Stair spindle advice

[Prawn_Cracker]

Hi All

I am need in some advice to replace spindles on my stairs. The existing spindles are ok but as part of wider renovations I’d like to replace the straight spindles with some turned spindles. The house is Victorian period (1872) and it seems fitting to include this as part of the wider task. I don’t however want to make a mess of things and want to take some advice from others that have done this sort of thing more times than I’ve had hot breakfasts.

I’ll do my best to describe things. The house is three story terrace and the stairs run quite tightly up the middle of the house. As a result of the rise and run of the house the arrangement is like this:

As a result I have a variation in spindle heights over the house.

What I'm proposing to do I have tried to sketch below:

I'd set the pommel length from the baserail the same all the way along and then adjust the length of the top pommel to meet the handrail. I’m thinking of using the Thomas Burdridge Edwardian spindles which are 900mm or 1100mm high, with a 390mm turned section and 32mm x 32mm on the pommel. The exception to this will be when the baserail and handrail get too narrow (235mm in the sketch for example). In these locations I will need to have spindles turned as the Burbridge spindles aren’t going to be of any use at all. The Edwardian style is also a reasonably easy profile for custom spindles to be turned.

My question is does it look ok to set the pommel height on the bottom and then adjust the top length? Is this visually a big no? Cost is definitely a factor and a mix and match of Burbridge spindles and locally custom made ones is the most cost effective.

The alternative to setting the same pommel heigh on the base rail and changing the top height would be to do something like this (thanks Richard!):

Which to me is optimum but realistically I probably cannot afford as it would involve a lot more custom spindles to be turned.

Grateful for any advice and experience.

Thanks in advance

Andy

 

[pcb1962]

I've no idea what the standard practice is but the second idea looks better to me.
Do any of your neighbours have an original staircase that you can look at?

 

[blackrodd]

The usual practice is to leave a bigger spindle "pommel" at the bottom than at the top.
As you're handrails should be between 900mm and 1000,mm, vertical from the nosing to the top of you're handrail,
The 1100mm spindles should be plenty long enough.
In you're pic, there should be a newel at the top step and then the handrail go forward the the star string in front,
This is why your'e spindles are not long enough, because you're handrail is set too high, in the pic, and in other places as well where you're handrail exceeds the 900, to 100,mm height, possibly.
strictly speaking you're handrails probably do not comply with building regs.
I suggest you either google stairs planning portal, or look at this link at the bottom of the page.
If you decide you're plan "A" is best for you, then get the longer spindles turned up and fit them,
I believe Burbidge is the way to go, with stair parts so easy to fit.
http://www.pearstairs.co.uk/staircase-b ... egulations

HTH Regards Rodders

 

[Prawn_Cracker]

I've no idea what the standard practice is but the second idea looks better to me.
Do any of your neighbours have an original staircase that you can look at?

Now that is a very good idea! I hadn't thought of that but can knock on a neighbours door.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Prawn_Cracker]

In you're pic, there should be a newel at the top step and then the handrail go forward the the star string in front,
This is why your'e spindles are not long enough, because you're handrail is set too high, in the pic, and in other places as well

It's hard to know exactly what it is was like before (although PCBs advice will get me towards understanding) but it looks like perhaps some of the original newels have been left in and new handrail and spindles installed fitted around it. It is a steep set of stairs though would it be possible that in 1872 they just made the handrail that steep and turned spindles to fit?

Thanks for the tip on leaving it longer on the top than the bottom. Is that because it just looks better, tradition or another reason? Just curious!

Cheers

Andy


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[blackrodd]

If you're newels are original, then it's more than likely that you're stairs are too because in those days the stair strings
were morticed into the newels, the newels having been fixed to the floor joisting.
The spindle's BIGGER square at the bottom, As far as I am aware it's just aesthetics.
Regards Rodders

 

[dejaa]

Hi

Having made numerous staircases I offer my comments for what its worth.

In your drawing 1, I think everything looks fine until you get to the point where the handrail meets the bottom of the upper stringer. so spindles 7,8,and 9 from rhs on your drawing. If these were to be raised so that on No. 7 the top of the turned part follows the upper dotted line, and No 8 is spaced a similar distance below the upper stringer as the no's 1-6 are below the handrail. No 9 is probably better as is shown which just leaves the one very small one at the end. My convention was to leave a slightly longer pommel at the bottom than the top, but that was just my own bespoke staircases.

Hope all that makes sense

David

 

[Prawn_Cracker]

Thanks David that does make sense and is greatly appreciated. I just now need to order a few of the Burbridge spindles and lay them up (applying what you have described) and it should become apparent how many of these will do and how many need turning.

Thanks again

Andy


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk