Title No.

60-45

Analysis and Design of a

Cantilever Staircase
By PHILLIP L. GOULD

The various factors influencing the behavior of a cantilever staircase

are discussed and evaluated. Particular attention is’given to the torsional
moment at the intermediate landing and the support condition of the upper
leg. A design example is presented illustrating those calculations that are
peculiar to this type of structure.
Key words: analysis; cantilever staircase; design;. reinforced concrete:
staircase: torsion.

W IN RECENT YEARS the cantilever or free-standing staircase has become

quite popular. Many variations of this type of staircase are possible and
some will be described herein. A discussion of the factors that affect
the behavior of the staircase is presented together with an abbreviated
design example which illustrates only those calculations which are
peculiar to this type of design. Once the forces and moments are deter-
mined, the calculations are generally routine.

DISCUSSION OF SUPPORT CONDITIONS

The behavior of the staircase is greatly influenced by the support at
Point A in Fig. 1. If a horizontal thrust can be developed at Point A,
the moment at the base is quite small; however, if only a vertical re-
action can be developed, the moment at the base is greatly increased.
The various possibilities are illustrated in Fig. 3. If the horizontal re-
action is to be developed, consideration must be given t\o the construc-
tion procedure as well as the final finished stair to insure that the
structure is never free-standing. The great variation in base moment
between the two conditions is illustrated in the design example.
To reduce the moment at the base, it seems logical to take advantage
of the large lever arm afforded by the stair height and, thereby, reduce
the overturning moment by developing the horizontal reaction. How-
ever, there are certain situations in which this is not practical such as
the case when the upper end of the staircase rests on a spandrel beam
which is designed to resist only vertical loads and is frequently restricted
I in size because of architectural considerations. The example illustrates
the treatment of this type of support.

881
882 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CONCRETE IN&TlTUTE July 196)

ACI member Phillip I.. Could, structural designer, Wastenhoff b Novick, Chicago,
Ill., obtained his BS and MS degrees in civil engineering from the University of
Illinois in 1959 and 1960, respectively. Mr. Could has had several discussions
appear in the ASCE Proceedings and the ACI JOURNAL.

ANALYSIS
For the analysis the staircase is considered as a frame with the mo-
ment at the intermediate landing being transferred between the legs by
torsion developed through the landing. The method of analysis used
depends again on the support condition at the upper landing. If the
horizontal reaction can be developed, classical moment distribution can
be used with Point B (Fig. 1) considered fixed against translation. On
the other hand if only the vertical reaction can be developed, Point B
can translate. To avoid a deflection correction to the moment distribu-
tion procedure, the* problem can be solved by Castigliano’s theorem of
strain energy.l This is the approach used in the example. For a fixed
support at Point A, moment distribution can again be used and for a
completely free-standing stair, the moment may be solved by statics.
For the case where the upper support is flexible, the structure may be
solved by Castigliano’s theorem as illustrated in the examples.
10.0’ I 4.0’

t
I

LOAD = 0.392 ‘A HORIZONTAL PROJ.

Fig. I-Elevation of cantilever staircase showing dimensions and loads

 CANTILEVER STAIRCASE a83

b width of intermediate landing, I a. = moment of inertia of the SUP-

in. porting beam, about the hori-
zontal axis, in.&
b’ long dimension of the tie or
hoop, in. I *v = moment of inertia of the sup-
porting beam, about the ver-
C width of supporting beam, in. tical axis, in.’
d depth of stair slab, in. Ka = horizontal spring constant of
e i&/P measured from centroid support, kips per ft
of base, in. KM = rotational spring constant of
e’ distance from centroid of foot- support, ft-kips per radian
ing to line of action of P’, in. Kv = vertical spring constant of sup-
f. allowable stress in reinforce- port, kips per ft
ment, psi L = length of the supporting beam,
h depth of intermediate landing, ft
in. MD = bending moment at base of
h’ short dimension of the tie or staircase, ft-kips
hoop, in. Mm, = bending moment at Point m
s spacing of ties in landing, in. in Member mn, ft-kips
t depth of supporting beam, in. P axial load on the base of the
staircase, kips
W width of stair slab, it
P equivalent axial load applied
A., area of horizontal steel per- to the footing at an eccentric-
pendicular to ties in intermedi- ity e’, kips
ate landing, sq in.
T torsional moment at interme-
A.. area of all shear reinforcement diate landing, ft-kips
at a given section in the in-
u strain energy due to bending,
termediate landing, i.e., the
ft-kips
area of two bars in the hoop,
s q i n . V* vertical reaction at nth sup-
port, kips
Cl 642 + EZ/1.3K,
V mn shear at m in Member mn,
c, 875 + E1/1.3K1 kips
C:, 15.83 + EZ/1.3K,,
E modulus of elasticity, kips per a elastic torsion theory constants
sq in. B for rectangular sections
F ratio of actual length to hori- h.
zontal projection
-c = angle of twist per unit length,
Fl integration factor radians
F* integration factor + = total angle of twist, radians
G shearing modulus, kips per sq An, = horizontal deflection of nth
in. support, in.
HI9 horizontal reaction at nth sup- Av,, = vertical deflection of nth sup-
port, kips port, in.
,.I moment of inertia of the stair AM+, = rotation of nth support, radians
slab, in.’ Q) = torsional shear stress, psi
 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE July 1963

TORSION AT INTEkMEDlAtE LANDING

As shown in Fig. 2, the torsional moment in the landing at the junction‘
of the upper and lower legs can be found by statics. The maximum
torsional shear stress can be approximated by >the formula
T
co= -
abh’

The coefficient a is itself proportional to b/h but approaches a limit

of 0.333 for large values of b/h. Tabulated values may be found in
Reference 2 or 3. There is considerable doubt as to. the distribution of
shear stress on the landing and how much of the landing may be re-
garded as effective. For the design example, the reinforcing will be
proportioned on the basis of the entire cross section resisting the torsion.

MBA =q

M BC= T-w

MBA~MBC- 2T
ToMBA+MDC
2

Fig. P-Moment acting on landin’g

 CANTILEVER STAIRCASE 885

Additional steel will be provided near the junction of the legs on the
basis of an effective width equal to the depth of the slab. . This addi-
tional steel will be arbitrarily proportioned for half the torsional moment
recognizing the increase in torsional shearing stress near the junction.
In the example the entire torsional shear is assumed to be resisted by
the ties and horizontal bars, although the slab itself provides consider-
able torsional resistance. The formula used for proportioning the steel
and the tabulated values for the constants may be found in Reference 3.

ADDITIONAL MOMENTS ON UPPER AND LOWER LEGS

For the staircase to behave as a frame, vertical and horizontal forces
(HB and V,) must be transmitted between the legs of the staircase
through the landing. Since these forces act on a section through the
center of the landing parallel to the longitudinal axis of the legs, they
are eccentric with respect to the legs and produce bending in the plane
of the legs, as well as torsion on the legs. The staircase should be in-
vestigated for the effects of these additional torsional and bending
moments as well as the primary moment and axial force acting on
the legs.4
Inasmuch as the legs are general-
STRAIN
ly quite stiff in their own plane and

Y?-
have considerable torsional resist- ,
ance, these additional moments
should have only a minor effect on
the design. %
CASE A CAJE E

FOUNDATION
The force and moment acting on
the foundation are shown in Fig. 4.
The moment M and axial load P
applied to the footing by the stair-
case are replaced by an equivalent
axial load P’ acting on the footing.
The moment on the footing is then
Pe’, where e’ is the distance from
the centroid of the footing to the
point of application of the equiva-
lent axial load. To avoid unequal
pressure distribution on the bottom
of the footing, e’ should be kept as
small as possible. If tension is to
be avoided on the bottom of the CASE 0

footing, a fairly large base may be Fig. 3-Support conditions for Cases A
required. through D
886 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE July 1963

Fig. 4-Forces and moments on footings

DESIGN EXAMPLES
The staircase shown in Fig. 1 will be analyzed for the various support
conditions at Point A illustrated in Fig. 3. Nominal dimensions are
given in Fig. 5a and the loading in Fig. 1. For Case A detailed computa-
tions are presented for the required torsional reinforcement. Tabulated
values are presented for the various reactions and moments for each of
the supporting conditions.
Case A -Vertical reaction at Point A
The forces acting on the structure are shown in Fig. 6. Castigliano’s
theorem states that
au
av, =Av1 . . . . .._......................................... (1)

where
VA = vertical reaction at Point A, and
AVL = vertical deflection at Point A

Since the vertical deflection at Point A equals zero:

au = 0
- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2)
T9VA
Only the strain energy due to bending is considered.

u+ E$z (3)
/
au s
-SK=
Mdx aM
EIav, (4)

To simplify the .algebraic expressions the integration will be per-

formed with the formulas for moment and the limits based on the
 CANTILEVER STAIRCASE 887

lNTECRATlON FACTQRS

Fig. 5a-Nominal dimensions and loads of cantilever staircase

4to

b - 48”

Fig. 5b-Typical torsional reinforcement

 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE July 1963

r0 . 9 9 2 K/;
A
MX = VAX -‘o. 992’+’
VA
g$*= x
SIGN CONVENTION
(bmpression on outside
T
0 )rOVn-49.6=M~~ face represents positive
m o m e n t
I
vi% =un- 9.92

7 NOVA-49.6

(b)

10 VA - 36.6
I
c VA - 16.4
0.992 % B
3 IO VA- 36.6 = MBO
VA- 16.4
t

D M x =(lOV~-36.6)-&A-l6.4)X+O.992~
7
L, MD
=VA(lO-X)-36.6 t16.4X+0.496X2
vb - a. IS-VA

1 ah4 = I O - X
SiVZ
(cl AT X = 5 . 8 3
MD = 4.17 UA +7&

Fig. 6-Free-body diagrams of staircase members assuming a vertical reaction

at Support A
 CANTILEVER STAIRCASE 889

horizontal dimensions as shown in Fig. 6. After integration and simplifi-

cation of the expressions, they will be multiplied by the ratio of the
actual length of the member to the horizontal projection (F) to obtain
the actual value of the integral. For Case A this is not necessary since
the factor will not affect VA. The value of F is computed in Fig. 5a.
Substituting the expressions for bending moment and the partial
derivatives into Eq. (4) :

au 1
10
av,=EI s o
(V.4x - 0.496x2) xczx

5.88
1 [0.496x2 + 16.4x - 36.6 + V~(10 -x)-j [lo - x]dx = 0 (5)
+EI/ o
After the necessary integration has been performed:
+ EI = -856 + 642 V., = 0 (6)
1
Hence
VA = 1.33 kips
From the equations given in Fig. 6:
M D = 76.0 + 4.17 x 1.33 = 81 ft-kips
VD = 22.18 - 1.33 = 20.85 kips
MBA = 10 x 1.33 - 49.6 = 36.3 ft-kips (clockwise)
Msn = 10 x 1.33 - 36.6 = 23.3 ft-kips (anticlockwise)
T = 23.3 + 36*3 - 29 8 ft-kips
2 -.

Case B- Horizontal and vertical reaction at Point A

The moment distribution procedure is used in this solution which is
illustrated in Fig. 3 and Fig. 7. To solve for HA and V, moments are
taken about Point B in Fig. 7b and about Point D ‘in Fig. 7~.
SMa zz -49.6 + 11.7 - 8.04% + 1OVn = 0 ,,,...,....,.............. (7)
From Fig. 7~:
SMD I 76.1 - 3.6 + 4.17V~ - 13% = 0 ( 8 )
From Eq. (7) and (8) :
HA = 9.10 kips
V.4 = 11.08 kips
V. = 22.18 - 11.08 = 11.10 kips
M BA = 11.7 ft-kips (clockwise)
MBD = 1.3 ft-kips (clockwise)
11.7 - 1.3 = 5.2 ft-kips
T = .2
a90 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE July 1963

316N CONVENTION
+\On-lLa

LM, (of /&ads) SMb (of fbadss)

9.92 . 5 I 49.6 9.92 - 0.83 = a.25
6.4&- 7.83~ 50.70
5.80- 2.91 = 17.00
(b)
79.5s “cy 7t=

Fig. 7-Free-body diagrams of staircase members assuming a vertical and hori-

zontal reaction at Support A
 CANTILEVER STAIRCASE 891

For this loading condition the bending moment acting on the base of
the staircase is greatly reduced. However, a horizontal reaction of 9.10
kips must be developed. Also the torsion on the landing is reduced by
a substantial amount.

Case C - Fixed support at Point A

The method of analysis is ~exactly the same as that of Case B so only
the results are presented.
V‘ = 12.0 kips
vo = 10.08 kips
HA = 8.89 kips
M BA = 8.98 ft-kips
M BD = 4.02 ft-kips
T = 8.98 - 4.02 - 2 48 ft-kips
2 -.
For this loading condition a considerable horizontal reaction must be
provided together with full fixity against rotation. For the slight re-
duction in the values of forces and moments as compared to Case B,
it does not seem practical to try to achieve this condition.

Case D -Vertical reaction of flexible support at Point A

This case is similar to Case A except that the support at Point A is
flexible as shown in Fig. 3. Assume that the support may be repre-
sented by a spring such that
Kr = VL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (9)
iv*

Eq. (2) will become

and Eq. (6) will become

(-858 + 842 VA) 1.3 = - 2 EI.. ., ..,. ,., (11)

Then

v* = 858 (lla)
842 f -& "'
. v

or
 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE July 1963

TABLE I-SUMMARY OF REACTIONS AND MOMENTS

’ fbl;ty ft-klps f;;yiP”

MA, clock- Wcley- clock- T,
lJ$ ky;s ft-kips wise) wise) ft-kips
20.85 ) - - 36.30 23.30 29.80
11.70 1.30 5.20
t-
B 11.08 9.10 -
C 12.00 10.08 8.89 7.90 / 2.20 1 8.98 4.02
20.91 - - 81.30 36.90 23.90
~7 38.00 25.90 12.90
1.40 / 36.90 25.40 12.40
- / 76.00 49.60 1 36.60

where
EI
CI = 642 + 1.3~,

The values for reactions and moments are summarized in Table 1.

The effect of the vertical elastic support is slight in the example pre-
sented.

Case E -Vertical and horizontal reactions on flexible supports at Point A

This case is similar to Case B. However, since deflections are involved,
the method of solution will. be different. The supports will be treated
as springs with constants KH and KV as shown in Fig. 3e and Fig. 8.
Castigliano’s theorem will then become

au
aH, HI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
= - Ka

The expressions for bending moments and partial derivatives are

shown in Fig. 8.
From Eq. (12) and (13) :

au 1
10
73-A =EI o s
(VAX - 0.804Hnx - 0.4961)(x)&r

[0.496$ + 16.4~ - 36.6 + Vl(lO - x) + I&(--8.04 - 0.85~) ]

[lo - z]cI.z = - 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (12a)

 CANTILEVER STAIRCASE 893

and
au 1 1o (VAX - 0.804 Hnx- 0.4969) (-0.804x)dx
%ii =EIJ o
l.(*t
1 [0.4961+16.43c-36.6 + V,( 10-x) + HA(-8.04-0.85x)1
+EI / o

C-8.04 - 0.85x]dx = - 2 .,.,,..,.,,...,...........,,,.,.,,............,....... (13a)

X
r 0.992 Y/I

1) tlh0A = OVA- 0 . 0 4 HA- 4 9 . 6

(a)
v&A=vA-9.92

HA-

(b)

WA
-d /M 60 = IO VA-8.04 HA - 36.6

1 VSD = V A - 1 6 . 4

,,h(~0VA-8.04HA-36.6)-(V~-16.4)x-kiA~~
+0.992$
=0.4%Xf+16dX-2&6+VA~IO-X)+HA(-8.04-0.t35~)
/
“LMo - 417V*,-l3H*,+76
. sA -‘O-’

Fig. 8-Free-body diagrams of staircase members assuming a flexible vertical and

horizontal reaction at Support A
 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE July 1963

After performing the necessary integration, Eq. (12a) and (13a)

become
a u = g (-870 - 689Hd + 642VJ
- = - @ ( 1 4 )
3V.4 *
and

a u = $f (-310 + 875H,
- - 688V~) = (15)
aH.i
Solving the Eq. (14) and (15) we obtain
HA = 598,000 + 310 c,
(16)
CG - 474,000 “’

and

v4 = 213,000 + 870 Ct
(17)
GCr - 474,000
where

‘2 = 875 + s
. I
The values for reactions and moments are summarized in Table 1.
The effect of the flexible horizontal support is seen to be considerable
since a small reduction in the horizontal reaction results in a large in-
crease in overturning moment at the base and, in turn, an increased
moment on the footing:
Case F - Partial fixity at Point A
If a restraint to rotation proportional to the angle of twist is assumed
at Point A (KM = Ml+), the effect of the moment may be accounted for
in a similar manner as the elastic deflections of the supports. The
equations of Case E (see Fig. 8) may easily be modified by the addition
of a -MA term to the moment expressions as shown in Fig. 9. An addi-
tional equation is obtained from this condition.

(18)

The three equations are then

10
au - 1- (VAX - 0.804H.a - 0.4962- MA) (-1)&r
?%!ii= EI*
/
I.88
1 E0.4962 + 16.4~ - 36.6 + I’~(10 - z) + HA
+EI /o
 CANTILEVER STAIRCASE a95

au 1 y (VAX- 0.804H~x- 0,496x'- ML) (x:) dx

8vl=Ti,J
1.”
1 [+0.496x' + 16.4x - 36.6 + VA ( 10 - cc)
+EI,/

+ HA(-8.04 -0.85x) -MA] (10 - s)ds = - 2 . . . . . . . . (20)

I

l-+X

s
Mx = VAX-80( Ha-0 992Xt - MA
IO.0 .L

= x

-HA bM =-0804X
VA bHA
t J
Me*=lO VA-&04HA-49.6
I
V&A = VA - 3.92
(4

VBD =VA- 16.4

0.992 KA

(Cl

Fig. 9-Free-body diagrams of staircase members assuming partial fixity at

Support A
896 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE July 1963

au lW (VAX- 0.804H~x - 0.4961 -MA) (-0.804x)c-l~

aHn=El J o
1.88
1 [0.4961+16.4x-36.6+ V,( 10-x) + H., (-8.04-0.85~:)
+m / a

- i&][-8:04- 0.85s-Jdz = - 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..~... (21)

Ka "'
After the necessary integrations have been performed, the equations
simplify into the following expressions.

# (+66.6- 91.3Vx+ 101.4H, + 15.83M~) = - + (22)

I

g (-870 + 642Vn - 689H.. - 91.3Mn) = - -%................ (23)

Kr

$ (-310+ -688Vn + 875~~ + 101.5Mn) = - +.f (24)

From these expressions we obtain:

v.4 = -7,210,OOO + 670 GC. + 214,000 C, - 6080 Cz (26)

12,750,OOO - 10,300 C, - 8330 C, - 474,000 Cs + CGG

HA = 14,850,OOO + 6780 C, + 598,000 C's + 310 CG

12,750,OOO - 10,300 C, - 8330 Ca - 474,000 C!, + CKG """(27)

M, = -9,900,000 - 31,500 c, + 79,500 c* - 66.6 CG (25)

12,750,OOO - 10,300 C, - 8350 C, - 474,000 C, + CGCs

where

C, = 15.83 + me??!-
1.3Ky
The values for reactions and moments are summarized in Table 1.
The results obtained considering the partial fixity against rotation are
similar to that of Case E, indicating that the added restraint has only
a small influence on the moments and reactions.

Case C - Free end at Point A

The results may be obtained from statistics and are tabulated in
Table 1. This case is presented to show the influence of the various
restraints on the upper leg.
It is interesting to note that both Cases A and D give base moments
higher than the pure cantilever case due to the rather long upper leg.
If the legs were more nearly equal in length, the vertical reaction at
Point A could reverse direction in Cases A and D.
 CANTILEVER STAIRCASE 897

Properties of supporting members

Supporting’ beam
For Cases D, E, and F a supporting beam is assumed with the follow-
ing dimensions and section properties.
Size: c = 12 in.; t = 18 in.; L = 20 ft simple s an restrained against twist
at ends; E = 3 x 10’ kips per sq in.; G = 1 x 14 kips per sq in.; Ia. = 5830
in?; Ia, = 2590 in?;

KHz +!$?L = 324 kips per ft

K,,= -%$.E = 732 kips per ft

Torsion = $tPG
The 20-ft beam will act as two lo-ft cantilevers fixed against rotation:
T=L=-L-
L 120
From Reference 1, t/c = 1.5, /3 = 0.196, and KM = 4240 ft-kips per
radian for each lo-ft cantilever or 8480 ft-kips per radian total.
Staircase
w = 4 ft; d = 6.5 in.;
I = 48 x 6 x 5a - lloo fta
12 -
Constants
C, = 642 + 22,900 = 666 ft8
1.3 x 732
C, = 875 + -22,900 = 929 ft3
1.3 x 324
Cs = 15.83 + 22,900 = 20.00 ft?
1.3 x 4240

- Cantilever staircase showing

formwork still in place
898 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICt+N CONCRETE IbkTITUTE July 1963

CONCLUSION
From the summary of results shown in Table 1, it is apparent that
consideration of the flexibility of the support will result in a reduction
in the horizontal reaction with a corresponding increase in overturning
moment. The torsional moments are also greatly increased.
The results of this example indicate that careful attention should be
given to the supports provided for the staircase, particularly the re-
straint against horizontal movement.
Fig. 10 is a construction photo of a cantilever staircase showing the
formwork still in place.

APPENDIX
TYPICAL DESIGN (CASE A)
Torrional reinforcement
From Fig. 5b and Reference 3
T = 29.8 ft-kips A,,=A,. (+)

b/h = 3.04 = y (45 + 12)

a = 0.287
= 2.86 sq in.
1 = 0.845
Hence, for design use 10 #5 = 3.10
1 29,800 x 12 sq in.
w
=0.267 15.75’ x 48 > Additional reinforcement will be re-
= 113 psi quired near the junction for one-half
the torsional moment:
b/h = 1.0 b’ = 12 in.
TiOS
h = 0.835 h’ = 12 in.
A,,= -!k-
hj. b’h’ Ties
Then A,. = Tr
s = hA.. f. b’h’
kj,bW
T 0.5 x 29,800 x 12 X 6
For #4 ties, = 0.845 x 20,000 X 12 X 12

A,. z 2 x 0.20 = 0.40 sq in. = 0.60 sq in.

s = 0.845 x 0.40 x 20,000 x 4 5 x 12 This reinforcement is provided by

29,800 x 12 #4 bars at 8 in. alternate spacing.
= 10.4 in.
Horizontal bars
Hence, for design use #4 ties at 8 in.
A.,= 0.40 x 24
8
Horizontal bars
= 1.20 sq in.
For horizontal bars, an equal volume
of steel is provided. For design use 2 $7 bars.
 CANTILEVER STAIRCASE 899

REFERENCES
1. Seely and Smith, Advanced Mechanics of Materials, John Wiley & Sonr,
Inc., New York, 2nd Edition, 1957, p. 423.
2. Ibid., pp. 270-271.
3. Cowan, H. J., “Design of Beams Subjected to Torsion Belated to the New
Australian Code,” AC1 JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 56, No. 7, Jan. 1960, pp. 591-618.
4. Siev, Avinada, “Analysis of Free Straight Multiflight Staircases,” Pro-
ceedings, ASCE, V. 88, ST3, Part 1, June 1962, pp. 207-232.

Rueivod by the lnstituh Feb. 5, 1962. Title N o . 6 0 - 4 5 i t a p a r t o f c o p y r i g h t e d J o u r n a l o f

the American Concrete Institute, Procwdlngr V. 60, No. 7, July 1963. Separate prints are
available at 60 cents each, cash with order.

American Concrete Institute, P. 0. Box 4754, Redford Station, Detroit 19, Mich.

Discussion of this paper should reach ACI headquarters in triplicate

by October 1, 1963, for publication in the March 1964 JOURNAL.

Sinopsis - R&urn& - Zusammenfassung

An6lisir y Direiio de una Escalera en Voladizo

Se evaluan y discuten 10s factores que influyen el comportamiento de una
escalera en voladizo. Se presta particular atencion al moment0 torsional en el
descanso intermedio y a la condici6n de apoyo de el ala superior. Se presenta
un ejemplo de disefio ilustrando aquellos cilculos que son peculiares a este tipo
de estructuras.

Analyre et Calcul d’un Escalier Volant

Discussion et evaluation des divers facteurs qui influencent le comportemcnt
d’un escalier volant, avec attention particuliere au moment torsional au niveau
intermediaire et la condition du support de l’aile supCrieure. On prksente une
exemple de dessein qui dkmontre ces calculs qui sont propres g ce type de
structure.

Berechnung und Entwurf einer Kragtreppe

Die verschiedenen Faktoren, die das Verhalten einer Kragtreppe beeinflussen,
werden eriirtert und ausgewertet. Besondere Aufmerksamkeit wird dem Tor-
sionesmoment an dem mittleren Treppenabsatz und den Auflagerbedingungen
am oberen Lauf geschenkt. Anhand eines Entwurfsbeispiels werden alle Bere
chnungen durchgefiihrt, die fiir diese Art von Konstruktion typisch sind.