Title No.

63-29

Experimental Study of a
Free-Standing Staircase
By A. R. CUSENS and JING-CWO KUANG

Describes loading tests to failure on a half-scale model of a symmetrical

reinforced concrete slab-type, free-standing staircase. Methods of analysis
are compared in the light of experimental results and general design recom-
mendations are made.
Key words: analysis; cantilever staircase; design; reinforced concrete:
research; staircase; torsion.

n THEREINFORCED CONCRETE FREE-STANDING STAIRCASE (Fig.l) has become

popular with architects in recent years. The cantilevered flights and
landing have obvious structural and aesthetic advantages particularly
when used for multiflight stairs. In consequence the design of this
type of structure has considerable interest for structural engineers.
Liebenbergl first introduced the concept of the space interaction of
plates for the design of this type of staircase. His analysis was made
for a statically indeterminate structure on the assumption that torsional
effects were negligible. SieP extended the theory to include the deter-
mination of the secondary stresses resulting from the compatibility
condition at the intersection between the flights and the landing. He
concluded that the torsional moments were usually small and may be
considered as secondary stresses; for most practical purposes it was
sufficient to compute primary stresses.
Fuchssteinefl simplified the basic staircase by considering it to be a
rigid space frame. The flights were considered as sloping cantilever
beams and the landing as a semicircular bow girder (Fig. 2). Sauter*
recently published an analysis employing the principle of least work,
using a frame identical to Fuchssteiner’s assumption; it is the opinion
of the authors that the bow girder does not provide an adequate repre-
sentation of the structural behavior of the landing. Gould5 and Talebe
made simplified analyses neglecting the bending moments along the
line of intersection of the flights and landing.
The authors7 have recently made an analysis of free-standing stairs
assuming that the structural behavior could be simulated by the skeletal
508 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE May 1966

ACI member A. R. Curenr is professor and head, Department of Civil Engineering, Uni-
versity of St. Andrews, Queen’s College, Dundee, Scotland. He has recently returned to
Britain after 5 years on the faculty at the SEATO Graduate School of Engineering, Bangkok,
Thailand. Professor Cusens is the author of numerous technical contributions.
ACI member Jinggwo Kuang is a graduate student, Technological Institute, Northwestern
University, Evanston, Ill. He received his undergraduate training in Taiwan and later studied
at the SEATO Graduate School of Engineering, Bangkok, Thailand, where he received his
master’s degree in structural engineering in 1964.

rigid frame shown in Fig. 3. The frame is cut at 0 as shown, and

horizontal restraining forces H and moments M, are applied to the two
halves of the staircase. Each half of the structure is now statically deter-
minate and equations may readily be written for bending and torsional
moments, and axial and shearing forces in the various structural mem-
bers.
Neglecting the effects of axial and shearing forces on deformation,
the partial differential coefficients of strain energy with respect to H
and M, are equated to zero. From the two simultaneous equations thus

Fig. I - isometric sketch of free-standing stairs

 FREESTANDING STAIRCASE 589

obtained, the values of M, and H may be found and individual moments

and forces evaluated. The principal equations are given in the Appendix.

PREVIOUS EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES

The only tests reported on a reinforced concrete free-standing stair-
case have been made by Hajnal-K6nyP on a full-sized structure. Deflec-
tions were measured for various arrangements of load below the design
value.
Mitchell and Shaw9 used a loaded plexiglass model and measured
strains with electrical resistance gages. From these values, moments
were calculated at various points.
LiebenberglO describes an experiment on a model staircase of epoxy
resin, employing photoelastic methods to determine the stresses in the
flights under a symmetrical loading on the landing.
The experimental values from these studies are compared with the
authors’ results in a later section.

Fig 2 - Fuchssteiner’s assumed form for the free&ending staircase

 DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF A MODEL STAIRCASE
A prototype staircase, having the dimensions shown in Fig. 4, has
been analyzed by the methods of Siev2 (including secondary stresses),
Sauter* and the authors7 The resulting values of bending and torsional
moment are shown in Table 1. It may be seen that there is little dif-
ference between the values obtained by the methods of Siev and the
authors; the greatest discrepancy occurs at the cantilever supports.
At the time of the test, the authors’ method of analysis had not been
completed and Siev’s values were used for design purposes. Reinforce-
ment at the various sections of the prototype was designed using the
conventional modular ratio method of design. Plain mild steel rein-
forcing bars with hooks were used throughout.
The staircase built for testing was a half-scale model of the prototype.
The same percentage of reinforcement was maintained as in the original
design for the prototype; thus, in the various sections of the model,
the area of steel was 25 percent of the value calculated for the prototype.
The arrangement of the reinforcement in the model is shown in Fig. 5.

Fig. 3 -Skeletal rigid frame representing the fro+standing staircase

 FREESTANDING STAIRCASE

TABLE I -COMPARISON OF COMPUTED

VALUES OF MOMENT (FT-LB\ IN STAIRS

(a) With both flights and landing loaded

Sauter Authors
- 1660 - 2920
- 6360 - 6360
- 6400 -11,580
- 450 - 30
f 4.530 -+- 3,350
MO.330 229,810
(b) With live load on both flights only

Sauter Authors
A - 2350 - 3660
B - 4150 - 4150
MI, 0 - 4700 - 8880
D + 200 + 710
Mr B A * 3,330 -c 2,760
M, B A c14,930 k22.600
Mn = bending moment about the horizontal axis
M. = bending moment about the vertical axis
Mt = torsional moment

Fig. 4- Dimensions of prototype staircase

 2-1/2"$+1-1/4y 2-l/4.@ 2-1/2"~tI-1/4"~

Section A-A

F i g . 5 - A r r a n g e m e n t o f r e i n f o r c e m e n t in model s 8taircase
 The base of the model, representing the lower floor level, was a 6 in.
reinforced concrete slab, with plan dimensions 3 ft 3 in. x 2 ft 9 in. It
was heavily reinforced with mats of %-in. bars at 4-in. centers in
each direction, positioned both at the top and the bottom of the slab.
The edges of the slab were cast into mild steel channel sections, bolted
rigidly to the laboratory floor. The upper floor level was represented
by an identical slab. The channels at the edges of this slab were sup-
ported by four vertical steel columns. The bases of these columns were
bolted rigidly to the laboratory floor. High tensile steel wires were used
to brace the columns supporting the upper floor slab. The general ar-
rangement may be seen in Fig. 6 and 7.
The concrete used in constructing the model had an aggregate-cement
ratio of 5 by weight and a water-cement ratio of 0.45. Natural river
sand and crushed limestone of 3/s in. maximum size were used with a
rapid hardening (ASTM Type III) portland cement. To check the
quality of the concrete, 6 in. test cubes were made from each batch.
The average cube strength at the time of test was 5420 psi.

TESTING

To measure vertical and horizontal displacements under load, 22 dial

gages with magnetic bases were mounted on an independent steel frame.
Electrical resistance strain gages were mounted on the model by epoxy
glue at various positions on the underside of the staircase. Gage points
were also fixed at either side of two flights.
Load was applied in increments by placing pig-iron bars on the steps
and landing according to the following program:
1. Half design live load on upper flight only.
2. Half design live load on right-hand portion of landing only.
3. Full design live load on upper flight and right-hand portion of landing.
4. Full design live load on whole landing only.

F i g . 6 - Model free-standing staircase Fig. ‘br Model staircase after failure,

at an early stage of the loading test with the load removed
594 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE

Fig. 8 -View of the torsional cracks at

the top of the lower flight of stairs
/ \ after failure of the staircase

f xv ”

5. Full design live load on the staircase (1210 lb).

6-24. Load increased in increments of half the design load until collapse.
Fig. 6 shows the staircase under load during this stage of the test pro-
gram.
The first crack was observed at the outside edge of the junction of
the lower flight with the ground floor. The crack extended diagonally
towards the inner edge of the lower flight. The corresponding live
load was 3825 lb. With increase of load, a similar diagonal crack occurred
towards the top of the lower flight (see Fig. 8) and at the base of the
upper flight. At a live load of 5800 lb, cracks were visible at the junction
of the upper flight and upper floor, and also at the intersection between
the landing and flights.
Final failure occurred along the line of the intersection of the landing
and the flights when the live load was 13,800 lb. If the dead load of 1100
lb is included, this represents a load factor of 6.48. Fig. 7 shows the
staircase after failure with the load removed.
At the later stages of loading, cracks developed in the upper face
of the landing near the junctions with the flights. The cracks were
considerably wider near the intersection with the flights, narrowing
to insignificance at the free edge of the landing. A sketch of the crack
pattern is shown in Fig. 9.

. -

Fig. 9-Crack pattern in the landing

7 at ultimate load

:, \
 FREESTANDING STAIRCASE

During the test it was found that although the upper floor supports
were braced, the steel columns had horizontal displacements which must
have had some effect on the distribution of moments in the structure and
were certainly responsible for the unsymmetrical cracking of the struc-
ture.

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

Displacement measurements
The displacement profiles of the stairway give a very clear concept
of the structural behavior under load. Fig. 10 shows the profiles of the
edges of the upper and lower flights under load. The spacing of the
dial gages does not permit the plotting of precise profiles in Fig. 10
but the positive moments, predicted by Siev2 for the midspan of the
flights, are not apparent from the behavior of the model. Fig. 11 shows
an isometric view of the deflected form of the staircase under the de-
sign loading.
I The displacements and stresses in the line of the intersection of the
flights and landing of free-standing stairs have provoked some discus-
sion in previous papers. In their analysis, the authors have considered
the landing to act as a beam concentrated at the line of intersection.
Since the landing slab is commonly tapered in section as in the model
and the reinforcement tends to be concentrated towards the line of in-
tersection, this is not an unreasonable assumption. The effective canti-
lever span of the landing was assumed to be one half of the actual value,
as in Siev’s analysis. Treating Beam CBOB’C’ as a member of a skeletal

Inner edge

(in.1
0
0.1
(il .)
0
0.1
0.2 0.2
03
04
i 05 I 0.3
a4
0.5

(in.)
0
01
0.2
03
04
1 05

Fig. IO - Profiles of edges of flights under load

 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE

Fig. I I - Deflected form of model staircase under design loaa

rigid frame, the bending moment diagram is as shown in Fig. 12a. If the
change of bending moment at B and B’ are taken to occur linearly across
the widths of the respective flights this diagram is modified to the form
of Fig. 12b. This may be compared with the bending moment diagram
from Siev’s analysis, and with the interpretation of resistance strain
gage readings from the plexiglass model tested by Mitchell and Shaw:
in Fig. 12~ and 12d.
Double integration of moment diagrams for the model staircase yields
the general forms of the deflection diagrams which are compared with
the experimental results in Fig. 13. Here it may be seen that the authors’
simplified skeletal structure gives analytical results which have reason-
able parity with the test results from the model, provided that the
change in bending moment at the joint of flight and landing is dis-
tributed across the flight. Vertical displacements may be computed di-
rectly from the theoretical skeletal rigid frame more simply, but result
in much higher values; only the calculated displacement of the central
point 0 corresponds with the experimental value.
 FREE-STANDING STAIRCASE

It may be observed from Fig. 13 that the experimental deflection

curve for the line of intersection of the flights and landing is not sym-
metrical about Point 0. The vertical deflection at C’ is some 20 per-
cent higher than at C. Part of this may be attributed to the displacement
at Support A. However it is felt that the tendency of the landing to
rotate in an anticlockwise direction about 0 is a contributory factor
in the asymmetry of the curve.
Horizontal displacements are of considerable significance in free-
standing stairs. The significance is not primarily a matter of structural
safety but more of psychological concern. A stairway may be of ade-
quate structural strength but if the horizontal deflection is large then
the stairs feel unsafe to the user. The authors know of at least one case
where free-standing stairs had to be strengthened due to this feeling
of insecurity, although there was no doubt as to the structural safety
of the stairs. Subjective tests on the model stairway revealed that hori-
zontal deflections of the order of 0.02 in. were sufficient to cause some
concern. However, on the longer spans of a full-sized stairway this
might be too stringent as a limiting value. It is therefore felt that if a
restriction of horizontal deflection at design load is to be put forward,
it should be expressed in terms of the span (a + c) of the staircase. On
a purely empirical basis, a limiting value of (a + c) /5000 is suggested

Fig. 12a -Moment diagram for beam Fig. I2b- Moment diagram for beam
of skeletal rigid frame with change of moment taken linearly
across joint with flight

C’ 0’ 0 c
P 0’ 0 0 C

I Fig. I2d- Comparable results from

Fig. I SC - Siev’s analysis Mitchell and Shawls experiments
 C' B' 0 B ’ C

I
(inch)
0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

I
0.05 / \
/c-Theoretical values \
/ \
0.06 /
/ \
\
0.07 / \
\
/I \
/ \
0.06
/

0.09

0.10

Fig. 13- Deflections at intersection of landing and flights from theory and
experiment

and should be checked as a normal part of the design procedure. In the

case of the model staircase, this function gives a value of approximately
0.04 in., and for the prototype, 0.02 in. It is sufficiently accurate for de-
sign purposes to compute horizontal displacements for the skeletal rigid
frame without correction of the bending moment diagram.
Strain measurements
The measured strains were generally smaller than predicted strains.
There was considerable scatter in the results of measurements made with
both Demec and electrical resistance gages but in general they confirm
the values of moment computed analytically by the authors’ method.
For example on the underside of the midspan of the flights at the center,
the electrical gages gave negligible strains, showing that the moment
was small, but giving little indication as to the direction of the moment.
Liebenberg,lO as a result of photoelastic tests, predicted considerable
stress concentrations in the region of the intersection of the inner edge
of the flights and the inner edge of the landing. Sievll expresses the
view that these concentrations are of secondary importance.
 FREESTANDING STAIRWE 599

There was no experimental evidence of stress concentrations having

any serious effect at the intersection of the flights and landing. An
electrical gage mounted at the center of the inner edge of the landing
showed a steadily increasing tensile stress of the order expected from
the calculated negative moment in the beam BCOC’B’.
Failure of staircase
Initial cracks in the staircase occurred through combined bending
and torsion and this focuses attention on the difficulty in providing
reinforcement. to resist torsion in shallow-wide sections. This factor
alone may be responsible for a thicker stair section than would other-
wise be necessary. Kemp, Sozen and SiesP express the view that crack-
ing in reinforced concrete members under torsion depends almost en-
tirely on the geometry of the cross section and the concrete strength.
In this test the first crack (at 1.6 times the design load) occurred at a
slightly lower load than expected, but this may be, at least partially,
attributed to the displacement of the supports of the upper flight.
Although the first cracks appeared in the flights the collapse of the
staircase occurred in the landing, which failed as a simple cantilever.
The load factor was satisfactory in this case but it is obviously desirable
to restrict the width c of the landing as much as possible in practice.
The shape of the transverse cracks in the landing provide an approximate
verification of the assumption that one half of the width of the landing
should be considered as effective in the consideration of the staircase
as a rigid frame.
Final failure occurred at a load factor of 6.48 times the design live
plus dead load which may be regarded as satisfactory.

CONCLUSIONS
The following conclusions may be drawn from this study:
1. For general design purposes the analytical methods of Siev2 and the
authors’ may be recommended. For the staircase tested, the authors’
method gives a more accurate prediction of the interaction of the flights
and landing.
2. The transverse reinforcing steel in the landing should have a major
concentration in the vicinity of the line of intersection of the flights and
the landing.
3. Large torsional moments are present in the flights of free-standing
stairs and a proper thickness of concrete must be chosen to resist
these moments, due to the difficulty of reinforcing shallow-wide sec-
tions against torsion.
4. It is desirable to restrict the landing length c as much as prac-
ticable.
600 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE May 1966

5. Horizontal displacements should be checked in design to insure that

uncomfortable lateral sway does not take place A suggested empirical
upper limit of horizontal movement is (a + c)/5000.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The work described in this paper was performed in the Structural Research
Laboratory of the SEATO Graduate School of Engineering, Bangkok.

APPENDIX

METHOD OF ANALYSIS
The staircase of Fig. 1 is simplified for the purposes of analysis to the rigid
framework ABOB’A’ shown in Fig. 3. Projected views are given in Fig. Al.
The positive vectors for moments are given in Fig. A2, and the usual right-
hand rule is applied. The frame is cut at 0 and the horizontal restraining forces
H and the restraining moments MO are applied to the two halves of the stair-
case as shown in Fig. 3 and Al.
The bending and torsional moments along the members of the upper half of
the frame are:
Member OB

Mr = - MO - T . . . . . . . . . . . .._...........................(Al)

M, = - Hy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (A2)
Aft=-- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(A3)

Member BC

M,.P--!!!. -$ + bl - y)2 . .._...._................ (A4)

2
MS=0 .,_., (A5)
Mt=+ ++ bl--1J . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (A6)
>
Member AB

Mr=Hssina-W (-!& +bl)scosa-T ($ +bl) - ws2~2a,,. (A7)

MS=- T cosa-MMosina+ W ($+ br )-&{( bl+ %) - b / sina

Mt=+ sina+Mocosa-W (-$+bl)+{(bl+$) - b /Lo?’

(A9)
where w and W are the loads per unit length of the flights and landing,
respectively.
 A
wu

ELEVATION END ELEVATION

A’

a cow I: C
t 1

PLAN

Fig. Al - Projected views of the staircase

602 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE

au b'2 MS aMs dy+ a -Mr aMr- +.+ a -MS aMs - ds

XT= J o EII’ aH J ,, El2 aH J ,, Ele’ aH

+ .I a -Mt aMt - ds
,, GJ2 aH
where
II, II’ = second moments of area of the landing section about horizontal and
vertical axes, respectively
Iz, I2’ = second moments of area of the flight section about horizontal and
vertical axes, respectively
Ji, J2 = polar second moments of the landing and flight sections, respectively
If the staircase consists entirely of shallow-wide sections, then Ii’ is much
greater than II and Is’ is much greater than 12, so that expressions containing
l/Ii’ and l/12’ may be neglected.
Then if aU/aH = 0:

-a u - = &-[l sina[ HS2sinu-W(-~-+bl)s2cosn-WWs(g+bl)~

an

1
- 7us3ya - -b sin a q sin a + M. cos a
2

+T (++bi)($-b+osa]ds=Q

whence:

1
_- -%+bl) (-~P-bi)+2M.-HHhtana] =O (A101
232

Also:

au =
- b'2 M, aMr &,+ a !kaM,&+ - -
aMo J o EII aMo J ,, Elz’ aMo
The second term is neglected and then:

++bl)(+l)

+2Mo-Hbtana
1 =o (All)

Appropriate values of a, b, bt, c, Ii, 12, J2, W, w, and a may be substituted

into Eq. (AlO) and (All) which are then solved for H and MO. The moments
(and shears and thrusts) may then be evaluated for the various members of
the structure and appropriate reinforcement designed.
The prototype staircase was analyzed using the above equations to deter-
mine the redundants. The stairs were designed for a live load of 40 lb per sq ft.
The design load was low as tests were to be carried out on a half-scale model
of the stairs and it was necessary to keep the ultimate load within reasonable
bounds. With the dead loads included, the total design loading along the flights
was 597 lb per ft (w), and 528 lb per ft (W) along the landing.
 FREE-STANDING STAIRCASE 603

Mt

Fig. A2 - Direction of positive moment

vectors Mr 4= X
2’

s
MS

To determine the effective second moment of area of the member OBC with
respect to the x-axis, one half the actual width of the landing was considered.
Sievs made a similar assumption in his calculations.
The following values were used for the prototype:
a = 9.17 ft G = 0.435 5s = 1305 in.4
-
b = 5.90 ft E zz tan-l 0.60
= 4.59 ft I1 = 786 in.4 Tf = 12,100 in.4
; 1 = 2.30 ft Is = 274 in.4 Iz’ = 54,900 in.4
Replacing the appropriate values of the terms in Eq. (AlO) and (All), two
simultaneous equations were obtained as follows:
0.0614H - 0.00452Mo - 514.99 = 0 (AX!)
0.0182H + 0.01356Mo + 11.80 = 0 (A13)
whence
Mo = 11,770 ft-lb
H = 9235 lb
These values are then substituted in Eq. (Al) to (A9) to determine the
bending and torsional moments given in Table 1. Equations for shear and nor-
mal forces may also be written for each member and evaluated similarly. A
diagrammatic sketch of bending moments Mr is given in Fig. 12. New equations
would be required to be formulated from Eq. (AlO) and (All) using W = 344
lb per ft for the case of loading on the flights only. The resulting values of
moment are shown in Table 2.

REFERENCES
1. Liebenberg, A. C., “The Design of Slab Type Reinforced Concrete Stair-
ways, ” The Structural Engineer (London), V. 38, No. 5, May 1960, pp. 156-164.
2. Siev, A., “Analysis of Free Straight Multiflight Staircases,” Proceedings,
ASCE, V. 88, ST3, June 1962, pp. 207-232.
3. Fuchssteiner, W., “Die Freitragende Wendeltreppe,” Beton-und Stahlbeton-
bau (Berlin), V. 49, No. 11, Nov. 1954, pp. 256-258.
4. Sauter, F., “Free-Standing Stairs,” AC1 JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 61, No. 7,
July 1964, pp. 847-870.
5. Gould, P. L., “Analysis and Design of a Cantilever Staircase,” AC1
.JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 60, No. 7, July 1963, pp. 881-899.
6. Taleb, N. J., “The Analysis of Stairs with Unsupported Intermediate Land-
ings,” Concrete and Constructional Engineering (London), V. 59, NO. 9, Sept.
1964, pp. 315-320.
604 JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE

7. Cusens, A. R., and Kuang, Jing-Gwo, “Analysis of Free-Standing Stairs

under Symmetrical Loading,” Concrete and Constructional Engineering (London),
V. 60, No. 5, May 1965, pp. 167-172.
8. Hajnal-K6nyi, K., “Test of a Staircase,” Concrete and Constructional En-
gineering (London), V. 54, No. 1, Jan. 1959, pp. 25-27.
9. Mitchell, L. H., and Shaw, F. S., “Columnless Stairs,” Architectural
Science Review (Sydney), V. 5, No. 2, July 1962, p. 80.
10. Liebenberg, A. C., Discussion of “Analysis of Free Straight Multiflight
Staircases,” Proceedings, ASCE, V. 89, ST5, Oct. 1963, pp. 251-254.
11. Siev, A., Closure to discussion of “Analysis of Free Straight Multiflight
Staircases,” Proceedings, ASCE, V. 89, ST5, Oct. 1963, pp. 251-254.
12. Kemp, E. L.; Sozen, M. A.; and Siess, C. P., “Torsion in Reinforced Con-
crete,” Structural Research Series No. 266, Civil Engineering Studies, Univer-
sity of Illinois, Sept. 1961, 126 pp.

Received by the Institute Nov. 23, 1965. Title No. 63-29 is a part of copyrighted JOURNAL
of the American Concrete Institute, Proceedings V. 63, No. 5, May 1966. Separate prints 81e
available at 60 cents each, cash with order.

American Concrete Institute, P.O. Box 4754, Redford Station, Detroit, Michigan 48219

Discussion of this paper should reach ACI headquarters in triplicate

by Aug. 1, 1966, for publication in the December 1966 JOURNAL.
(See p. iii for details.)

Sinopsis-RBsumk-Zusammenfassung

Estudio Experimental de una Escalera de Apoyo Libre

Se describen 10s ensayes de carga hasta la rotura de un modelo a escala de
un medio de una escalera de losa simktrica de concrete reforzado y de apoyo
libre. Los m&odos de anPlisis se comparan a la luz de 10s resultados experi-
mentales haciendose recomendaciones generales de diseiio.

Etude Exptkimentale d’un Escalier Autoportant

Les auteurs decrivent les essais de chargement B rupture d’un mod&le B echelle
$ d’un escalier autoportant en bbton arm4 B deux volees adjacentes B paillasse
porteuse. Les methodes d’analyse sont comparCes g la lumi&re des rbultats ex-
perimentaux et des recommandations generales pour le dimensionnement sont
don&es.

Experimentalstudie an einer freitragenden Treppe

Dieser Bericht beschreibt Belastungsproben bis zum Zerbrechen am Model1
(Masstab 1: 2) einer symmetrischen, freitragenden Treppe aus Eisenbeton coder:
aus Eisenbetonteilen). Die Untersuchungsmethoden werden im Licht der ex-
perimentellen Ergebnisse verglichen; ferner werden allgemeine Konstruktions-
vorschlHge gegeben.