See anything wrong with the stair rail?

The stair rail on the wall goes all the way to the top. It turns in at the top and bottom. The rail on the left stops at the wall. Forget the window. Any obvious defect here? :cool:

Railing continuity: should be continuous - that is a hand can slide along the rail without interruption from above the top riser to above the bottom riser

Is the one on the right not continuous?

My right is the window!! Yes I would say its continuous (kinda) and switch my answer to the height at the turn, my left? :slight_smile:

“The main stairs did not have a continuous handrail. In the photo, the rail on the left stops at the wall. The rail on the right does not wrap around the stair winders. You have to start by holding onto one rail, and then switch to the other. Today’s commonly accepted construction standards require a handrail for 4 or more risers. Additionally, “handrails for stairways shall be continuous for the full length of the flight, from a point directly above the top riser of the flight to a point directly above the lowest riser of the flight.” Although this defect is quite common, for safety reasons a railing meeting the standard as quoted above is recommended. Information about proper stair rail construction and illustrations are available on our website (see page 9).”

Maybe that is the purely decorative side ,since it is not continuous anyway.Only one side is required to have practical handrails.

So if your enforcing the rail to todays standards, go for the treads too…

That taint no 6" at the nosing on step #3

Joe, are you saying that the rail at the far wall needs to wrap around past the window even though you can switch hands with the rail that stops at the wall?

Exactly. Basically two sets of stairs with separate railing.

If they want to leave the rail on the left like it is, then yes.

However, the best solution is to remove completely the rail on the right wall and wrap the one on the left around the left wall without a break and extend it to the top.

That said, rest assured nothing will change.

Where do you see two sets of stairs? There is no landing, the stairs continue through.

Well,well.
Are those turns wide enough to be looked at as a landing?

All treads are required to be the same width also remember.So either they are a landing or violating the tread width rule.:slight_smile:
If looked at as a landing then no handrail is needed at the last couple steps.

A we go down a slippery slope (stairs).

See page 6:

http://www.arcways.com/pdfs/IRC2006.pdf

Yes ,I saw a nice definition of “winders” now how about one for landing.
WINDER. A tread with nonparallel edges.
landing.jpg

landing.jpg

OK here is definition of “landing”

The width of each landing shall not be less than
the stairway served. Every landing shall have
a minimum dimension of 36 inches (914 mm)
measured in the direction of travel

So if those winders are at least 36" wide would they not be called landings?

No. There is not 36 inches in the direction of travel.

The requirement is: at least 36 inches wide **and at least **36 inches in the direction of travel. So, for the sake of arguement… 36" X 36" minimum.

OK ,so I guess the handrail needs to be extended.
Here is one I had today.

So just wanted to be 100% sure on this.

Now you got it Bob! Yes, needs continuous handrail.

Thanks Larry! That will come in very handy with a few remodelers I know. :wink:

The railing needs to follow the risers around and down to the main floor.
That one went to far, it should have stopped at the last riser of the main stair and then followed the pitch of the winder stairs. :slight_smile: