath projecting nosings, and of tripping as a result. In addition,
some partially sighted people can feel a sense of insecurity when looking
through open treads, and assistance dogs might refuse to proceed.
The preferred dimensional ranges for steps and stairs are
between 150 mm and 180 mm for the rise and between 300 mm
and 450 mm for the going.

NOTE There is now compelling research evidence to indicate that a
larger going helps to avoid accidents on a stair, particularly in descent, as
it allows a person to place more of their foot on the step. Larger goings
can also benefit people who wish to pause mid-flight to rest.
The rise and going of each step within a flight, and preferably between
a series of flights, should be uniform.
Preferably, a step should not overlap the one below. If there is an
overlap, the nosing should not project over the tread below by more
than 25 mm.
The riser should not be open and its profile should ensure that people
who drag their feet do not trip when ascending.
5.9.3 Rise of a flight
No flight on an external stepped access route should contain more
than 20 risers and, as far as possible, the numbers of risers in successive
flights should be uniform.
NOTE 1 In determining the number of risers in a flight, designers need
to strike a balance between minimizing the number of risers between
landings so as to create more frequent resting points, and maximizing
the number between landings so that the number of potential accident
danger spots (when moving from a landing to a flight) is minimized. The
former approach is likely to benefit people with restricted mobility and
the latter approach is likely to help blind or partially sighted people.
Single steps should be avoided as, even when highlighted using visual
contrast, they present a significant trip hazard. Thus, where there is
a change in level of two steps or more, it should be treated as a stair
and should include handrails each side and all other features of a
stair. A stair should always be provided in addition to a ramp, unless
the change in level is less than 300 mm, where it would otherwise be
necessary to have a single step (see also 5.8.1).
NOTE 2 The 300 mm dimension assumes a minimum step rise of 150 mm.
5.9.4 Stair width
The surface width of a stair, between enclosing walls, strings,
balustrades or upstands, should be not less than 1 200 mm, and the
width between handrails should be not less than 1 000 mm.
Where the width between handrails exceeds 2.0 m, the stair should be
divided into two or more channels with a distance between handrails
of not less than 1 m, or not more than 2 m, to ensure that all users
have access to a handrail."

[jack]

Arrgh!  It's all coming back to me!!! 

 

I had a series of heated discussions with my wife and our architect about stairs while we were finalising our house design.  His original plans had stairs that I thought were too steep.  The rise wasn't so bad - 190mm, or something like that - but the going was far shorter than I felt comfortable with.  Having lived in a few Victorian houses with narrow, steep stairs (and having slipped on the third last step of one while carrying my 3 month old son - he was fine, my elbow took the impact), I was adamant that our forever home would have comfortable stairs that wouldn't have me worrying about walking down them bleary-eyed in the morning.  My architect thought it was all a waste of time, as the stairs he'd planned for us were within regs.  My attitude was that the regs were a minimum compromise for safety, not an ideal standard for comfort and safety.

 

With a lot of looking at various international guidelines and commercial regs, we ended up with about 182mm rise and 264mm going.  I find this ratio extremely comfortable and never think about my foot placement.  I'd have preferred an even lower rise given we presently plan to be here until we kick the bucket, but we had some other constraints on length that meant we couldn't manage this.

 

Our stairs are about 950mm wide, from memory, and that's ample for passing in a domestic situation (assuming cake consumption in the house isn't too high!)

[joe90]

I too hate winders ( steps going round corners ) I plan 5 steps, 90' landing 2 steps, 90' landing, 6 steps. Not sure of my goings but when we get to actual measurements I will have the max I can within the stairwell. My hate of winders goes back to falling down my grans stairs when I was small, it was almost like a spiral in places, gawd only knows how she managed in her old age.

[Ferdinand]

A staircase with a shallow slope is one of the great hidden luxuries that makes a house feel sumptuous imo, even at the cost of an extra square metre of space (or two). It is like getting the orientation right - people who instinctively like the house may have trouble noticing why.

 

And it makes a significant difference to whether people can keep going upstairs easily when old; we reckoned our parents found it convenient for an extra 5 years+. And far better for the fat people we are all becoming.

 

I lived with the one below for several decades. It is a magnificent bruiser of a thing - Jacobean oak and pine with a gallery but sooooo comfortable. The shallow angle allowed my parents to keep going upstairs comfortably for a few extra years. Originally it had about 28 layers of paint from the Victorians onwards and we had two slaves architectural students who spent a whole summer restoring it.

 

There were 18 steps between floors, which were a little shallower than usual and I think the angle was under 35 degrees. Suggest go for roughly that.

 

And a generous half landing with a window seat, or space for a resting chair, is good :-). But that is more difficult in a modern setting.

 

My other favourite is generously shallow and wide open well circular staircases.

 

Suspect also that when falling down shallow staircases less damage is done as you go down less height for a given length of horizontal travel, as do half landings and curves (you stop quicker hitting the wall or floor less hard). That is just me guesstimating but feels about right.

 

Looking at Jack's numbers, I think I might try for something like 165-70 rising and his 270 going if the house could take it.

 

Ferdinand

 

Edited February 15, 2017 by Ferdinand

[jack]

10 hours ago, Alphonsox said:

I've been using various online stair design sites to try and plan out our new staircase. One thing I haven't had much luck in finding is a good set of "rules of thumb" for designing a comfortable staircase. Assuming that there are no great space constraints what do I need for a comfortable set of stairs ? I'm thinking of things like width, pitch, rise, going etc.

 

Any thoughts ?

 

Also, along the lines of looking to commercial regs, it's worth taking a ruler or tape measure with you and trying out the stairs in public or commercial premises. I seem to recall that I based our numbers roughly on the stairs at the office building where I worked at the time.

 

1 hour ago, Ferdinand said:

Looking at Jack's numbers, I think I might try for something like 165-70 rising and his 270 going if the house could take it.

 

Agreed. I'd have gone for exactly that if we'd had the space.

 

I do think there's a point where stairs become too flat and you feel like you're wasting energy going sideways. But Ferdinand is right, in my opinion, about generous stairs adding to that subtle feeling of quality. It's the same as generously proportioned hallways and landings.

[Guest Alphonsox]

Thanks for all the input everyone - time to get the tape measure out for some practical research.

[Declan52]

A good test  if your stairs will work is how easy it is to get the likes of wardrobes up them. If you can get that up them easy enough then they will be fine.

[Ferdinand]

The other test to apply to a proposed staircase is the normal length of your nearest and dearest's comfortable steps walking in the house, and to compare that to the length from one step to the next on the stairs.

 

That is sqrt (rising squared + going squared). Can also be done with arc tan if you are a masochist. 

 

I suggest that the step up the stairs should be a little shorter.

 

Having said that , I have never designed a staircase :-), so just call me an architectural consultant.

 

Ferdinand

Edited February 17, 2017 by Ferdinand

[Guest Alphonsox]

Just back from measuring the main staircase in IKEA Belfast, got some very funny looks but they do supply tape measures for the purpose so it must be OK.

Rise 180mm, going 280mm. The carpark stair is slightly different with 160 rise 320 going.

[sruk]

I know its an old post, this post has helped me alot but need a little further help.

My total rise (including top tread) is 2857mm, I am planning to make my staircase staircase 900mm wide, going 264mm, rise 179mm with a half landing 3 or 4 steps from the top (have not yet decided how many steps i want after the half landing due to space constraints)

 

I have 2 questions i am grappling with ,

a. with a rise of 179mm I am left with 7mm spare so 1 step will have a 172mm rise, question is where is the best place to put this lower step, bottom, half landing or top landing?

b. to save space I designed the half landing 840x840mm with the higher stair overlapping is there any issue with this or does it seem good?

(see attached image)

 

(The pros and cons for if to put the step on the longer or shorter run is that if I put it on the longer run the staircase will start 1725mm from the front door and I prefer to get a bigger distance, putting it on the shorter run however makes for a smaller landing upstairs and it also lowers the height of the main hallway under the stairs, i still need to decide which is more important to me 🤔)

 

Many thanks for your help

 

 

 

Edited April 20, 2022 by sruk

[markc]

No problem with that landing and if you must have a different step then it needs to be at the bottom to prevent falls. Amazing how a small difference in rise or going part way up or down a flight catches people out

[PeterW]

Have to be the same and tbh if you’re not building the staircase yourself then suggest you plug it into one of the many online stair design products and play with it there. Pears Stairs is one of many. 

[ProDave]

1 hour ago, sruk said:

a. with a rise of 179mm I am left with 7mm spare so 1 step will have a 172mm rise, question is where is the best place to put this lower step, bottom, half landing or top landing?

b. to save space I designed the half landing 840x840mm with the higher stair overlapping is there any issue with this or does it seem good?

(see attached image)

All stairs must rise the same amount, so you can't have one shallow step, make them all the same.

 

I am also pretty sure the half landing must be as wide as the stair, so if you can only fit a 840mm half landing then probably the whole stair will have to be 840mm.  Is that allowed where you are ?  (In Scotland the minimum is now 900mm)

[joe90]

Is anyone going to notice 7mm? 🤔

[saveasteading]

49 minutes ago, joe90 said:

Is anyone going to notice 7mm?

It is less than in a change of floor covering. However if that was added to an actual change in floor covering, and perhaps some construction tolerances, it could feasibly become a trip risk.

[joe90]

My stairs was out by a few mm and I just altered the angle by less than one degree which no one is going to notice or be able to measure 😎