Hello everyone,
What dimensions would an "S-shaped" staircase with two opposite 1/4 turns need to have (see attachment) in order to be functional? We would prefer a slightly wider tread width, about 115 cm (45 inches). A riser height of 19–19.5 cm (7.5–7.7 inches) would be acceptable.
Are the costs significantly higher compared to a standard 1/4-turn staircase?

What dimensions would an "S-shaped" staircase with two opposite 1/4 turns need to have (see attachment) in order to be functional? We would prefer a slightly wider tread width, about 115 cm (45 inches). A riser height of 19–19.5 cm (7.5–7.7 inches) would be acceptable.
Are the costs significantly higher compared to a standard 1/4-turn staircase?
Assume a height to be overcome of about 285cm (room height 2.50m (8 feet 2 inches) plus floor structure including upper floor finish).
A straight staircase can be calculated relatively easily if you know the rise and tread depth. However, I am unable to estimate how much the two opposite quarter turns will affect this.
Do you think a total length (in the drawing from left to right) of 370–380cm (12 feet 2 inches to 12 feet 6 inches) and a total width (in the drawing from top to bottom) of 190–200cm (6 feet 3 inches to 6 feet 7 inches) will be sufficient?
A straight staircase can be calculated relatively easily if you know the rise and tread depth. However, I am unable to estimate how much the two opposite quarter turns will affect this.
Do you think a total length (in the drawing from left to right) of 370–380cm (12 feet 2 inches to 12 feet 6 inches) and a total width (in the drawing from top to bottom) of 190–200cm (6 feet 3 inches to 6 feet 7 inches) will be sufficient?
If the width is only supposed to be 190 to 200 cm (75 to 79 inches), then the stair tread and the top landing are each only about 40 cm (16 inches), assuming the staircase has a clear width of 115 cm (45 inches).
I calculated with 16 risers, which results in the following layout:
390 cm (154 inches)
and width 165 plus 37 equals 202 cm (65 plus 15 equals 80 inches), because you simply have to imagine the 37 cm (15 inch) wide section at the bottom right of the staircase.
--------------
I would really be interested in the kind of room layout where such a stair design could be used. ops:
I calculated with 16 risers, which results in the following layout:
390 cm (154 inches)
and width 165 plus 37 equals 202 cm (65 plus 15 equals 80 inches), because you simply have to imagine the 37 cm (15 inch) wide section at the bottom right of the staircase.
--------------
I would really be interested in the kind of room layout where such a stair design could be used. ops:
Thank you very much for your effort! The width would be suitable. A tread width of 110cm (43 inches) would also be perfectly fine. With a rise/run ratio of 17.8/27.4, the staircase is very comfortable. Could we save some space by using 15 risers instead? (How much?) As mentioned, a riser height of 19cm (7.5 inches) is acceptable. We have already walked on stairs with that height and found it not bothersome but completely fine.
285cm (112 inches) ÷ 16 = 17.8cm (7 inches) (your example above)
285cm (112 inches) ÷ 15 = 19.0cm (7.5 inches)
285cm (112 inches) ÷ 16 = 17.8cm (7 inches) (your example above)
285cm (112 inches) ÷ 15 = 19.0cm (7.5 inches)
Similar topics