Stair tread depth problem

[bonus]

Trying to draw a single flight stair with a U-winder.

The stair tool allows me to set the tread depth for the whole stair.

But when assigning the number of risers in the U-section of the stair, the depth of the treads varies and changes with the number of risers, instead of resizeing the whole stair.

The depth of all treads must be equal in the walking line, regardless straight or turned, so I'm a bit confused with the tool.

Am I missing something or is this something that needs fixing in 2008?

[Robert Anderson]

bonus, send me a file with the stair in it and some notes on what you are trying to do and I'll try and help.

randerson@nemetschek.net

[dcont]

Not sure how you could assign a depth of a tread for a winder since the treads are triangular or wedge shaped.

[Petri]

There are several schools - actually warring tribes - on this subject. In principle, the "winder" configuration of any flavour should not be used anywhere. If one must use it, the stair should go up clockwise. (Being a sinister person, I'd prefer it the other way around, but as we all know, 99% of people are right-handed and 1% are geniuses.)

If we are talking about internal stairs in houses or units, the tread depth (= the magic formula) should apply at a curve that is 350?450 mm from the right hand side handrail when descending.

And what, prey tell, is the magic formula? Well, of course it is the "sum of two risers + one tread = 610 to 630 mm". Or is it? Every textbook I've had the pleasure to know considers ascension - "nosing" is a good example of this. But what goes up, must come down. The magic is not necessarily magical when descending, especially not to us old, frail and even partially movement-challenged. (OK: I'm an aging cripple! Happy now?)

At this point of time I can only question Dr. Neufert's theories; the proof may well be in the form of yours truly dying because of wrong stair geometry or the "nosing".

Meanwhile: the riser should never exceed 160 millimetres. I'm working on the formula, but the older the occupant, the smaller the sum should be.

And hey, kids: if you don't provide the so-called wheel chair access at 5% (maybe 8% with special provisions), one day you'll descend to a place where you'll be broken on a wheel. While descending, you'll have the heel of your shoe stuck under the nosing at every step and you'll just fall... Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'intrate.

Yes, I did digress.

[bonus]

Oh! - answers...it took lots of viewers without any answer, so I thought nobody was interested.

dcont, as I see it Petri knows the theory quite well. A stair must have an even rythm and flow when you descend it. That means all treads must have the same depth and rise throughout the whole stair, in the walking line - the line or curve described by Petri. Just a few mm difference can make quite an impact on the comfort of the stair. Therefore it is imperative to be able to set the tread depth accuratly, not only in straight flights, but also in curved parts of the stair.

This is what I can't find any tool for.

Robert, I will send you a file. Hope you can enlighten me.

I just started up VW2008(SP1), but I'm still missing the possibility to set the tread depth under "flights and platforms /U-winder ". I mean the tread depth should influence the length of sides 1 or 2 by choice, not be a consequence of their lengths.

Do you understand my poor English?

In my drawing I have managed to get close to reality, but I don't think it's the right way to do it. Maybe designing 100% correct stairs is not the purpose of the stair tool, but if it's possible to achieve in the next SP - why not do it?

so long guys!

[doughd]

Does anyone know why the dashed risers on a stair in Top/Plan view would look different than it's supposed too? The line is solid about 2/3rds across the stair, then it starts to dash. I tried creating another stair in a new document, and the risers looked fine. But when I created a new stair in the problem document, the risers were still having the issue. Any help would be appreciated.

VW 2008 w/Architect & Renderworks

Windows XP SP2 on PC

[islandmon]

when I created a new stair in the problem document, the risers were still having the issue.

Did you import any DWG or DXF line styles into that ' problem ' document ?

As for stair design .. form follows function ... and the Codes ...

Using Petri's ' ye olde Gaelic formulae" ... it's sometimes necessary to bite the musket ball ...

calc & program your very own stairs with railings... as hybrid symbols... and stop all this constant hand-wringing

over the well documented limitations of ye olde Stair Tool.

[doughd]

Yes I imported a the site drawings from ACad to create the site model. I suppose they had different line styles with them, but why would those create a problem on what I already had? From the looks at this posting, I think NNA needs to totally wipe out the stair tool, and start it again from scratch. Revamping it will only cause other problems!

[islandmon]

why would those create a problem on what I already had?

You bet ...

Acad lines always screw up the VW attributes .. that's the law !

[doughd]

Most of the time the law sucks! This time is no exception. Thanks for the input.

[bonus]

I sent a file to Robert at NNA a couple of weeks ago. I will get back on the topic as soon as I get any feedback on the original issue.

Guess they are quite busy these days...

Robert, if you read this. ....a reminder!

[Robert Anderson]

Anders, I've just sent you back an email on this topic. For the others of you following this topic, you might find interesting the KB article on "platform winders" I did some time back:

'>Link to KnowledgeBase article on Platform Winders

[doughd]

Robert, that url and link that you supplied did not show correctly on my pc. I can't navigate to that topic.

[bonus]

Robert and I have had some off-line mailing. I'm not sure I managed to get all the way trough the language barrier, but hopfully he understood most of it.

Anyway he answered "I'll look into this".

So have patience.....

[mike m oz]

Doughd, try this direct link: Direct Link: http://kbase.nemetschek.net/index.php?ToDo=view&questId=97&catId=25

The KnowledgeBase topics are accessed from the NNA wbsite: http://www.nemetschek.net/

Click on Support, then on Knowledgebase and then do a search for Winder.

[bonus]

An alternative workflow for the tread depth in winders along with the possibility to offset the walking line will be added to the wish list by Robert.

Thank you Robert!

[Petri]

Good tidings, Bonus!

[Robert Anderson]

Bonus and others, it's always dangerous to speak for others. I've made no such commitment (i.e. to add anything to the wish list), although I am continually working on improvements to our stairs (and other features as well.)

[Petri]

Bad tidings, Robert!

[Robert Anderson]

Not at all. I just do not like having words put in my mouth, especially by someone who posits a (and I quote here) "language barrier". I have no doubt Bonus's intentions were good, but his reporting was erroneous.

[Petri]

But indeed they were!

Should you have wishlisted the development of the stair tool to something actually useful, it would have been good news. Regurgitating about someone being "continually working" is meaningless: the tool has been extant for years and shows no signs of becoming useful in projects that are not McMansions in the U.S. of A.

[bonus]

I'm truly sorry Robert if this is how you feel. Please accept my appologies.

This is what I read: (quote) "I'll add this alternate workflow as a wish (along with offsetting the running-line reference.)"

Maybe you did not mean the "wish list". My mistake then.

On the other hand it made me a bit confused. Why would you put it in the wish list. Why not just put it on NNA's "let's-do-it list".

The reason I wrote my reply was to end this topic without leaving all viewers/readers/writers without any knowledge about what came out of it at the end - especially when the matter has been discussed "privately" over mail with no transparency. My commitment as the topic author, so to speak.

All too often topics just end without closure - they just drop dead, maybe because once the problem is solved for the author of the topic, he or she forgets to give feedback to all others following the discussion.

And you are right. My intentions are good. I spend precious time writing in this forum, not for fun but for the best of VectorWorks and its users and of course to find help and disclose how stupid I am every now and then.

So, whoever reads this, - I might be the unreasonable Shaw wrote about, but I'm certainly not the guy who want's to put words in anybodys mouth.

I had a hard time explaining the tread problem. Therefore it was kind of a relief to read Roberts answer which I understood the way I did. A guy with NNA connection, native english and certainly some skills in VW would take over and navigate the rest of the way. I was thrilled. Now, I'm lost in a fog.

Now - I started this topic and it is about one specific problem with the stair tool. Let's please stick to that and join our efforts to make our working tool better.

Again , I'm sorry if I stepped on your toes Robert.

[Petri]

Well, Bonus - sadly, I no longer am fluent in writing or speaking Swedish, but have no problems in understanding it. Just let me know what you want and I'll break the famous language barrier, behind which NNA is now hiding.

No, I'm not a native English speaker and there are Texan terms of construction that I don't necessarily immediately know, but I've practiced in an English-speaking country long enough.

[Robert Anderson]

Bonus, you ask,

Why would you put it in the wish list. Why not just put it on NNA's "let's-do-it list".

It's a good question, and that is exactly what I have done. This is what I meant when I wrote:

I am continually working on improvements to our stairs

The "wish" I referred to is an internat (non-public) NNA list, and the way you put it earlier, I was concerned that others might expect to see something on the wish list in this forum, which I did not intend to use.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[bonus]

Great - then we should all be happy!

Let's close this topic and move ahead - there's a lot more to be done!

so long guys

ps - Petri, thank you for your concern about my "barrier", but as long as possible I intend to keep on writing in English as it is the language used on this site and it should be for all to read. Maybe I accidentally contribute to the evolution of the English language.... :-)