Stairs Landing 2

[Christina1]

The builder put a LVL beam to support the landing and upper set of stairs, but the beam cuts across what should be stair railing in a very visible location. I hope this community has suggestions for ways to support the stairs and landing so the LVL can be removed, ideally without rebuilding the stairs with steel stringers. THanks in advance for your thoughts!!

 

[phamENG]

What's your role in the project?

Replacing that with some sort of kinked steel stringer - or at least reinforcing it with a plate - is probably the best option. Lots of these stairs have been "successfully" built without them, but those are a decent source of income for me to repair the sagging stairs.

Alternative is for the architect to come up with a way of enclosing that area and not make it look like an afterthought.

 

[lexpatrie]

Not with the stair opening below and the stringer already in place. Sheetrock.

 

[SWComposites]

what is the problem as-is? you can't/shouldn't leave that area open with the stairs below.
are you the owner? or what role?

 

[JAE]

Drop the LVL down to the level of the floor (like a typical floor beam) and post up to the corner of the landing?

 

[SWComposites]

That LVL beam sure goes all the way across to the wall, no?
Maybe post a photo of the other side of the LVL.

 

[Retrograde]

Drop the LVL down to the level of the floor (like a typical floor beam) and post up to the corner of the landing?

It looks like that solution might affect the head height of the next flight of stairs down.

 

[dvd]

It would be nice to know what the railing looks like and what could stay and what needs to go.

 

[Christina1]

I think dropping the lvl might work. The ceiling is 10' so there should be enough head room even if we lose a couple feet under the landing. The engineer is taking a look today so we'll be sure to make this suggestion. Thank you!!!

 

[Eng16080]

If possible, I would add a post below the corner of the landing and cut-off the end of the existing LVL. This should work if the lower stairs are framed in the same manner, meaning that the post won't obstruct the stairs. If that doesn't work, then add a new LVL at floor level which the new post will rest on. Or, I suppose, build a short wall between the two LVLs to avoid the post. If a new LVL is being added at the floor level, be sure there's adequate head height below it (probably 80" by code)

 

[stevenal]

I am reminded of a former pet of mine that decided to go left off of a landing when the stairs went right. She went under the railing, fell and broke her wrist. The beam where it sits prevents those not quite up to railing height from stepping out into the void. See lexpatrie's post above.

 

[Christina1]

Turns out there's not enough head room after all to set the lvl at floor level. Would love to hear any other thoughts or suggestions.

The railing will be vertical down to the treads so there won't be any gaps >4"

 

[lexpatrie]

I still think sheet rock is the answer. Think of it as a "stet" mark from the editor.

I won't question the open stair system versus a fire enclosure and smoke control. Honestly I won't. Maybe it's not an egress stair and those are elsewhere.

 

[dvd]

Everything works when there is no scale, so take this with a grain of salt. Suggesting to create a laminated 2-d stringer/truss section.

 

[Eng16080]

Other ideas? Idk, set the LVL on top of the floor instead of flush with it, with the top roughly the same elevation as top of the first tread? That won't impact the railing. Does my post idea not work? What do the stairs below look like?

Really it should be your engineer solving this, but I guess I can't resist a little problem solving.

 

[TLHS]

I'm on team "cranked steel channel" if you can't just enclose the thing

 

[phamENG]

Easiest solution is a column in that corner (assuming the stairs below are configured the same way/there's a place for that column to land).

Only reliable way I see to get the look you clearly want is going to be a kinked steel tube. If your engineer is adventurous enough, he/she might be able to prove that a kinked steel plate could handle it.

 

[DoubleStud]

bent steel beam is your best bet.

 

[Eng16080]

I wouldn't do this, but theoretically, you could use a sloped beam along the lower steps, with a "pinned" connection to an LVL at the landing only. As long as the adjacent framing could resist the lateral thrust of those two kinked pieces, it should work. In reality this is too complicated to actually get built correctly and probably dangerous.

 

[Eng16080]

Back to reality, I kind of like the steel plate idea with the connection to each piece designed to resist the moment.