Bibliographic record
Abstract
The authors state that the aim of this book is to present the published methods for designing stairs, especially for free standing and spiral, helical, elliptical shaped stairs. They state the target audience is the practicing professional as well as students and professors. There are five chapters as follows: • Chapter 1 shows the different forms a stair can take, discusses wood, steel, and concrete as materials, and compares code stresses in four countries, including Canada. • Chapter 2 outlines all available classical methods of structural analysis. • Chapter 3 presents flexibility, stiffness, and finite element analyses. • Chapter 4 compares stresses found using the different analysis method. • Chapter 5 outlines some design examples and detailing of various stair types and methods. The bibliographical references allow for in-depth research. Two appendices show European practice of redistribution of movements and contain design drawings of unusual stairs as detailed in various countries. Worked examples of analyses are included. Pages 59–65 have excellent sketches of the in-plane forces developed in stairs; page 71 illustrates the deflections of a free standing stair with no supports at the landing. Helical stairs are analyzed in a clear manner following page 132. The explanatory diagrams for space truss theory for dealing with torsion on page 240 are helpful in visualizing this topic. The book is unique in its topic of designing stairs; the reviewer has not seen another text on this topic. The practicing engineer will be able to design unusual stairs with increased confidence. The authors have developed a generalized method based on older work by Gould. Strengths and weaknesses. There are good illustrations of the various forms and shapes of stairs, and an excellent presentation of the effects of arch actions and resulting horizontal forces. The flexibility method in Chapter 3 appears practical for designers. There is a good explanation of torque and its analysis in Chapter 5. Some weaknesses are the variety of units used in the illustrations, SI metric, imperial, and the older European metric, due to the sources of the drawings being from all over the world and some are older drawings. Some of the reinforcing details are incorrect; re-entrant corners require reinforcing to be detailed to prevent “pop out” of the concrete by bent bars in tension. In general then some of the detailed examples are not current practice in Canada. The design of stairs is rarely a topic in undergraduate, or even at the masters level. Thus this textbook is useful to any structural engineering office both as an aid to inexperienced engineers, but also for assistance in designing more unusual stairs, such as stairs with freestanding unsupported landings, spiral or helical stairs that are sometimes required in public spaces. The development of horizontal reactions is helpful, normally they are ignored, and designers should be made aware of their presence.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.046 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".