CivilAxisCivilAxis
☕ Support🌐 Community

WT 3X6 vs ST 3X6.25

WT 3X6 is an WT section from the American AISC Shapes Database; ST 3X6.25 is the closest equivalent in the American AISC Shapes Database. They are close to interchangeable in bending: 16.551 cm³ against 16.551 cm³ of plastic modulus, a difference of 0.0%. WT 3X6 is the lighter of the two at 8.9 kg/m against 9.3 kg/m, a saving of 4.3% on steel weight. Both are about 76 mm deep, so either fits the same construction zone.

Section properties side by side. Bold marks the more favourable value where one is.
PropertyWT 3X6
WT
ST 3X6.25
ST
Difference
Mass8.9 kg/m9.3 kg/m-4.3%
Depth76.7 mm76.2 mm+0.7%
Width101.6 mm84.6 mm+20.1%
Web thickness5.8 mm5.9 mm-1.7%
Flange thickness7.1 mm9.1 mm-22.0%
Area11.5 cm²11.8 cm²-2.5%
Second moment, major (Iy)54.94 cm⁴52.45 cm⁴+4.7%
Plastic modulus, major (Wpl,y)16.551 cm³16.551 cm³same
Elastic modulus, major (Wel,y)9.242 cm³8.964 cm³+3.1%
Second moment, minor (Iz)62.43 cm⁴37.5 cm⁴+66.5%
Plastic modulus, minor (Wpl,z)19.009 cm³15.24 cm³+24.7%
Radius of gyration, minor (iz)2.33 cm1.78 cm+30.9%
Torsion constant (It)1.87 cm⁴3.45 cm⁴-45.8%

WT 3X6 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0; ST 3X6.25 to AISC Shapes Database v16.0. Difference is expressed relative to ST 3X6.25.

How to choose between them

On stiffness, WT 3X6 has the larger second moment of area: 54.94 cm⁴ against 52.45 cm⁴, a difference of 4.7%. This matters more often than the strength comparison, because on normal floor spans deflection rather than bending capacity sets the beam size - so if the two are close on modulus but apart on inertia, the stiffer one is usually the better answer even when it is not the stronger one.

Measured as bending capacity per kilogram of steel, WT 3X6 is the more efficient section: 1.9 against 1.8 cm³ per kg/m, 4.5% better. Over a floor of repeated beams that difference is real tonnage, though it is often outweighed by whichever section the fabricator can actually source.

The two diverge much more about the minor axis: WT 3X6 has 19.009 cm³ of minor-axis plastic modulus against 15.24 cm³, 24.7% more. If the member sees any minor-axis bending, or if it is unrestrained over a long length and lateral-torsional buckling governs, that gap decides the comparison even though the major-axis numbers looked equivalent.

In short, ST 3X6.25 is the stronger section and WT 3X6 is the lighter one; where those are the same section, it is the clear choice, and where they are not, decide on whether your design is governed by capacity or by tonnage.

Common questions

They are effectively equal in bending. WT 3X6 has a plastic modulus of 16.551 cm³ and ST 3X6.25 has 16.551 cm³, a difference of only 0.0% - within the margin that section choice normally turns on. Compare stiffness and availability instead.

WT 3X6 at 8.9 kg/m, against 9.3 kg/m for the other - a saving of 4.3%. Over a repeated floor beam that is a real cost difference, but check it against the deflection case before taking it.

Structurally it is the closest equivalent we hold: ST 3X6.25 gives 16.551 cm³ of plastic modulus and 52.45 cm⁴ of inertia against 16.551 cm³ and 54.94 cm⁴. Re-check deflection and the connection details before swapping, since the flange and web thicknesses differ.

WT 3X6, with a second moment of area of 54.94 cm⁴ against 52.45 cm⁴ (4.7% more). Deflection under a uniform load goes as 5wL⁴/384EI, so it is inversely proportional to I - on a span where the deflection limit governs rather than strength, this is the number that decides the section.

Related comparisons

WT 3X7.5 vs ST 3X6.25WT 3X6 vs Tee 152×76×12
Rate this
No ratings yet
Sign in to join the discussion.
Loading…