For some time I have been trying to find the name (if there is one) for a unique stairwell configuration of a brutalist building here in NE Ohio. The configuration is essentially a straight stair with intermediate landing placed side by side so that an X configuration is made in section view. The stairwell is accessible from two sides on each floor, so in essence you could enter the stairwell at the east end of the building, ascend a half flight, turn at the landing, descend a half flight and end up on the west side if the building. Or, by continuing to ascend straight up at the landing, one would end up at the west end of the building on the second floor.
I have tried, with little luck, to determine a logical reasoning for this configuration, but I have found no information thus far. Anyone have any ideas? Thanks.
Although a second read says your particular case is slightly different than most scissor stairs. Normally, you wouldn't have the shared landing in the middle.
Indeed, they are similar to scissor stairs, however in the photo in the link, they are similar to the red staircase, only the intermediate landings are joined. Any reason why these would have been used, other than to be "different"? I can't see how it could pass as two means of egress, since the staircases are joined.
you should post a picture of that stair for better visualization.
If they meet at the landing, they could indeed be two means of egress. There is part of the code where, lets say from top of 3rd story you meet the travel distance to a point (where the two stairs meet at 2nd story) then at that point you have two means of egress, as long as the discharge is a remote distance.
In this case, two stairs coming down from the 3rd story would not be necessary, but it all depends on the travel distance and what part of code you are focusing on.
Can't see how this meets code requirement for two means of egress. One of the reasons for two means of egress is in case one of the stairs fills up with smoke. They must be totally separated, which is not the case here.
Well, but how about breezeway stairs, exterior stairs. Nothing to do with smoke! Its more complex than what you think! It has more to do with common path of travel. At the intersection, you have two ways to go and therefore you have two discharge exits (two means). The staris don't have to be "completely" separated! Travel distance is the key here! How about 1/2 the remote distance?
It all depends on what it is. If the building is sprinklered, new rules apply.
I'm not saying this is the case, but it could very well be. This stairs, could be simply a design feature!
Jul 29, 13 7:56 pm ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
Name of stairwell configuration
For some time I have been trying to find the name (if there is one) for a unique stairwell configuration of a brutalist building here in NE Ohio. The configuration is essentially a straight stair with intermediate landing placed side by side so that an X configuration is made in section view. The stairwell is accessible from two sides on each floor, so in essence you could enter the stairwell at the east end of the building, ascend a half flight, turn at the landing, descend a half flight and end up on the west side if the building. Or, by continuing to ascend straight up at the landing, one would end up at the west end of the building on the second floor.
I have tried, with little luck, to determine a logical reasoning for this configuration, but I have found no information thus far. Anyone have any ideas? Thanks.
Scissor Stairs.
Although a second read says your particular case is slightly different than most scissor stairs. Normally, you wouldn't have the shared landing in the middle.
Indeed, they are similar to scissor stairs, however in the photo in the link, they are similar to the red staircase, only the intermediate landings are joined. Any reason why these would have been used, other than to be "different"? I can't see how it could pass as two means of egress, since the staircases are joined.
Rc,
you should post a picture of that stair for better visualization.
If they meet at the landing, they could indeed be two means of egress. There is part of the code where, lets say from top of 3rd story you meet the travel distance to a point (where the two stairs meet at 2nd story) then at that point you have two means of egress, as long as the discharge is a remote distance.
In this case, two stairs coming down from the 3rd story would not be necessary, but it all depends on the travel distance and what part of code you are focusing on.
Here is a photo of the building.
Can't see how this meets code requirement for two means of egress. One of the reasons for two means of egress is in case one of the stairs fills up with smoke. They must be totally separated, which is not the case here.
Well, but how about breezeway stairs, exterior stairs. Nothing to do with smoke! Its more complex than what you think! It has more to do with common path of travel. At the intersection, you have two ways to go and therefore you have two discharge exits (two means). The staris don't have to be "completely" separated! Travel distance is the key here! How about 1/2 the remote distance?
It all depends on what it is. If the building is sprinklered, new rules apply.
I'm not saying this is the case, but it could very well be. This stairs, could be simply a design feature!
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.