Past project

[Meccarroll]

I've been finding this really interesting to follow along

Don't be afraid to chip in, it is hoped you will!

[Meccarroll]

That's a nice start but maybe a new thread?

It may be difficult for people to visualise what you are conveying without a wreath section.

Without adding a typical application for the drawing it may be difficult to visualise the relevance of such work.

Which book are you working from Oldboy22, and can we have your first name. Mine is Mark.

[Oldboy22]

I've been finding this really interesting to follow along

Thanks feel free to add to the conversation or perhaps a drawing.

[Oldboy22]

That's a nice start but maybe a new thread?

It may be difficult for people to visualise what you are conveying without a wreath section.

Without adding a typical application for the drawing it may be difficult to visualise the relevance of such work.

Which book are you working from Oldboy22, and can we have your first name. Mine is Mark.

I will add some explanation later.

I’m not working from any book just using what I’ve learned over the years.

If there is enough interest and participation I might start a new thread.

It’s getting plenty of views but not much participation and don’t see the point of me sharing what I know if know one is interested.

[Meccarroll]

That's a nice start but maybe a new thread?

It may be difficult for people to visualise what you are conveying without a wreath section.

Without adding a typical application for the drawing it may be difficult to visualise the relevance of such work.

Which book are you working from Oldboy22, and can we have your first name. Mine is Mark.

I will add some explanation later.

I’m not working from any book just using what I’ve learned over the years.

If there is enough interest and participation I might start a new thread.

It’s getting plenty of views but not much participation and don’t see the point of me sharing what I know if know one is interested.

Regarding views and participation I would say It is a complex subject to learn at first and most people will find it hard to follow.

It's not easy to participate if you don't know what to ask or have not got a clue what is being projected.

It will take time.

If you go through the steps of your stair build in detail then I feel people will have something tangible to relate to in the drawings. It would be quite an undertaking but a nice thread for people to follow including myself.

[woodsmith]

I’ve found it really interesting despite not following what’s going on.

[Oldboy22]

Here’s a good example of level to rake and rake to level handrails, the geometry to develop this is above. The same geometry can be used to get level to rake portion of the scroll.

Also a few pages from the book “A comprehensive practical geometry for builders” by A B Emary.

Showing a different method, but more importantly showing the development of the templates and there application.

[Oldboy22]

I’ve found it really interesting despite not following what’s going on.

Thanks, don’t be worried about asking something if you don’t understand.

[Oldboy22]

Special treat now lol, found this in the back of the garage, it must be 35-40 years old I thought it had long gone in the wood stove, and maybe it should have lol.

It’s the first practice piece I ever made ,single twist single bevel, I’ve shown it both ways to prove it can be used from level to rake and rake to level although a change in pitch is probably required but you get the idea.

Apologies the pictures aren’t very good.

[Meccarroll]

If those first practice pieces were made 35 - 40 years ago and you made the set of stairs 15 years ago you have spent a long time learning tangent hand-railing.

What was the material used to form the curve for the strings? I see a lot of this work done in ply then covered with veneer but some use solid wood built up from veneers.

[Oldboy22]

If those first practice pieces were made 35 - 40 years ago and you made the set of stairs 15 years ago you have spent a long time learning tangent hand-railing.

What was the material used to form the curve for the strings? I see a lot of this work done in ply then covered with veneer but some use solid wood built up from veneers.

Well I haven’t been learning the whole time, I’ve always had an interest since my city & guild college days around 1977, but 99% of the work I’ve done you don’t even see a tangent handrail.

There wasn’t much time to be honest bringing up a family, takes a lot of money which is filled with bread and butter jobs.

Like I said that staircase was a one off.

I formed the curve on the string with a skin of thin birch ply around a drum former , from there staves were cut to radius and stacked together on the inside face , a piece of canvas was cut and glued to the inside face.

[Meccarroll]

If those first practice pieces were made 35 - 40 years ago and you made the set of stairs 15 years ago you have spent a long time learning tangent hand-railing.

What was the material used to form the curve for the strings? I see a lot of this work done in ply then covered with veneer but some use solid wood built up from veneers.

Well I haven’t been learning the whole time, I’ve always had an interest since my city & guild college days around 1977, but 99% of the work I’ve done you don’t even see a tangent handrail.

There wasn’t much time to be honest bringing up a family, takes a lot of money which is filled with bread and butter jobs.

Like I said that staircase was a one off.

I formed the curve on the string with a skin of thin birch ply around a drum former , from there staves were cut to radius and stacked together on the inside face , a piece of canvas was cut and glued to the inside face.

Like you I too am a carpenter, I started in 1976 and like you I have developed an interest in the Tangent system, my interest started about 8 years ago. I do a variety of carpentry work, mainly site carpentry, and have done quite a bit of cut roofing over the years so first developed a knowledge of angles for roofing bevels.

I have only ever developed the simpler form of a wreathed handrail (level to rake) and found the elementary stuff ok to understand. I've always had a blank spot when it came to the method for determining tangents for an unequal pitch! I have read a lot of books for the development of unequal pitch tangents and copied the process but never actually understood how to develop a drawing relating to an actual set of stairs.

I am now working on a drawing for Rodgers unequal pitch stairs (just to satisfy my curiosity) so may find your drawings and conversation (in this thread) with Rodger helpful to go back over.

Keep up the good work Oldboy.

[Oldboy22]

If those first practice pieces were made 35 - 40 years ago and you made the set of stairs 15 years ago you have spent a long time learning tangent hand-railing.

What was the material used to form the curve for the strings? I see a lot of this work done in ply then covered with veneer but some use solid wood built up from veneers.

Well I haven’t been learning the whole time, I’ve always had an interest since my city & guild college days around 1977, but 99% of the work I’ve done you don’t even see a tangent handrail.

There wasn’t much time to be honest bringing up a family, takes a lot of money which is filled with bread and butter jobs.

Like I said that staircase was a one off.

I formed the curve on the string with a skin of thin birch ply around a drum former , from there staves were cut to radius and stacked together on the inside face , a piece of canvas was cut and glued to the inside face.

Like you I too am a carpenter, I started in 1976 and like you I have developed an interest in the Tangent system, my interest started about 8 years ago. I do a variety of carpentry work, mainly site carpentry, and have done quite a bit of cut roofing over the years so first developed a knowledge of angles for roofing bevels.

I have only ever developed the simpler form of a wreathed handrail (level to rake) and found the elementary stuff ok to understand. I've always had a blank spot when it came to the method for determining tangents for an unequal pitch! I have read a lot of books for the development of unequal pitch tangents and copied the process but never actually understood how to develop a drawing relating to an actual set of stairs.

I am now working on a drawing for Rodgers unequal pitch stairs (just to satisfy my curiosity) so may find your drawings and conversation (in this thread) with Rodger helpful to go back over.

Keep up the good work Oldboy.

I love roofing too in fact any thing that was a challenge I stepped forward, that’s how you learn by getting out of your comfort zone.

The drawing for Rodgers stairs should come out similar to mine if you follow the same dimensions depending on you development process.

There are other types of quarter turn unequal pitch stairs, for example where the lower pitch is less steep.

But also obtuse, acute, elliptical planned stairs with equal, and unequal pitches.

Which are further complicated by level upper tangents and lower level tangents , the variations are endless. But great fun to learn.

[Meccarroll]

[

The drawing for Rodgers stairs should come out similar to mine if you follow the same dimensions depending on you development process.

I am working from a stretch-out which is the product of the riser and going dimensions Rodger gave to me. From the actual stair dimensions I am producing the drawing. I don't know if I will be able to produce an actual wreath from the drawing or if it will be workable but it's interesting to develop the drawing.

I drew a stretch-out from Rodgers last set of dimensions and the vertical height difference between strings on my stretch-out and those of Rodgers site measurement came within 1.5mm, so I feel the dimensions I am working with will allow a very close reproduction of Rodgers quarter turn.

I am not sure what dimensions you and Rodger worked with or how you originally obtained the top pitch line?

At the moment my drawing looks similar to yours.

It's a slow process for me as I have not worked with CAD for a long time so having to re-learn how to draw in CAD again.

When it's finished I'll put it on here if you don't mind?

[Oldboy22]

[

The drawing for Rodgers stairs should come out similar to mine if you follow the same dimensions depending on you development process.

When it's finished I'll put it on here if you don't mind?

Definitely, I can’t wait to see it.

[Meccarroll]

This is where I am at at the moment.

I am having a bit of trouble forming the ellipse with my CAD software (TurboCad 4 for Mac). Because the ellipse is on an angle and the programme does not seem to like working other than horizontal or vertical. I have used it in the past to perform ellipses for wreathes but have forgotten how I did it!

I would appreciate anyone taking a look to see what mistakes I my have made. I am using W & A Mowats method from page 209. I am also using some of the methods from page 195 onward.

There are more lines on the drawing than needed for the final article but the lines can be moved to another layer and hidden from view.

[thatsnotafestool]

Afraid I can't help you there, Mark, as I'm a SketchUp user.

On the subject of graphics packages, what do use on your iPad when using your package, OldBoy? Do use a stylus (if such a beast exists ?) I'm havig difficulty visualising how one could use a touch screen for this.

[thatsnotafestool]

OK...I'm having one more crack at this. I revisited my drawing and although I had intended to pick up the different widths of the ellipse at either end and had done so, I'd used the wrong reference markers - which is why Oldboy thought they were parallel (they're not but marginally...hence the confusion). Now redrawn correctly and the difference in width is clearly visible.

I also asked some way back about how one decided in which direction the bevel line should go as the drawing only provides the bevel angle...not the direction (as in 7 o'clock to 1 o'clock OR 5 o'clock to 11 o'clock). I was getting very confused as, looking at various examples in books and online, it seemed that in some instances they both went in the same direction, in others they crossed for no apparent rhyme nor reason.

di Cristina explains all on p.130 Plate 69. The criteria being referenced back to tangent drawings in plate 67 but here I get very confused. So if anyone is willing and can tell me, please, which Figure on Plate 67 refers to my particular circumstance...TIA.

(Ignore those two red arrows)

[Meccarroll]

OK...I'm having one more crack at this. I revisited my drawing and although I had intended to pick up the different widths of the ellipse at either end and had done so, I'd used the wrong reference markers - which is why Oldboy thought they were parallel (they're not but marginally...hence the confusion). Now redrawn correctly and the difference in width is clearly visible.

tgt hrlg.png

I also asked some way back about how one decided in which direction the bevel line should go as the drawing only provides the bevel angle...not the direction (as in 7 o'clock to 1 o'clock OR 5 o'clock to 11 o'clock). I was getting very confused as, looking at various examples in books and online, it seemed that in some instances they both went in the same direction, in others they crossed for no apparent rhyme nor reason.

di Cristina explains all on p.130 Plate 69. The criteria being referenced back to tangent drawings in plate 67 but here I get very confused. So if anyone is willing and can tell me, please, which Figure on Plate 67 refers to my particular circumstance...TIA.

(Ignore those two red arrows)

I am now going to have a beer Rodger, but will be looking at this again tomorrow, maybe with an actual drawing board! I have forgotten how to use CAD So the drawing board's coming out.

Very good point about the reference points on the ellipse Rodger. And you have actually told us where to look in the book for help too!

Keep it up Rodger.

[Oldboy22]

This is where I am at at the moment.

I am having a bit of trouble forming the ellipse with my CAD software (TurboCad 4 for Mac). Because the ellipse is on an angle and the programme does not seem to like working other than horizontal or vertical. I have used it in the past to perform ellipses for wreathes but have forgotten how I did it!

I would appreciate anyone taking a look to see what mistakes I my have made. I am using W & A Mowats method from page 209. I am also using some of the methods from page 195 onward.

There are more lines on the drawing than needed for the final article but the lines can be moved to another layer and hidden from view.

Very good although a little busy it’s hard to pick out the the important bits, I love the way you’ve used Mowatt to develop the upper tangent but you have also used the method from this is carpentry, that would cut some lines out.

You’ve also used his method to develop the major axis end points which is great, I’ve used this many times too, I find it great if drawing on pen and paper with a trammel, with cad for me it takes a lot of transferring of points and is easy to get confused at least for me.

The bevel method on that page is my favourite, it’s easy and you can see straight away which end the bevel goes.

I’ve pointed an arrow at the line I don’t think is needed, unless you know different. Also you have draw an ellipse on an angle but not the right one? What is that for? Arrow to that too

The radius in the plan is fine just different to mine so should show a different result.

This is great now we are getting started.

[Oldboy22]

Afraid I can't help you there, Mark, as I'm a SketchUp user.

On the subject of graphics packages, what do use on your iPad when using your package, OldBoy? Do use a stylus (if such a beast exists ?) I'm havig difficulty visualising how one could use a touch screen for this.

Just a finger everything snaps to a point highlighted in the magnified area.

[Meccarroll]

This is where I am at at the moment.

I am having a bit of trouble forming the ellipse with my CAD software

(1) Very good although a little busy it’s hard to pick out the the important bits, I love the way you’ve used Mowatt to develop the upper tangent but you have also used the method from this is carpentry, that would cut some lines out.

(2)You’ve also used his method to develop the major axis end points which is great, I’ve used this many times too, I find it great if drawing on pen and paper with a trammel, with cad for me it takes a lot of transferring of points and is easy to get confused at least for me.



(3)I’ve pointed an arrow at the line I don’t think is needed, unless you know different. Also you have draw an ellipse on an angle but not the right one? What is that for? Arrow to that too

(4)The radius in the plan is fine just different to mine so should show a different result.

This is great now we are getting started.

1. No reference from This IS Carpentry has been use, I just back referenced on Mowat where I thought the book intended which would simulate This IS Carpentry.

2. Major axis may actually be a problem for me in CAD, that's why I am going to look again using the drawing board!

3. I will look at that line in the morning (Beer Glasses are not helping right now LoL). Ignore the ellipse I was just playing around with the CAD software to see if I could do an ellipse on an angle. The ellipse will be removed.

(4) The radious point is on a riser which seems to be the point which most authors use so it just seemed logical to follow.

I think the drawing looks right but I feel I may be out on some critical points, so will re-work it tomorrow to see if I can pick up on anything. Unless you are good at it CAD can lead you astray ( I'm using that as my excuse!).

[Oldboy22]

On closer look I think I notice you don’t have the minor axis point correct, if the rectangle is supposed to be the centre line of the ellipse the radius used should be to the centre line of the ellipse, if so that makes your spring lines out.

[Meccarroll]

PS: oldboy22, If I have missed any points you raised it's because I am now winding down for the day but appreciate your input and will look to answer then asp! In the mean time Take care.

[Meccarroll]

On closer look I think I notice you don’t have the minor axis point correct, if the rectangle is supposed to be the centre line of the ellipse the radius used should be to the centre line of the ellipse, if so that makes your spring lines out.

I also think something is out but not quite sure what so agree with you that further attention is needed.................that's why I am going to re do the drawing tomorrow. And thank you for pointing to the Minor Axis.

[Meccarroll]

Question: Why do you suppose the minor axis is not correctly positioned? I thought I followed the book or to be more precise where did I deviate?

The end of the ellipse at Q is wider than at P so there is a deviation in the points of the ellipse.

I think that may be an important point that I have overlooked. Rodger seems to have picked up on this so could be helpful at this point don't you think?

More investigation!

[Oldboy22]

Question: Why do you suppose the minor axis is not correctly positioned?

We will talk tomorrow

[thatsnotafestool]

Question: Why do you suppose the minor axis is not correctly positioned? I thought I followed the book or to be more precise where did I deviate?

The end of the ellipse at Q is wider than at P so there is a deviation in the points of the ellipse.

I think that may be an important point that I have overlooked. Rodger seems to have picked up on this so could be helpful at this point don't you think?

More investigation!

I only picked up on this because Oldboy pointed it out to me !

[Oldboy22]

Meccarroll

Don’t read this until tomorrow, as you’ve had a couple of bevies

I can’t see anything wrong the points P Q they are different and should be, the way you developed them is fine.

What I said previously about the minor axis may be wrong Apologies for that, what confused me was the rectangle, but I think you was getting ready to form the ellipse inside that rectangle on the inside curve of the ellipse ?.

I would stick with the cad if I was you just move all the noise onto a different layer.

I think what you have done so far is fantastic.

[Meccarroll]

OK...I'm having one more crack at this. I revisited my drawing and although I had intended to pick up the different widths of the ellipse at either end and had done so, I'd used the wrong reference markers - which is why Oldboy thought they were parallel (they're not but marginally...hence the confusion). Now redrawn correctly and the difference in width is clearly visible.

tgt hrlg.png

I also asked some way back about how one decided in which direction the bevel line should go as the drawing only provides the bevel angle...not the direction (as in 7 o'clock to 1 o'clock OR 5 o'clock to 11 o'clock). I was getting very confused as, looking at various examples in books and online, it seemed that in some instances they both went in the same direction, in others they crossed for no apparent rhyme nor reason.

di Cristina explains all on p.130 Plate 69. The criteria being referenced back to tangent drawings in plate 67 but here I get very confused. So if anyone is willing and can tell me, please, which Figure on Plate 67 refers to my particular circumstance...TIA.

(Ignore those two red arrows)

I have not read too much of di Cristina's book lately as the layout works differently than my brain does so it's not my go to right now but it was the very first book I gave any attention to regarding Tangent hand-railing.

1. A quick look at Page 126, Plate 67 in di Cristina's book indicates that plate 67 relates to Obtuse Plans so not the plan you need to reference as yours is 90 deg Rodger. It may still contain relevant information Rodger but I've not waded through it so can not be sure.

2. Look at page 134 in di Cristina's book at the bottom is plan 75, that's your plan.

3. Page 138, Quarter-Circle Plan with Short Upper Pitched Tangents. You should recognise the tangent pitches are similar to yours, so use this.

Will that do for now?

[thatsnotafestool]

OK...I'm having one more crack at this. I revisited my drawing and although I had intended to pick up the different widths of the ellipse at either end and had done so, I'd used the wrong reference markers - which is why Oldboy thought they were parallel (they're not but marginally...hence the confusion). Now redrawn correctly and the difference in width is clearly visible.

tgt hrlg.png

I also asked some way back about how one decided in which direction the bevel line should go as the drawing only provides the bevel angle...not the direction (as in 7 o'clock to 1 o'clock OR 5 o'clock to 11 o'clock). I was getting very confused as, looking at various examples in books and online, it seemed that in some instances they both went in the same direction, in others they crossed for no apparent rhyme nor reason.

di Cristina explains all on p.130 Plate 69. The criteria being referenced back to tangent drawings in plate 67 but here I get very confused. So if anyone is willing and can tell me, please, which Figure on Plate 67 refers to my particular circumstance...TIA.

(Ignore those two red arrows)

I have not read too much of di Cristina's book lately as the layout works differently than my brain does so it's not my go to right now but it was the very first book I gave any attention to regarding Tangent hand-railing.

1. A quick look at Page 126, Plate 67 in di Cristina's book indicates that plate 67 relates to Obtuse Plans so not the plan you need to reference as yours is 90 deg Rodger. It may still contain relevant information Rodger but I've not waded through it so can not be sure.

2. Look at page 134 in di Cristina's book at the bottom is plan 75, that's your plan.

3. Page 138, Quarter-Circle Plan with Short Upper Pitched Tangents. You should recognise the tangent pitches are similar to yours, so use this.

Will that do for now?

Thank you, Mark. I really appreciate that.

[Oldboy22]

I also asked some way back about how one decided in which direction the bevel line should go as the drawing only provides the bevel angle...not the direction (as in 7 o'clock to 1 o'clock OR 5 o'clock to 11 o'clock). I was getting very confused as, looking at various examples in books and online, it seemed that in some instances they both went in the same direction, in others they crossed for no apparent rhyme nor reason.

di Cristina explains all on p.130 Plate 69. The criteria being referenced back to tangent drawings in plate 67 but here I get very confused. So if anyone is willing and can tell me, please, which Figure on Plate 67 refers to my particular circumstance...TIA.

(Ignore those two red arrows)

You have had information about this twice page 5 at 9:08 the book print and confirmation page 6 at 10:31.

[Oldboy22]

[/quote]


(4) The radious point is on a riser which seems to be the point which most authors use so it just seemed logical to follow.

[/quote]

My theory why they do this (for what it’s worth) is for positioning for assembly, nice to have a reference point to work to.

Any ideas as to why?

[Oldboy22]

Here’s a different technique to draw the ellipse, this is what I used to work out the handrail in my staircase (first page), I didn’t really understand it at the time but it worked, I didn’t have as many books or as much knowledge back then.

[thatsnotafestool]

Thanks to both. 7 to 1 it is. Just checked what my first mock-up was and that is the right orientation.

[thatsnotafestool]

I need a sanity check please re 'sliding the bevel'.

Bevels marked up. They were already 7 to 1.

The template has been applied to one side. I am assuming that the line marked with an arrow is the position of minimum twist ?



Now to slide the bevel I put the template underneath (facing up exactly as on the top of the block) and line up the tangent lines with the bevel line ? Yes ?

Here's the top end


and we have to extrapolate the easing end so



Is that right ?

[Oldboy22]

You need to transfer that paper template for two pieces of ply or thin mdf, hardboard.and follow this picture

[thatsnotafestool]

That's exactly what I've done.

I can't see the point of going to the bother of using a template made from ply when it's a one-off and gluing the paper template to the block with photo spray glue works fine.

[Meccarroll]

Here’s a different technique to draw the ellipse, this is what I used to work out the handrail in my staircase (first page), I didn’t really understand it at the time but it worked, I didn’t have as many books or as much knowledge back then.

That seems to follows the same method used by Mowat Fig. 211

[Oldboy22]

Here’s a different technique to draw the ellipse, this is what I used to work out the handrail in my staircase (first page), I didn’t really understand it at the time but it worked, I didn’t have as many books or as much knowledge back then.

That seems to follows the same method used by Mowat Fig. 211

I didn’t have that book at the time I copied it from my geometry for builders book, by Emary.
He probably copied it from Mowatt, but who knows lol