Stair Railing

[ricksidebottom]

This is a stair railing that I completed this week. It is about 10 long. Everyone was very pleased with the results. Scrolls are from King Metals.

[aametalmaster]

Nice work Rick...Bob

[MNT]

looks great.

Are the codes for spacing of pickets different on a railing that goes up the middle of the stairs? How did you mount it to the concrete?

[smooth72]

Looks good.

[JimYoung]

nice job RicK
Jim

[ricksidebottom]

looks great.

Are the codes for spacing of pickets different on a railing that goes up the middle of the stairs? How did you mount it to the concrete?

The county passed it and it meets ADA. We matched the existing precast concrete scrolls in the overhead of the entrance. That was a have to for National Historic registry. It had to be mounted with base plates so it could be removed. I would have preferred to core drill.

[Bodybagger]

It seems like I'm always the resident nit pick. Oh well, here goes. I see 3 issues.

1: It does not appear that the top rail meets the graspability requirement of IRC/IBC which requires a minimum of 4" section perimeter and a maximum of 6.25" section perimeter (which means you're locked into using 1.25" or 1.5" tubing if you chose square). 1" square tubing has a section perimeter less than 4" due to rounding of the corners. It appears that the top rail is smaller than 1 1/4", but it's hard to tell for sure from the picture.

2: It looks like the anchors are darn close to the edge of the concrete at the bottom of the stairs, which will lead to splitting. The minimum edge distance for anchors is given in "the concrete code" ACI 318 D.8.3

D.8.3 — Unless determined in accordance with D.8.4, minimum edge distances for post-installed anchors shall be based on the greater of the minimum cover requirements for reinforcement in 7.7, or the minimum edge distance requirements for the products as determined by tests in accordance with ACI 355.2, and shall not be less than 2.0 times the maximum aggregate size. In the absence of product-specific ACI 355.2 test information, the minimum edge distance shall be taken as not less than:
Undercut anchors .............................................. 6d
Torque-controlled anchors ................................. 8d
Displacement-controlled anchors .................... 10d

3: I'd make it clear and get something in writing that it's understood that this center handrail does not make these stairs code compliant. A protective railing is required on both sides due to height. Having the building inspector sign off on it provides absolutely no indemnification for you.

That said, they look great and appear to fit a historic property nicely.

EDIT:

The county passed it and it meets ADA.

I thought about it for a second and thought ADA Accessibility Guidelines require 2 handrails. And in fact, these stairs DO NOT meet ADA Accessibility Guidelines.

4.9.4* Handrails. Stairways shall have handrails at both sides of all stairs.

http://www.access-board.gov/adaag/html/adaag.htm

[smooth72]

So what is the value or need of a inspection? My understanding is that an official from city or state inspects and past it then it is approved.

[ricksidebottom]

Thanks for the comments everyone, yes Bodybagger, even you!

The rails are 1 1/4" sq with 1 9/16" cap rail. From the best we could tell, the avg. aggregate size was about 1/4" for the precast steps. We are 2" +- from the edge and epoxy was put on the anchors. As for the total ADA compliance, the building went with nothing for over 70 years. People are just glad to have something to grab onto.

I do my best to do it right, but sometime regs can be confusing has h3ll. I have done work in 3 cities close to me and none have identical regs.

[Bodybagger]

Hey, you did a good job. And strike issue one as graspability is covered. And with epoxy, there is no splitting force developed, so you're in the clear there too. And as far as having two rails, there's nothing you can do if the owner only wants one!

I never want to make anyone feel bad with my criticism except for the periodic occasion when someone flaunts an obvious disrespect for the codes. It's hard enough keeping up that it's probably impossible to cover every base and run a job at the same time.

That said, the building inspectors are not running a job. They are there to nitpick. But what obviously happens is that when they call out every little detail, they get political pressure from city officials (who believe firmly that inspection is a revenue generator, and not for the safety and welfare of the public) that want to keep the building permit revenue flowing.

I feel sorry for a person who has to worry about being fired for doing their job to the best of their abilities.