formula for deck stairs

[Pat]

Hi, can anyone give me a formula to do deck/patio stairs in metric.

Cheers Pat

[Larry Jaques]

On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 21:17:25 +1100, "Pat" calmly ranted:

25.4mm = 1"

Nexxxxxxxxxxxxxxt!

----------------------------------------------------------------------- A PSYCHOLOGIST looks at everyone -else- ||

an attractive woman enters the room. || Full Website Programming

[Slowhand]

3.28084 feet per meter? When I was 15, dad was a partner with another contractor on a dam in Oklahoma. It was also the first federal job that President Reagan had decided to make a metric job to get everyone used to the forthcoming transition . Guess what my job was my first summer there. Converting the metric measurements on the plans into standard so dad didn't have to think so much! That is a number I will never forget. Fortunately the next summer I got to go out in the field and bust my butt in the sweltering heat. SH - the "I've done my time" woodworker

[Phil Crow]

To do what with them? Lay them out? Build them? Apply metric finishes?

Seriously, Ohio commercial building code requires a maximum rise of about 17 cm (7 inches) and a minimum tread width of, I think, 30 cm (12 inches). That's a good place to start.

-Phil Crow

[Guess who]

[Badger]

Hummm, still in the dark ages then ;-)

And American companies wonder why selling high tech gear to the rest of the world is so hard....

Niel.

Below is from my alter self:

"GO METRICS - Not Adopting is Lliving in the Past from Niel J.P.Fagan, Lab. and Process Superintendent, England

John P. Schweisthal hit that nail squarely on the head, but in England we have it even worse with Metric, English Imperial and american english to contend with.

We buy units from Asia and its metric, from Europe metric again, from USA a horrible mixture some (few) metric but mainly weird sizes that make little sense like #8/32 threads. Yes we still have some older kit with BSF/BSW, but atleast they make some sense and you can still get most sizes of nuts and bolts off the shelf, unlike most US threads.

Yes we English have gone metric, for MOST things, and its much much easier to build systems as a result, we still retain BSP (our imperial pipe thread standard) which has been adopted by most of the rest of the world and it now has an ISO designation too.

We understand that the USA likes to do things differently, BUT using non-standard thread systems and the measurement systems that go with them (or is that the other way round) is just living in the past, as with most industries here its modernize or die, or atleast get stuck in an unfavourable trading position time-warp.

I was trained when inches were king, moved through the transition, and apart from historic equipment (and vehicles, a 1950's Land- Rover being my preferred mode of transport, for ecological reasons as much as anything else) most everything is now metric, and fits first time without wasteful and sometime dangerous adaptors made by unskilled workers "just to make it fit", re-building is an off the shelf prospect with standard parts and no problems with odd threads etc.

Move on, don't live in the past, the future is out there, grasp it with both hands, sure it'll hurt for a while, but change always does, and go for it, the old'uns will complain, but working in metric is easier, base

10 calc is quicker, and in 15-20 years you may have even have caught-up with the rest of the world!"

[Pat]

I am in Australia, thats why I have asked for Metric. I really have no idea about imperial. What I need is a formula for the angle of the stringers with the drops to the treads etc. I have built two sets so far but neither have a 'comfortable feel' to them.

Pat

[Robert Bonomi]

one rise over one run, per stair.

HTH

HAND

[Old Nick]

On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 09:35:20 +1100, "Pat" vaguely proposed a theory ......and in reply I say!:

remove ns from my header address to reply via email

Working with stuff, you may have to at least pick up imperail conversions. It can be useful..

Do a google search for "stairway design". Lots of finds when I tried it. Nobody is liktely to simply "this is it".

[Old Nick]

On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 21:17:25 +1100, "Pat" vaguely proposed a theory ......and in reply I say!:

remove ns from my header address to reply via email

Or you could look at a few and measure up one that feels good.

[Pat]

Thanks Old Nick, That was a winner. I now have what I was looking for. Thanks all.

Pat

[Mike Marlow]

Forget formulas and angles Pat. DAGS for framing squares and steps. There's some sites out there that will give you all the info you need to use a framing square to lay out stairs. Basically, it's rise over run. Typically, somewhere in the 7" range is what's comfortable for most people, for the rise. The run should be at least that, and typically more... maybe in the 10" range. I've heard it said that rise and run should total 17, but I don't go by that myself. I prefer a bit more tread so that it feels more like a walk than a step, but that's my preference.

[Old Nick]

On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 16:07:08 +1100, "Pat" vaguely proposed a theory ......and in reply I say!:

remove ns from my header address to reply via email

Just watch one thing with slopes. They can be tricky bastards. I got into an argument with a Civil Engineer once, because his 1:3 slope was different from my 1:3 slope. I am still not sure who said what or what the accepted standard is. But one of us was measuring 3 up the hill, then going up 1, the other was measuring 3 dead horizontal, then going up 1. So we had different angles altogether.

Actually it was 1:2. I said 30 deg, because the in of 30 is 1/2. I walk up the slope 2 metres and I will be higher by 1 metre. He said

26.6 degrees, because he would go straight along 2 metres then up one. As far as I was concerned he was welcome to buy a trench dogger whenever he was working uphiull, and skyhooks when going downward! .